16
$\begingroup$

From the link that quid usefully provided in another answer:
MO stats

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Hehe.${}{}{}{}$ $\endgroup$ – Andrés E. Caicedo Jul 13 '13 at 18:54
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Well, the site is running for about 1400 days, and there are 30,000 users. So I suppose there are a lot of sock puppets! :-) $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila Jul 13 '13 at 19:00
  • $\begingroup$ My first idea upon seeing this was that it could be along the lines of what @AsafKaragila mentions that they take the actual age but only the visits since the move. But even for this it cannot be 1. Now, another idea would be that the number is only calculated once every, say, 30days. So this did never happen after the move so far. Or it is still something else. $\endgroup$ – user9072 Jul 13 '13 at 19:03
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ (@AndresCaicedo: at the moment my system refuses to render MathJax so I see you comment as typed Hehe.${}{}{}{}$. As I asked for on another ocassion could you please not use MathJax in ways it was never intended for. I think Andrew Stacey can give you some advice how to still post too short comments without using MathJax, some invisible character or something.) $\endgroup$ – user9072 Jul 13 '13 at 19:07
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ ${}{}{}{}{}{}{}$ $\endgroup$ – Andrés E. Caicedo Jul 13 '13 at 20:53
  • $\begingroup$ @AndresCaicedo: I take it this your way of contributing to the collegiality of the site to now post empty, but not quite, comments via typing ${}{}{}{}{}{}{}$ I intend to start a meta thread on the general matter of mis-use of MathJax soon. $\endgroup$ – user9072 Jul 13 '13 at 21:01
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @quid:$\vphantom{I think there is a big difference between using empty braces to pad up some text, and mis-using LaTeX. Furthermore, I think that generating empty characters is a vastly more difficult task in comparison to holding down the shift key and a couple double-taps on the braces. I think that requesting this sort of request is unreasonable.}$ $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila Jul 13 '13 at 21:17
  • $\begingroup$ @AsafKaragila: I do not intend to continue the discussion any further here. But, it seems also perfectly possibly to just fill the comment with something else in addition. I do not know, say, '(MO is great!)' or simply not post to short comments in the first place. If you consider it as a unreasonable request that intentionally placed restrictions on the site are not circumvented in ways that cause problems for others, then I do not quite know what to reply. (To be cleare: the reference to the other poss. was meant more in a joking way.) $\endgroup$ – user9072 Jul 13 '13 at 21:43
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @quid: I think that we all find some feature or another to be at least somewhat unreasonable: association bonus/CW of questions for mods only/the poor handling of crank math on the main, at least at the moment/strange badges/etc. I find the limitation of a comment of 15 letters to be reasonable for other sites (I can imagine SO being bombarded with :-) and me too or LOL comments all the time), but I find it generally less reasonable for "well-behaved communities" like MO (and MSE, for that matter, at least for the most part). $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila Jul 13 '13 at 21:46
  • $\begingroup$ Let's not have a big fight about this commenting trick. Personally I'd certainly be happier if people wanting to do things like this use invisible characters from Unicode, rather than MathJax. It seems less of a hack, and won't screw things up when viewed without MathJax. $\endgroup$ – Scott Morrison Jul 13 '13 at 22:35
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @AsafKaragila: I think you misunderstood my concern a bit; the problem I have is the 'in ways that cause problem for others' not the circumvention of the character limit itself (which I do not consider particullarly necessary either, the limit I mean, well in the end also the circumventing but this is not what I meant to say). Also, and this is more for Scott Morrison, I did not want to start any fight, my intent is/was more to request that this is avoided/minimized as a courtesy. I will create the announced meta-thread soon. Perhaps my intent then becomes clearer. $\endgroup$ – user9072 Jul 13 '13 at 22:58
  • 10
    $\begingroup$ The number of visits is now 0, it seems they got rid of that suck-puppet. $\endgroup$ – Kaveh Jul 14 '13 at 6:03
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ I mentioned this in meta.mathoverflow.net/a/17/12705, but it apparently went unnoticed. The number is steadily going down: it stood at 5 ten days ago, it was 3 last Thursday (IIRC), and it is 0 now. I’m eagerly waiting when $-1$ appears. $\endgroup$ – Emil Jeřábek supports Monica Jul 15 '13 at 12:08
8
$\begingroup$

The analytics key had not been entered for stackexchange.com. The next build will include this and report the correct stats. It should be live within the next few hours.

$\endgroup$
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ It's fixed now, currently saying 14k visits per day. $\endgroup$ – Joel Reyes Noche Jul 17 '13 at 5:51

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .