Maybe it's not just that number of comments are inversely proportional to the length of the post - they're inversely proportional to the *amount of content* in the post, except for extreme cases (starting a meme obviously gets you lots of comments; being depressed tends to get you more comments).
If I had any invite codes left or any time, I might set up a new journal to test these theories. Maybe a statistical survey of my LJ-friends would do.
If I had any invite codes left or any time, I might set up a new journal to test these theories. Maybe a statistical survey of my LJ-friends would do.
no subject
Date: 2002-04-10 02:29 am (UTC)From:no subject
Date: 2002-04-10 03:18 am (UTC)From:no subject
Date: 2002-04-10 02:39 am (UTC)From:no subject
Date: 2002-04-10 03:06 am (UTC)From:Which would mean, by my reckoning:
C = k Sigma(i) Sigma(I) ------------------- n^3This would mean that the effect of posting more than one thing in an entry is only canceled out if it what you are saying is both interesting and important.
This entry, for example, contains only one core idea, which is fairly interesting, but not very important, so it appears to be getting comments.
Oh, and it might be worth adding a constant to the end allowing for an extra comment or two for any entry that specificly mentions comments.
Or maybe I'm babbling.
no subject
Date: 2002-04-10 05:26 am (UTC)From:no subject
Date: 2002-04-10 05:39 am (UTC)From:Often, the posts that with more content in also tend to be the ones that have been thought through more, and seem more 'closed'. At the same time, I know I'm more reluctant to comment on the more serious and/or reflective posts, through fear of saying "the wrong thing" or simply because it needs more time to think about first.
Yes, the quizzes and webtests get more comments - but then they're mostly as inane as the posts (which can be fun, of course).
Sure
Date: 2002-04-10 05:47 am (UTC)From:That makes sense.
Re: Sure
Date: 2002-04-10 08:58 am (UTC)From:Yeee. I'm late for work again. Oh well. :P