What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 134 Stack Exchange communities.

I imagine it could be based on which SO site has the lowest median and the lowest mean of user points, correcting for the number of members and the age of site (since newer sites will naturally have lower averages).

That's only an idea. Does SO even do such comparisons? If so, how does SO determines which sites are the lowest performers? What are the metrics?

PS: for the sake of simplicity, let's define performance as a lot of people with a high average of points. A lot newbies entering also means the site is performing well, but if those newbies don't participate and help raise the average user point count the site isn't performing (in sense defined here) that well. So in the end, high point avg seems make sense.

UPDATE: I'm referring to a "site rankings" context. Not necessarily to find out which are best, but to identify and help the under performers. It enables trying to improve them or take them out of circulation if nothing helps.

share|improve this question
2  
    
That helps, but I am referring to already graduated sites. Pro Webmasters, for example, seems to have so many low point users, a lot of unanswered questions and a lot questions marked with [] status. –  Gaia Oct 28 '13 at 17:33
3  
What context are you talking about? There is no general "site rankings" where sites compete for "best performing site". –  Servy Oct 28 '13 at 17:35
    
I'm referring to a "site rankings" context. Not necessarily to find out which are best, but to identify and help the under performers. It enables trying to improve them or take them out of circulation if nothing helps. –  Gaia Oct 28 '13 at 17:39
    
@Gaia So you're proposing such a thing be added? That's not at all clear from your question. –  Servy Oct 28 '13 at 17:45
    
hmmm, i'm too much of a nobody to propose that. i am just more curious as to what is used to measure business performance (not in the technical sense we are used to round here) –  Gaia Oct 28 '13 at 17:56
2  
@Gaia If you have a proposal, go for it. There's no such thing as a "nobody" around these parts of the internet. –  Yannis Oct 28 '13 at 17:57
    
I beg to differ, @Yannis. People with lower scores get voted down much faster and more frequently than people with higher scores. It would be very interesting to run A/B testing on this premise. –  Gaia Oct 31 '13 at 3:36
1  
@Gaia That's true, but it's more a matter of familiarity than a matter of points. People with higher rep have been around longer, and naturally are more accustomed to SE's standards and policies, which usually (but not always) leads to thoroughly researched and better formulated posts. That said, I don't see what's stopping a newer user thoroughly researching their questions before they post them. –  Yannis Oct 31 '13 at 11:44

1 Answer 1

up vote 4 down vote accepted

There are lots of metrics that are considered when deciding if a site should be removed from the network. A single metric such as average user reputation is way too simplistic to effectively measure the value added by the existence of that site.

There are many factors that need to be considered. Way too many to distill it down to a single numeric ranking.

Some of the factors include:

  1. Questions per day
  2. Answered rate
  3. Number of active users
  4. Answers per question
  5. Views per question (as well as the breakdown of internal views and referrals from external sites)
  6. Closure rate for questions
  7. Activeness of a meta community

And that's just a start. These factors, as well as others, will also have entirely different weights based on the specific site. Some of those factors are also not easy to quantify or measure, even though some are.

share|improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

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