From Newsgroup: alt.culture.usenet

On Sat, 14 Jun 2025 00:01:31 -0000 (UTC), pschleck@panix.com
(Paul W. Schleck) wrote:

"In the context of Usenet discussion forums, Himelboim et al. (2009)
have undertaken a detailed study of new thread creation. They found that
many Usenet forums featured a small group of 'discussion catalysts'
whose seed posts inspired a lot of debate. Interestingly, these users
largely posted stories from elsewhere on the web with little or no
comment - a relatively conservative approach to setting the agenda."

https://academic.oup.com/jcmc/article/19/3/625/4067622?login=false

The abstract had a "water is wet" vibe to it. In any group,
you are going to find a small number doing and a large
number looking on.
--
Joy Beeson
joy beeson at centurylink dot net


--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.culture.usenet

Joy Beeson <jbeeson@invalid.net.invalid> writes:

On Sat, 14 Jun 2025 00:01:31 -0000 (UTC), pschleck@panix.com
(Paul W. Schleck) wrote:

"In the context of Usenet discussion forums, Himelboim et al. (2009)
have undertaken a detailed study of new thread creation. They found that
many Usenet forums featured a small group of 'discussion catalysts'
whose seed posts inspired a lot of debate. Interestingly, these users
largely posted stories from elsewhere on the web with little or no
comment - a relatively conservative approach to setting the agenda."

https://academic.oup.com/jcmc/article/19/3/625/4067622?login=false

The abstract had a "water is wet" vibe to it. In any group,
you are going to find a small number doing and a large
number looking on.

You got a point. Nevertheless, it's not such a bad publication. You
know, not every paper must be an advance to the state-of-the-art. An observation of a phenomenon such as ``water is wet'' is still useful.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.culture.usenet

On 6/14/25 02:05, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Paul W. Schleck <pschleck@panix.com> wrote:

"In the context of Usenet discussion forums, Himelboim et al. (2009)
have undertaken a detailed study of new thread creation. They found that
many Usenet forums featured a small group of 'discussion catalysts'
whose seed posts inspired a lot of debate. Interestingly, these users
largely posted stories from elsewhere on the web with little or no
comment - a relatively conservative approach to setting the agenda."

https://academic.oup.com/jcmc/article/19/3/625/4067622?login=false

Ironically, Paul has posted something he didn't write.

Ironically, we replied.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.culture.usenet

On 9/26/25 2:42 PM, sjoz wrote:

On 6/14/25 02:05, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Paul W. Schleck <pschleck@panix.com> wrote:

"In the context of Usenet discussion forums, Himelboim et al. (2009)
have undertaken a detailed study of new thread creation. They found that >>> many Usenet forums featured a small group of 'discussion catalysts'
whose seed posts inspired a lot of debate. Interestingly, these users
largely posted stories from elsewhere on the web with little or no
comment - a relatively conservative approach to setting the agenda."

https://academic.oup.com/jcmc/article/19/3/625/4067622?login=false

Ironically, Paul has posted something he didn't write.

Ironically, we replied.

I think I feel called out. I love science.

--
Pranav
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2