How accurate do you think these stats are?

75% of residents are male
5.7 million unique residents
people aged 35+ account for 45 % of the hours in SL
85-90% of people sampling SL do not continue in SL

Stats reportedly from LL as told to a magazine.

That first one seems off. I would guess it closer to 50/50. The rest I can believe, but I can only give anecdotal evidence. Stats can always be skewed or misread as well.

The article was by someone that went to that live SL conference in Las Vegas I think it was. He said that 50% of the 900 attendees were male, 50% female.

The stats were said to be from LL, except the 90% one. LL said 85% do not return after starting an avatar, Wired Magazine, sourced in this unnamed article, said 90%.

Ok, I'll admit it now - it is an article in the latest issue of The Weekly Standard. I will now be stoned, I believe.

Seems high. Even accounting for a number of male-gender people playin female-gender avvies, I would tink it too high.

Did they chack dat via webcam?



I dunno about dat. Sounds awful high. Maybe the article was prepared when there were 5.7 million accounts, an it was misrepresented?



I could believe dat.



I'm in a skewed demographic in regards to dat: most (±90%) of the people I've introduced to SL have stayed. I imagine dat number, though, includes a lot of those who did not get past the website, griefers, an other "throwaway" accounts.

Is a lot of dis in the core metrics?

Mari

The Weekly Standard? Blah I have conservative leanings, but even I won't read that rag. Now The American Conservative usually has decent articles and commentary.

The Weekly Standard, eh?

It's fascinating how fixated the American right is on SL. I remember an article that Mike Gerson wrote a few months ago in The Washington Post dissing SL as showing the flaws in the "libertarian vision" of the libertarian wing of the GOP, and preferring Lord of the Rings Online and it's benevolent guided approach -- how Gerson would self-servingly characterize the current regime, no doubt. SL seems to be a lightning rod of fascination for the right, which is interesting.

Those stats lack a lot of context.

What is the URL of the article.


If you were presenting data on SL demographics you would need to present it differently than a simple list.


You would have to present Data on the demographics of people who Stay - who they are made up of, age groups, gender , w/e.

And

You would need to present the Data on the demographics of peopel who leave quickly.

For example Women might be more likely to stay than men, since much of SL is basically an animated chat room combined with a Shopping simulator.

At the time there were 9 million residents (as of July 2007) and 5.7 million unique with around 40,000 that logged in regularly. Sorry, I should have included that in the first post.

I'm just going by what was in the article, so I do not know if it is in the core metrics.

I had subsriptions to the Weekly Standard and National Review (I think it was National Review; dang, can't remember now). I let the NR one lapse and kept the WS one.

I've never heard of The American Conservative.

I'd love those type of stats. All I have was what was in, as one replier called it "that rag".

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/014/145mliuh.asp

Hehe I just stick with The Economist.

Business Week, Weekly Standard, Variety, Cat Fancy

I'd get Hustler's Taboo, but I'm a little afraid to do so

Wow all that time! The Economist takes me all week to get through! The only other one I can manage is The Atlantic, but that's because it's only once a month. Cat Fancy is nice though, I pick that up every now and then at B&N.

Oh me too. But its worth it. Other business magazines are not really in the same league IMO.