Demographics of BitcoinTalk

[myrkul]

Please enter your gender at birth if you cannot classify yourself as male or female.

That will cover almost everyone.

[malevolent]

Bumping this thread.

Vote here too:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=24709.msg306981

[theymos]

For users with more than 4 posts who filled out this info in their profiles:

1,660 Male
65 Female

Birth years:

Code:

|        1 | 1901 |
|        1 | 1908 |
|        2 | 1911 |
|        1 | 1933 |
|        2 | 1941 |
|        2 | 1949 |
|        1 | 1950 |
|        3 | 1951 |
|        1 | 1954 |
|        1 | 1955 |
|        1 | 1956 |
|        5 | 1957 |
|        2 | 1958 |
|        3 | 1960 |
|        3 | 1961 |
|        2 | 1963 |
|        2 | 1964 |
|        5 | 1965 |
|        7 | 1966 |
|        5 | 1967 |
|       10 | 1968 |
|        9 | 1969 |
|       18 | 1970 |
|        8 | 1971 |
|        8 | 1972 |
|       14 | 1973 |
|       17 | 1974 |
|       15 | 1975 |
|       16 | 1976 |
|       19 | 1977 |
|       22 | 1978 |
|       26 | 1979 |
|       42 | 1980 |
|       32 | 1981 |
|       28 | 1982 |
|       43 | 1983 |
|       24 | 1984 |
|       38 | 1985 |
|       40 | 1986 |
|       28 | 1987 |
|       34 | 1988 |
|       37 | 1989 |
|       38 | 1990 |
|       23 | 1991 |
|       31 | 1992 |
|        9 | 1993 |
|       11 | 1994 |
|       11 | 1995 |
|        4 | 1996 |
|        4 | 1997 |
|        2 | 1998 |
|        1 | 2001 |
|        1 | 2003 |

Total: 713

[dree12]

For users with more than 4 posts who filled out this info in their profiles:

1,660 Male
65 Female

Birth years:

|        4 | 1996 |
|        4 | 1997 |
|        2 | 1998 |
|        1 | 2001 |
|        1 | 2003 |

I don't buy that that is all the people under 16 on these forums (0.7% is far too low). Maybe younger people tend to be more anonymous?

[theymos]

I don't buy that that is all the people under 16 on these forums (0.7% is far too low). Maybe younger people tend to be more anonymous?

Could be. I was also surprised about that.

[gbl08ma]

I don't buy that that is all the people under 16 on these forums (0.7% is far too low). Maybe younger people tend to be more anonymous?

Could be. I was also surprised about that.

Not only that, some of these younger people tend to say they are older than what they actually are (even though those usually don't get out of the newbie section, and when they get, some deserve being sent back)...
Personally I'll vote in for the "Male, 10–19" category now. It's not like my real date of birth and gender can't be easily found with a internet search...

[malevolent]

I don't buy that that is all the people under 16 on these forums (0.7% is far too low). Maybe younger people tend to be more anonymous?

There is 64k of members and only 2.7% of them filled out the info in their profiles. The list is too small (not to mention we don't how many of them submit false info to gain credibility).

[dree12]

I don't buy that that is all the people under 16 on these forums (0.7% is far too low). Maybe younger people tend to be more anonymous?

There is 64k of members and only 2.7% of them filled out the info in their profiles. The list is too small (not to mention we don't how many of them submit false info to gain credibility).

I guess it might have something to do with the scams on these forums. Minors, which are prevalent scammers, register and claim to be 20+ for credibility.

[mobodick]

I don't buy that that is all the people under 16 on these forums (0.7% is far too low). Maybe younger people tend to be more anonymous?

You don't have to buy it because that is not what you're measuring.
You're specifically measuring the age of people who found this thread and participated in the poll.
And then there is no certainty about truthfullness of answers.
It is not a balanced representation of the people visiting this forum.


Edit: fixed some quoting confusion

[muyuu]

I don't buy that that is all the people under 16 on these forums (0.7% is far too low). Maybe younger people tend to be more anonymous?

You don't have to buy it because that is not what you're measuring.
You're specifically measuring the age of people who found this thread and participated in the poll.
And then there is no certainty about truthfullness of answers.
It is not a balanced representation of the people visiting this forum.

It does convey the general picture that the biggest group is males in their 20s followed by males in their 30s. That's the impression I get as well.

[myrkul]

I don't buy that that is all the people under 16 on these forums (0.7% is far too low). Maybe younger people tend to be more anonymous?

You don't have to buy it because that is not what you're measuring.
You're specifically measuring the age of people who found this thread and participated in the poll.
And then there is no certainty about truthfullness of answers.
It is not a balanced representation of the people visiting this forum.

It does convey the general picture that the biggest group is males in their 20s followed by males in their 30s. That's the impression I get as well.

Sorry, I just had to fix that.

[dree12]

I don't buy that that is all the people under 16 on these forums (0.7% is far too low). Maybe younger people tend to be more anonymous?

You don't have to buy it because that is not what you're measuring.
You're specifically measuring the age of people who found this thread and participated in the poll.
And then there is no certainty about truthfullness of answers.
It is not a balanced representation of the people visiting this forum.


Edit: fixed some quoting confusion

I acknowledged this, but I was not referring to people I was measuring. I was referring to theymos's forum dump, which did not seem accurate.

[mobodick]

I don't buy that that is all the people under 16 on these forums (0.7% is far too low). Maybe younger people tend to be more anonymous?

You don't have to buy it because that is not what you're measuring.
You're specifically measuring the age of people who found this thread and participated in the poll.
And then there is no certainty about truthfullness of answers.
It is not a balanced representation of the people visiting this forum.


Edit: fixed some quoting confusion

I acknowledged this, but I was not referring to people I was measuring. I was referring to theymos's forum dump, which did not seem accurate.

Sorry, i derpt...

[matthewh3]

I don't buy that that is all the people under 16 on these forums (0.7% is far too low). Maybe younger people tend to be more anonymous?

Could be. I was also surprised about that.

Not only that, some of these younger people tend to say they are older than what they actually are (even though those usually don't get out of the newbie section, and when they get, some deserve being sent back)...
Personally I'll vote in for the "Male, 10–19" category now. It's not like my real date of birth and gender can't be easily found with a internet search...

Also I could imagine a lot of the very younger people just follow and read the forum with out actually joining.

[fimp]

For users with more than 4 posts who filled out this info in their profiles:

1,660 Male
65 Female

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=stats

This says ratio 2.9:1.

Is that because it includes also members with less than 4 posts?

[malevolent]

For users with more than 4 posts who filled out this info in their profiles:

1,660 Male
65 Female

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=stats

This says ratio 2.9:1.

Is that because it includes also members with less than 4 posts?

It's because a lot of people didn't submit this kind of info - you included

[fimp]

For users with more than 4 posts who filled out this info in their profiles:

1,660 Male
65 Female

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=stats

This says ratio 2.9:1.

Is that because it includes also members with less than 4 posts?

It's because a lot of people didn't submit this kind of info - you included

What I don't understand is how jgarzik's ratio and the ratio I found on that stats-page can be different when the data source is seemingly the same.

[dree12]

For users with more than 4 posts who filled out this info in their profiles:

1,660 Male
65 Female

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=stats

This says ratio 2.9:1.

Is that because it includes also members with less than 4 posts?

It's because a lot of people didn't submit this kind of info - you included

What I don't understand is how jgarzik's ratio and the ratio I found on that stats-page can be different when the data source is seemingly the same.

Most of the "females" on this board are zero-post spambots, which register with a 1:1 sex ratio. See this page and all subsequent pages for the zero-post spambots.

[fimp]

For users with more than 4 posts who filled out this info in their profiles:

1,660 Male
65 Female

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=stats

This says ratio 2.9:1.

Is that because it includes also members with less than 4 posts?

It's because a lot of people didn't submit this kind of info - you included

What I don't understand is how jgarzik's ratio and the ratio I found on that stats-page can be different when the data source is seemingly the same.

Most of the "females" on this board are zero-post spambots, which register with a 1:1 sex ratio. See this page and all subsequent pages for the zero-post spambots.

Ok, right, as I guessed.

[freedomno1]

A few months passed reposts to modify the data