in reply to Re^3: Is PerlMonks relevant for one's Perl marketability?
in thread Is PerlMonks relevant for one's Perl marketability?

If that is a true metric, Mom, it sure-as-heck surprises me to hear it.   Although the user group of Perl is huge ...

Nevertheless ... one more thing must be said about PerlMonks:   I have never been around any group of software professionals who knew more about so many things, and were instantly willing and able to help.   You can just put your ear to the ground and listen to some of the conversations that pass through here every week and learn a lot.   You won’t encounter any fanboi’s around here ... they know their stuff.   You can ask a question and get a thorough answer to it in, like, fifteen minutes or so.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^6: Is PerlMonks relevant for one's Perl marketability?
by Your Mother (Archbishop) on Sep 10, 2012 at 13:15 UTC

    I agree about the value of the site, or I wouldn't be here. There is at least a million hackers/sysadmins of whatever variety that sling Perl at least some of the time. This site is something like 120,000th most visited site in the world right now (and this is a big gain over what it was a few months ago; not sure where the spike originates though the historical traffic is pretty spiky overall). I've worked with a couple dozen Perl hackers in the last decade and only one of them is a current/active monk and many were unaware of the site's existence.

    Update: HURRRR… meant to reply to Re^4: Is PerlMonks relevant for one's Perl marketability?

[reply]

      Whilst I agree that any expectation that the membership here is anything more than a small percentage of the Perl programmers (as opposed to users for whom the percentage would probably be immeasurable :) around the world, is naive; I think your most visited stats are maybe suspect.

      I guess it depends on who's numbers you believe; but also what they choose to measure.

      For example, by one particular supplier, perlmonks.com is below the 10 millionth globally, but by the same supplier, perlmonks.org is in the top 20,000.

      Lies & damned lies aside, it'd be interesting to see an aggregate score.

      First time I ever looked at such statistics. For all the billions of websites, the vast majority must get precious little traffic.

      With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
      Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
      "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
      In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

      RIP Neil Armstrong
[reply]

        Alexa's stats are mostly based on a proprietary plugin so the data are crap. :| I was going by Quantcast which, in my experience as a webmaster using it and comparing it to logs, is quite reliable (/ in the ball-park). quantcast.com/perlmonks.org

[reply]
Re^5: Is PerlMonks relevant for one's Perl marketability?
by DrHyde (Prior) on Sep 10, 2012 at 10:33 UTC
    There's an interesting sequence in this presentation that Michael Schwern gave at YAPC::NA 2012, starting at 16:55, showing that "the community" is only a small proportion of even the users that the community *knows* about (of the people I've worked with well under half are in the community, and well under half of those use perlmonks), and that the users that we know about are only a small proportion of actual users.
[reply]

In Section Meditations