“percentage of all MAUs” is interesting, never thought of that metric before.
as you point out, MAUs cover a lot of ground: posts that get a lot of upvotes, posts that get a lot of discussion, lots different people making posts, and combinations of all these. Different communities are gonna want different things here.
I think it gives a much clearer picture of “who actually sees us” compared to “who liked it enough to subscribe” which is the more commonly used metric. Both data points can be meaningful but I find % of Threadiverse MAUs shows the pulse of the communities more accurately. Subscriber numbers don’t usually go down by much but that doesn’t mean those people are active, so it’s not great for understanding growth IMO.
“percentage of all MAUs” is interesting, never thought of that metric before.
as you point out, MAUs cover a lot of ground: posts that get a lot of upvotes, posts that get a lot of discussion, lots different people making posts, and combinations of all these. Different communities are gonna want different things here.
I think it gives a much clearer picture of “who actually sees us” compared to “who liked it enough to subscribe” which is the more commonly used metric. Both data points can be meaningful but I find % of Threadiverse MAUs shows the pulse of the communities more accurately. Subscriber numbers don’t usually go down by much but that doesn’t mean those people are active, so it’s not great for understanding growth IMO.