/d/ - Statistics! First edition!

>>6721729
Interesting, futa sure is an influential part of /d/

>>6721732
That's fucking observant of you

File: fd0890a8557d10e842e48bf176be887e.jpg (334KB, 1200x900px) Image search: [Google]

334KB, 1200x900px

The remainder of this thread will be about playing when you should be working, at a job or in school... Hope nobody notices!

Please continue to post porny images of some sort with any questions or comments, so that the mods need not become angry.

Hey Ai can you do me a flavour, can you mark down the hours futa threads are posted see when there's a spike in their creations if any? I have a theory and I would like some statistics to see if it has any grounds.

File: sample-5f611ec36d48d404d11875aac9e12d15.jpg (205KB, 850x1442px) Image search: [Google]

205KB, 850x1442px

>>6721743
Ah, the legendary case of the "futa spammer".
Of our 23 threads,

1 was created on Friday, 7 on Mondays, 5 on saturdays, 2 on sundays, one on a thursday, 4 on a tuesday, 3 on a wednesday.

The times that these are created are widely spread around the clock face, as early as 00:15 and as late as 23:40, with no significant gap around the place. If you wish to attribute this to one person, they must keep a pretty diverse schedule! There's also no pattern in the day of the month that the threads are created, with as few as none or as many as 3 being created in one day at odd times.

The raw data is here for you: http://i.imgur.com/ec1eykK.png

I do not believe the timing is consistent with a single person. However, data is data, and I never said I was great at interpreting it!

File: 1450692266195.jpg (160KB, 586x905px) Image search: [Google]

160KB, 586x905px

>>6721777
Without having gone and looked mind you. The idea of a single spammer putting up all the futa threads seems silly to me because between the amerifags, eurofags, and aussifags we have alsmot every major time zone on earth coveted

File: 0710c0fdea051822562d93416bad97d4.jpg (533KB, 780x960px) Image search: [Google]

533KB, 780x960px

>>6721814
I thought the futa spammer was the guy who would post a single futa image in an almost dead thread, regardless of the thread topic.

>>6721729
Your methodology is flawed. To really get a good view of the board, you'd have to take multiple samples over an extended time period, say six months with one a week.

>>6721837
I do that sometimes. I'll stop doing that if it's against the board culture.

File: Untitled.png (284KB, 2052x3060px) Image search: [Google]

284KB, 2052x3060px

>>6721743
I think this about covers it.

I actually posted a similar analysis (minus the graphs, since a person can just go in the catalogue to see for themselves) a while back when someone made a thread talking about making a futa-only board, but I seem to recall about one third of threads being futa-related on that day.

Which is the real issue, anyone who browses long enough will see those days when every thread is some variant of futa: futa in stockings/futa with giant dicks/self paizuri/futa and tentacles/futa with balls larger than dick/futa weight gain/futa x futa/catgirl futa/futa under clothes/futa with toys/futa getting pegged/futa cock-vore/futa in heels/futa non-consent/futa with tails/futa eating salad alone while laughing/etc

While on other days it'll be kept to a few, broader threads. Really most fetishes have a single broader thread (like 'shortstack general') which they keep things to; the larger fetishes like futa or vore seem to have trouble with that.

>>6721870
>futa eating salad alone while laughing
You can't even begin to imagine how badly I wish that was a thing.

>>6721729
Another flaw: often trap and futa are confounded, and only trap is said. It would have been more complete if trap was in with.

>>6721856
I did say I planned on repeating. This is just the first look
>>6722114
I also included "shemale" in with "futa", even though they're not actually the same thing. I tried my best to include threads where futa was meant, but of course I can't be 100% accurate.

>>6721865
If a thread is dying, just let it die.

>>6722356
Except if its not a futa thread of course, then its fine

>>6722377
I am of the let it die school in general the only exception was a quest that was expected to start again on a specified date/time but quests have bean pocket banned so its not cool and futa bumps in a non fut a thread are skum.

>>6721729
To really prove things to the fags who believe in the futa spammer, you should gather more data. Perhaps every 2-4 weeks for 6-12 months.

It won't really stop them from saying it, because believing in something really hard makes it incontrovertibly true, but at least we'll have more stuff we can throw in their faces and laugh at them for.

>>6722377
I think it's less a revive the thread/let it die situation that's the issue, it's more just contributing 1 image to keep it alive over and over rather than a significant dump of content which would give an actual reason for it to be back on top

>>6722645
This, pretty much. People like to talk about a futa spammer because there was a serious problem with one back in... 2014, I think? They made a habit of bumping, every single futa thread on the board with a single image, and spamming new threads besides, which really did crowd out other content quite seriously. It hasn't been that egregious since... but people have long memories and like to complain, so any apparent glut of content, or a bunch of single-image bumps, triggers accusations of spam.

File: freakind.png (58KB, 649x850px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 649x850px

>>6722679
Oh yeah, big time. Back then, it was crowding absolutely everything else out. I did a count myself back then- here it is.

File: holy futa batman.png (52KB, 746x817px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 746x817px

>>6722885
And heres the data.

>>6722888
As you can see, things got pretty bad! I mean, what the hell! Do we really need 58 barely-alive seperate threads for different flavours of the same thing?

File: 1453671403293.jpg (87KB, 713x717px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 713x717px

>>6722888
>green/pink futa
>posing futa

>>6721874
>fully nude futas with big tits
preferably cumming or milking
>dickless futa
>kinda realistic futa
>futa wearing panties
>futa with female lovemaking (Oh boy that's not half the other threads)
I've seen worse, I'm too tired to go through the archives but there you go.

>>6723239
There is also a
>Futa x female thread
Which is a redundant thread. That's the definition of spam really.

>>6721729
It could be argues that the male breast expansion thread is basically a futa one just more veiled

>>6722888
Those whites really don't stand a chance

>>6723241
How is that redundant? Not everyone wants pictures of futa on futa, futa on male, tentacles on futa etc.

>>6723247
So that dude from Fight Club is now futa?

>>6723247
Wha

This is cool. Do you have the time/patience/motivation to see how many not-specifically-futa threads have a majority of futa pics as their content and/or how many become all futa at some point? That's the annoying thing to many users, you can filter or just ignore purpose-made or open-ended threads, but when stuff flip-flops or suddenly turns futa it can be like an oasis drying up.

>>6722888
This is the key point right here. Now try logging how many days old the threads are, and you can really see what kind of effect the futa spammer has when he bumps those threads once a day/every other day. Nice trips, btw.

>>6721729
Ai, are you using a web scraper of your own, or someone's API? In either case, what do you think of tackling some archives. loveisover, for example, once it is back up.

Nice to see someone taking the statistics. I wonder how many people are getting off to them.

>>6722888
Just wondering, but where's the Genderbend/TG thread?

That's the one I generally inhabit but I'm not seeing it there.

>>6724577
There is a date a bottom of >>6722885

The CYOA fad was quite a while ago. Several threads I was upset to see abandoned by host, but knew it would happen.

>>6721729

If it isn't too much additional work, it may be useful to also track the number of replies/images in each thread.

>>6723303
Futa x female and futa with female lovemaking are exactly the same thing

/d/ has been remarkably light on futa lately.

It has been glorious.

OP pls don't fuck it up.

>>6724136
I'm afraid I don't, and the ability to scrape that much data is beyond my primitive coding skills. It's possible that if we had a big enough database we could tag every post properly, but I just don't see the point past a certain level of detail.

>>6724553
It's a thing I threw together with help. I'm not sure I want to tackle archives, but I'll be running it periodically as time moves on.

>>6726133
Why would me doing this fuck it up?

File: 29677794_big_p0.jpg (226KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

226KB, 900x900px

>>6726116
It's the same type of pairing, but the contents of those two threads are vastly different, though arguably they could still be posted in a single thread.

The problem with dickgirl threads in general is the fact that there are lots of sub-genres of dickgirl porn and even more sub-sub-genres and to make matters worse they're often mutually exclusive. Hardcore fans of either hermaphrodites or shemales are constantly clashing with each other as they find the other groups preference disgusting, while the people who don't care get caught in the middle of the shitstorm for posting content.

If /dg/ - Dickgirls existed, the extremist groups could make their own pure and clean threads without flooding /d/ with their bickering.

>>6726402
>Hardcore fans of either hermaphrodites or shemales are constantly clashing with each other

I'm not even trying to be an ass here— I legitimately don't know what they would argue about, it's so similar that they are nearly the same thing. My equivalent guess is a large insertion thread where people argue whether balls or large rods are better.

I would rather wade through 100 futa threads than 100 ntr threads

>>6729085
These are the extremities in nutshell:

The Herm side: "Boy, I sure am I tired of of looking at close-ups of asses of men as they have sex with women. I think I'll just replace men with herms and enjoy some lesbian sex with real dicks instead of shitty strap-ons and scissoring. Replacing women with herms is fine too, makes it easier to swap who's on top".

Pro-Shemale: "Oh my god! Vaginas are so disgusting! But I kinda like the rest of female body, so I'll replace all the women with shemales. Maybe I should replace the men with shemales too to make it less gay".

In short, there are few people who only like herms and a few who only like shemales and they don't get along with each other. I'm fine with both, but you can probably guess that I prefer herms.

>>6721729
You aren't counting threads where the premise is invalidated by the thread's premise, like genderbender.

>>6729361

And then there's the No-Balls herm supporters versus the Full-Package enthusiasts.

That used to spark a lot of rage, but seems to be less of an issue today.

File: 1fcddc486444f3dbee7832e4c8bfeff9479b124f.jpg (869KB, 1200x1488px) Image search: [Google]

869KB, 1200x1488px

>>6729797
The "Balls or No-Balls Argument" existed, because the lack of balls was the easiest way to make sure the character was a herm since /d/ hasn't always been this kind on shemales. The counterargument was that being so homophobic to not tolerate pictures of herms with their balls covering their pussy because they might secretly be shemales means missing a lot of good stuff. Now /d/ is arguing whether the obvious lack of pussy should be tolerated or not.

>>6722114
Honestly how hard is it to understand

feminine male (possibly in women's clothing) = Trap

same as above but also with boobs = shemale

female with a male and female genitalia(s) = futa/herm/dickgirl

We also have the gray are of male genitalia only females.

Fucking these up should be banable, along with fucking up other fetishes, there is nothing more annoying than having an already over specified futa thread and have some retard start posting traps.

>>6722890
>separate threads for different flavours of the same thing
If it's different, then it's not the same. Think of futa like 3rd gender, nobody wants farting/futa-on-male/chubby/etc. futas in their futa-on-female threads for example. Not that I am defending 58 different threads at the same time. But a single general is all the same ridiculous, if you don't have enough material for a separate thread (1-30) images, then find most similar thread and dump them there.