Member count

[pg240]

MFC home page lists the number of models online, but is there a total number of members/guests online available for you? I'm thinking it would have to be a staggering number to populate all those rooms. What a bunch of horny bastards we are!

 

[MsAllyCat]

No there isn't a member count. Not that I've realised anyway. But yes, would be cool to know how big that seething horny cesspit of debauchery known as MFC is at any one time.

 

[emptiedglass]

No there isn't a member count. Not that I've realised anyway. But yes, would be cool to know how big that seething horny cesspit of debauchery known as MFC is at any one time.

I imagine it'd be pretty depressing if you saw it broken down by how man guests/basics/premiums.
Or if they did like other sites and showed which premiums have tokens or at least have purchased some recently.

 

[JerryBoBerry]

There isn't an automatic function but counting them only took about 20 minutes. So here's the numbers as of 12:47pm CST time today. There were 863 models online (total, including away, private, true private and group) and 31,191 people in all the rooms combined (again including the previous mentioned rooms and the three lounges). So there was an average of 36.143 people in each models room at that moment.

Keep in mind this is based on total number of people in a room in a single moment based on the number given on the homepage screen. Many members do have more than one room open at the same time so they would be counted twice in this method. So the actual number of people would be a bit less. You'd have to do a study to find out what percentage of people do multiple rooms and how many on average they have open at once to find a more accurate number.

 

[Kradek]

There are typically 30-50k in public rooms. I wrote a snippet to calculate it.

In Chrome, open the most popular rooms page, press f12 to open the developer tools, then paste the code below into the console and hit return.

(function(){
    Math.sum = function (ary) {
        return ary.reduce(function (a, b) { return a + b; });
    }
    Math.avg = function (ary) {
        return Math.sum(ary) / ary.length;
    }

    function getRoomCounts() {
        return [].slice.call(document.querySelectorAll("i")).map(function (e) {
            var match = e.innerHTML.match(/\d*/);
            if (match) {
                var cnt = parseInt(match[0], 10);
                if (cnt > 0)
                    return cnt;
            }
        }).filter(function (e) {
            return undefined !== e;
        });
    }

    function navRoomPages(pageNum) {
        MfcPaging.hInstances[1].nPage = pageNum;
        PopularRooms.LoadTopRooms();
    }


    var userCount = 0;
    var allRoomCounts = [];
    var currentPage = 1;
    navRoomPages(currentPage);
    var roomCounts = getRoomCounts();
    while (roomCounts.length > 0) {
        userCount += Math.sum(roomCounts);
        allRoomCounts = allRoomCounts.concat(roomCounts);
        navRoomPages(++currentPage);
        roomCounts = getRoomCounts();
    }
    console.log(userCount + " total viewers.");
    console.log(Math.round(Math.avg(allRoomCounts)) + " average viewers per room.");

})();

 

[JerryBoBerry]

There are typically 30-50k in public rooms. I wrote a snippet to calculate it.

In Chrome, open the most popular rooms page, press f12 to open the developer tools, then paste the code below into the console and hit return.

Very cool

Does that just count the 100 most popular rooms, since that is all that shows up in the most popular rooms page? Or does that actually get all the rooms including those that are away, in group, and privates?
I'm wondering because the number I just got from your method is VERY close to the number I got from when I counted all the rooms manually.

Numbers from the code:
32124 total viewers.
36 average viewers per room.


Almost identical, with just a small difference being attributed to doing the two methods a little bit of time apart.

 

[pg240]

You people are amazing! Thanks

 

[Kradek]

Does that just count the 100 most popular rooms, since that is all that shows up in the most popular rooms page? Or does that actually get all the rooms including those that are away, in group, and privates?
I'm wondering because the number I just got from your method is VERY close to the number I got from when I counted all the rooms manually.

Numbers from the code:
32124 total viewers.
36 average viewers per room.


Almost identical, with just a small difference being attributed to doing the two methods a little bit of time apart.

The most popular rooms page actually lists all rooms with viewers, it's just paginated. The script looks at each page until it reaches rooms with zero viewers.

All the caveats in your manual calculation apply (people in multiple rooms counted multiple times, doesn't count people in privates/groups, etc).

Your numbers would be different, but still close if you only counted the first page because numbers drop precipitously after page one.

 

[JerryBoBerry]

All the caveats in your manual calculation apply (people in multiple rooms counted multiple times, doesn't count people in privates/groups, etc).

Your numbers would be different, but still close if you only counted the first page because numbers drop precipitously after page one.

The method I did actually does count the people in all the rooms, even those in privates/groups and away too. I did it old school number crunching method. I told the homepage to sort by most popular room and had it set to list 500 avatars at a time. Then I paused it from updating, maxed out my browser to cover both of my monitors, shrunk down the zoom on chrome to where i could just barely see the numbers in each room and took a screen shot. Repeat the screen shot for every room. Then i opened up the pictures and zoomed back up to where I could see all of them and typed all the counts into a spreadsheet. Since the privates, groups, away's and all three lounges are included at the bottom of the listings they were included that way too. Not as efficient as your method granted, but it got the job done. :lol:
Here's one of them i used.

 

[emptiedglass]

There would also be a small number of members who wouldn't currently be viewing a room, or doing so through a PM window.
Even so, it boggles the mind to think of the resources that must be required in order to keep the site running.

 

[Evvie]

Does that just count the 100 most popular rooms, since that is all that shows up in the most popular rooms page? Or does that actually get all the rooms including those that are away, in group, and privates?
I'm wondering because the number I just got from your method is VERY close to the number I got from when I counted all the rooms manually.

Numbers from the code:
32124 total viewers.
36 average viewers per room.


Almost identical, with just a small difference being attributed to doing the two methods a little bit of time apart.

The most popular rooms page actually lists all rooms with viewers, it's just paginated. The script looks at each page until it reaches rooms with zero viewers.

All the caveats in your manual calculation apply (people in multiple rooms counted multiple times, doesn't count people in privates/groups, etc).

Your numbers would be different, but still close if you only counted the first page because numbers drop precipitously after page one.

I think it's sexy how you used precipitous like an everyday word.

 

[pg240]

Does that just count the 100 most popular rooms, since that is all that shows up in the most popular rooms page? Or does that actually get all the rooms including those that are away, in group, and privates?
I'm wondering because the number I just got from your method is VERY close to the number I got from when I counted all the rooms manually.

Numbers from the code:
32124 total viewers.
36 average viewers per room.


Almost identical, with just a small difference being attributed to doing the two methods a little bit of time apart.

The most popular rooms page actually lists all rooms with viewers, it's just paginated. The script looks at each page until it reaches rooms with zero viewers.

All the caveats in your manual calculation apply (people in multiple rooms counted multiple times, doesn't count people in privates/groups, etc).

Your numbers would be different, but still close if you only counted the first page because numbers drop precipitously after page one.

I think it's sexy how you used precipitous like an everyday word.

I think it's sexy that you think it's sexy that he used the word so casually.

 

[Meoff_69]

Does that just count the 100 most popular rooms, since that is all that shows up in the most popular rooms page? Or does that actually get all the rooms including those that are away, in group, and privates?
I'm wondering because the number I just got from your method is VERY close to the number I got from when I counted all the rooms manually.

Numbers from the code:
32124 total viewers.
36 average viewers per room.


Almost identical, with just a small difference being attributed to doing the two methods a little bit of time apart.

The most popular rooms page actually lists all rooms with viewers, it's just paginated. The script looks at each page until it reaches rooms with zero viewers.

All the caveats in your manual calculation apply (people in multiple rooms counted multiple times, doesn't count people in privates/groups, etc).

Your numbers would be different, but still close if you only counted the first page because numbers drop precipitously after page one.

I think it's sexy how you used precipitous like an everyday word.

I think it's sexy that you think it's sexy that he used the word so casually.

I think Kradek's just a sexy guy, all around! In a strictly platonic way, of course! :lol:

 

[LilyMarie]

Does that just count the 100 most popular rooms, since that is all that shows up in the most popular rooms page? Or does that actually get all the rooms including those that are away, in group, and privates?
I'm wondering because the number I just got from your method is VERY close to the number I got from when I counted all the rooms manually.

Numbers from the code:
32124 total viewers.
36 average viewers per room.


Almost identical, with just a small difference being attributed to doing the two methods a little bit of time apart.

The most popular rooms page actually lists all rooms with viewers, it's just paginated. The script looks at each page until it reaches rooms with zero viewers.

All the caveats in your manual calculation apply (people in multiple rooms counted multiple times, doesn't count people in privates/groups, etc).

Your numbers would be different, but still close if you only counted the first page because numbers drop precipitously after page one.

I think it's sexy how you used precipitous like an everyday word.

I think it's sexy that you think it's sexy that he used the word so casually.

I think it's sexy that you appreciate that Evvie finds Kradek's usage of the word sexy.

 

[JerryBoBerry]

Does that just count the 100 most popular rooms, since that is all that shows up in the most popular rooms page? Or does that actually get all the rooms including those that are away, in group, and privates?
I'm wondering because the number I just got from your method is VERY close to the number I got from when I counted all the rooms manually.

Numbers from the code:
32124 total viewers.
36 average viewers per room.


Almost identical, with just a small difference being attributed to doing the two methods a little bit of time apart.

The most popular rooms page actually lists all rooms with viewers, it's just paginated. The script looks at each page until it reaches rooms with zero viewers.

All the caveats in your manual calculation apply (people in multiple rooms counted multiple times, doesn't count people in privates/groups, etc).

Your numbers would be different, but still close if you only counted the first page because numbers drop precipitously after page one.

I think it's sexy how you used precipitous like an everyday word.

I think it's sexy that you think it's sexy that he used the word so casually.

I think it's sexy that you appreciate that Evvie finds Kradek's usage of the word sexy.

I think it's sexy that you think that they appreciate that she thought he used....wait, I'm getting confused now. :confusion-confused: :confusion-helpsos:

 

[LilyMarie]

I think it's sexy that you think that they appreciate that she thought he used....wait, I'm getting confused now. :confusion-confused: :confusion-helpsos:

What, ALREADY?! I'm so disappointed in you.

But yeah we should probably put an end to this before Amber beheads us all. :thumbleft:

 

[emptiedglass]

But yeah we should probably put an end to this before Amber beheads us all. :thumbleft:

Beheading's a bit extreme. She might just lock you in a room where the walls are plastered with penis pictures.

 

[Brad]

I think it's sexy that you think that they appreciate that she thought he used....wait, I'm getting confused now. :confusion-confused: :confusion-helpsos:

What, ALREADY?! I'm so disappointed in you.

But yeah we should probably put an end to this before Amber beheads us all. :thumbleft:

Just start replying with colored fonts.