I think it is pretty hilarious that history.se has less than 4000 questions and skeptics.se has more than 8000. Oh, well, at least we have more questions than beer.se.
Well, they have been a full launched site for at least 2 years, and we are just a beta.
- 5.7 questions per day (Okay)
- 90% answered (Okay)
- 464 avid users
- 5,698 total users (Excellent - 40 users with 2,000+ rep, 27 users with 3,000+ rep)
- 1.7 answer ratio (Okay)
- 3,786 visits/day (Excellent)
History Beta (as of this posting):
- 4.4 questions per day (Needs Work)
- 94% answered (Excellent)
- 465 avid users
- 6,430 total users (Excellent – 60 users with 2,000+ rep, 36 users with 3,000+ rep)
- 2.1 answer ratio (Okay)
- 6,747 visits/day (Excellent)
Looking this over, you are quite right to zone in on our Questions per day. It is probably the one thing holding us back in "beta" state. In every other respect, we are doing better than Skeptics was when it left beta. We are getting almost double the visits per day they were.
If I had an improvement suggestion for users here to get us over the hump, it might be to consider editing weak questions into an acceptable shape in some circumstances where we might be meerly closing them today. We could try an overt question push too of course, but that's liable to be just a temporary bump. What I think we need is either a slight (0.6 question per day or so) cultural change, or of course just wait until we snowball up enough users to get us over the hump with our current way of doing things.
I think it has to be easier to ask a question on Skeptics than it is on History just based on the very nature of each site.