ABDL Population and rough estimates. How rare are we?

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Draco9990

Contributor
Messages
5
Role
  1. Adult Baby
  2. Diaper Lover
Heya ADISC community.

I've posted only once here, and it was from a year ago. Now I return and my goal is to provide everyone with rough estimates of ABDL people.

Just to say: These numbers are all estimates. The correct number can't be known but with my method I think we can come closely to it.

-----

To begin, we need to do some research. I've been here and on DD and asked through a poll on how many of you are using one or both sites. Even though I got a relatively small sample, I can scale that number more to mirror it.

On both sites, I got similar results.

Here, I got that 85.71% of users use only ADISC and 14.29% use both ADISC and DD. When we apply that percentage to the site's max users (37031, 10% of which are fake if we apply social networking logic) we get that 28565 users use Adisc only and 4763 that use both Adisc and DD.

Doing same for DD results (71.05% only DD, 28.95% both ADISC and DD) we get that from total of 40975 users 26201 are only DD and 10677 users are both ADISC and DD.

-----

In Phase 2 we add single users from ADISC and DD, resulting in 69540 users.

However, we must include the difference of sharing users, which is 5914 additional users, totaling up to 75454 ABDL's.

-----

After going to a total number of ABDL's on the world's two largest ABDL sites, we can compare our stats to twitters for two reasons:

- Facebook is too big and famous to be realistic

- Twitter is neither too big or too small and can give us more realistic statistics.

At the end of 2017, twitter had 330 million accounts on its site. Comparing that number to the world total humans, results in 4.434291857027681% of population having twitter accounts. We can then symbolically represent that as: 75454 are number of twitter accounts, 4.434291857027681% of population has accounts, what is the total population.

-----

After the calculation of above results, next up is pretty common algebra. Extracting the x for total users, we get that total number of ABDL is... Drumroll please!

1701602 people.

In comparison, that is 0.023% of the earth's population. That then results in 1 out of every 4374 person born is an ABDL.

This might seem small, but don't forget that this is rough. It does serve as a reminder to keep every ABDL friend around ;).

-----

And that's it. The calculations. Comment if I've made a mistake or anything, but I think I've done it pretty solidely.

Bye for another year, going back to lurker.
 
What's the DD site?
 
Pete67 said:
What's the DD site?
Click to expand...

DailyDiaper

Interesting calculations, Draco. 1.7m people. I reckon that’s a real conservative estimate, tbh - if I had to take a wild guess, I’d be saying there’s at least 3m.
 
We're too few. :D
 
Yeah, there must be plenty who aren't active online. I would expect the vast majority of those 1.7m are in the Western world as well, so that's probably 1.7m out of 1bn rather than out of 7bn.
 
Very interesting calculations.
 
I thought there was only five 🤔
 
Lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Draco9990 said:
Heya ADISC community.

I've posted only once here, and it was from a year ago. Now I return and my goal is to provide everyone with rough estimates of ABDL people.

Just to say: These numbers are all estimates. The correct number can't be known but with my method I think we can come closely to it.

-----

To begin, we need to do some research. I've been here and on DD and asked through a poll on how many of you are using one or both sites. Even though I got a relatively small sample, I can scale that number more to mirror it.

On both sites, I got similar results.

Here, I got that 85.71% of users use only ADISC and 14.29% use both ADISC and DD. When we apply that percentage to the site's max users (37031, 10% of which are fake if we apply social networking logic) we get that 28565 users use Adisc only and 4763 that use both Adisc and DD.

Doing same for DD results (71.05% only DD, 28.95% both ADISC and DD) we get that from total of 40975 users 26201 are only DD and 10677 users are both ADISC and DD.

-----

In Phase 2 we add single users from ADISC and DD, resulting in 69540 users.

However, we must include the difference of sharing users, which is 5914 additional users, totaling up to 75454 ABDL's.

-----

After going to a total number of ABDL's on the world's two largest ABDL sites, we can compare our stats to twitters for two reasons:

- Facebook is too big and famous to be realistic

- Twitter is neither too big or too small and can give us more realistic statistics.

At the end of 2017, twitter had 330 million accounts on its site. Comparing that number to the world total humans, results in 4.434291857027681% of population having twitter accounts. We can then symbolically represent that as: 75454 are number of twitter accounts, 4.434291857027681% of population has accounts, what is the total population.

-----

After the calculation of above results, next up is pretty common algebra. Extracting the x for total users, we get that total number of ABDL is... Drumroll please!

1701602 people.

In comparison, that is 0.023% of the earth's population. That then results in 1 out of every 4374 person born is an ABDL.

This might seem small, but don't forget that this is rough. It does serve as a reminder to keep every ABDL friend around ;).

-----

And that's it. The calculations. Comment if I've made a mistake or anything, but I think I've done it pretty solidely.

Bye for another year, going back to lurker.
Click to expand...

Except you forgot all the other "diaper" related sites and groups (dlbois, fetlife, and yes facebook/instagram too), and the fact that the total "users"/members far outweigh the total guests that frequent these two sites. Really, your numbers are maybe half at best for the total members of everywhere, so let's be conservative and say there are 3.4 million abdls in the world (double your 1.7).

Now, let's not forget those website guests who prefer to remain uncounted. They outweigh members to more than 900% by some numbers (members are roughly 10% the total visitors according the DD & ADISC). So now, 2.4 times 9 is 21.6 million abdls worldwide (or about 3.4% the world's population)

See, math is easy. You can make it come out to anything you want. And mine was likely even closer to being true than your's was.
 
I like it.

Doesn’t matter to me if it’s underestimated, spot on or the actual numbers are half of those currently registered on ADISC, just nice not to be alone.
 
1.7 million is actually a lot lol, might be able to form a small country's population.
 
Slomo said:
Except you forgot all the other "diaper" related sites and groups (dlbois, fetlife, and yes facebook/instagram too), and the fact that the total "users"/members far outweigh the total guests that frequent these two sites. Really, your numbers are maybe half at best for the total members of everywhere, so let's be conservative and say there are 3.4 million abdls in the world (double your 1.7).

Now, let's not forget those website guests who prefer to remain uncounted. They outweigh members to more than 900% by some numbers (members are roughly 10% the total visitors according the DD & ADISC). So now, 2.4 times 9 is 21.6 million abdls worldwide (or about 3.4% the world's population)

See, math is easy. You can make it come out to anything you want. And mine was likely even closer to being true than your's was.
Click to expand...


I mean yeah, math is easy. However the difference between your calculations and mine is that you assume far lot more than I do. I went by real stats and only assumtion I did was make it connected to twitter, wich isn't that far off.

The reason why other pages are not included is quite simple, actually. If I calculated all sites, I'd then compare my stats to facebook, which a lot more people own, rather than twitter, which is statistically smaller. Adding to my favour is that the fact the facebook tries to limit your possibilites of broswing facebook if you are not logged in, whereas twitter does not, making it far more similar to my case. And sure, we can assume the % of people that don't have an accaunt, and while I am sure that it is higher than in twitter's case, it won't be in that much of significanse.

All in all though, if you think my math is faulty, no problems. As everyone said, nobody can truly calculate, what I did is calculate the bare minimum. :)
 
Draco9990 said:
I mean yeah, math is easy. However the difference between your calculations and mine is that you assume far lot more than I do. I went by real stats and only assumtion I did was make it connected to twitter, wich isn't that far off.

The reason why other pages are not included is quite simple, actually. If I calculated all sites, I'd then compare my stats to facebook, which a lot more people own, rather than twitter, which is statistically smaller. Adding to my favour is that the fact the facebook tries to limit your possibilites of broswing facebook if you are not logged in, whereas twitter does not, making it far more similar to my case. And sure, we can assume the % of people that don't have an accaunt, and while I am sure that it is higher than in twitter's case, it won't be in that much of significanse.

All in all though, if you think my math is faulty, no problems. As everyone said, nobody can truly calculate, what I did is calculate the bare minimum. :)
Click to expand...

Actually, I DID go by real stats. The online presence of any one community is represented by only about 10% of the total community. and you yourself said you purposely did not include all online presences. You purposely left out far too many that should have been counted in the first place, then you overestimated the online presence as a whole. You numbers aren't the bare minimum, it's well below even that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top