Can't we just call it: An Approximation of Missing Members on an Annual Basis - or something equally zingy!
Sounds good to me, except that without factoring in mortality it would be very approximate indeed.
World map showing net reduction in publisher numbers
by cedars 188 Replies latest jw friends
-
slimboyfat
-
traveb
I was confused by Cedars' chart too, but couldn't explain it in words until I thought about my own local congregation.
There are older teens that have been publishers for 10+ years, yet have never been baptized. It's fairly common around here for kids to become publishers at a young age, like around 5-7 years old. What this means is that a congregation's publisher count can grow year over year, even with zero baptisms. As long as people keep turning in time, they are counted as publishers. Baptism has nothing to do with it. Theoretically, a person can remain a publisher indefinitely without ever being baptized.
Even when one of these kids gets baptized, the publisher count stays exactly the same. The only time a congregation experiences a publisher decrease is if someone becomes inactive (stops turning in time), is disfellowshipped, dies, or moves. So, thinking about it on a local level, the number of baptisms in a congregation has nothing to do with the increase or decrease in the number of publishers.
-
slimboyfat
Theoretically, a person can remain a publisher indefinitely without ever being baptized.
Theoretically yes, but in reality the vast majority either leave as a teenager or get baptised, and thus eventually cancel out other young unbaptised publishers coming behind them. Any born-in JWs who remain unbaptised publishers their whole lives must be very few and far between, which is why 00DAD argues that baptisms and increases in publishers can be reasonably compared over time.
But that's not the major problem with the map. The problem is that it misleadingly calls net increases in publisher numbers net reductions.
-
factfinder
I agree with traveb.
When measuring increase in publishers baptisms don't count as they are ALREADY included as publishers as traveb mentioned.
The publisher count can remain the exact same in a congregation even if every non-baptized publisher gets baptized as long as no one dies, leaves, or gets disfellowshipped, or of course any new ones move in.
-
cedars
slimboyfat
Oh Lordy, what have you done there? You multiply the total publisher number by the mortality rate to get the number who died. I don't know what you've done or why.
I realised my mistake as soon as my head hit the pillow last night. If you keep me up until 1am, something's going to give eventually. Thanks at least for helping me finish off the equation the way it should have been...
number of publishers*mortality rate=approximate number of deaths
706,699*0.0063=4,452
I'll try it again, and see if I can still come up with your magical "net increase"... 27,425 - 14,197 - 4,452 = 8,876 publishers still unaccounted for after mortality is factored in. And that's a net increase?
Slim, it's interesting that you not only defend the Society against my accusation that they publish misleading statements about the preaching work reaching the whole inhabited earth (just because they publish "smallprint" in the form of the worldwide report), you also now defend them by calling a decrease in publishers a "net increase" - at least that's what you were arguing until 1am (my time) last night.
Maths doesn't lie my friend, that's the beauty of it.
Cedars
-
cedars
travelb / factfinder
I was confused by Cedars' chart too, but couldn't explain it in words until I thought about my own local congregation.
There are older teens that have been publishers for 10+ years, yet have never been baptized. It's fairly common around here for kids to become publishers at a young age, like around 5-7 years old. What this means is that a congregation's publisher count can grow year over year, even with zero baptisms. As long as people keep turning in time, they are counted as publishers. Baptism has nothing to do with it. Theoretically, a person can remain a publisher indefinitely without ever being baptized.
Even when one of these kids gets baptized, the publisher count stays exactly the same. The only time a congregation experiences a publisher decrease is if someone becomes inactive (stops turning in time), is disfellowshipped, dies, or moves. So, thinking about it on a local level, the number of baptisms in a congregation has nothing to do with the increase or decrease in the number of publishers.
You are absolutely right. I've been arguing all along that the number of baptisms doesn't represent "gross increase". However, there is no other statistic provided by the Society that serves as a more useful "growth indicator" as to roughly how many are being attracted to the organization annually either through the preaching work or young ones getting baptized.
The figures can't be considered exact, although I wish I had the statistics at my disposal so that they could be. Slimboyfat thinks that in the absense of exact figures, you should publish nothing. I disagree. The figures above, however approximate, serve as a useful tool to see that something isn't right in JWland. The Society is struggling with retention - i.e. the number leaving isn't keeping pace with the number coming in.
Slimboyfat admitted himself that people have been using the same equation as I have for years (maybe I'm the first to show the results on a world map, I don't know). He's decided, for whatever reason, to object to me using it. He also thinks the numbers produced should be expressed as a "net increase" even if they show people are leaving at a faster rate than they are coming in. I wasted hours last night trying to argue with him otherwise, but to no avail.
Cedars
-
besty
cedars - I haven't read the whole thread but in general I find SBF to be a reasonable counterpoint to all us apostates on occasion where it is deserved - make no mistake - he is one of us.
-
cedars
besty
cedars - I haven't read the whole thread but in general I find SBF to be a reasonable counterpoint to all us apostates on occasion where it is deserved - make no mistake - he is one of us.
I take that on board. I've had your mantra constantly in my mind concerning slimboyfat, i.e. "we are all dogs on the internet", and I try not to second guess his motives accordingly. I guess I'm just bewildered at the voracity with which he tries to pour cold water on statistical evidence. He similarly interjected on my "30 Other Lands" thread, claiming the Society doesn't exaggerate in the literature as to the effectiveness of their work. I'm at a loss to explain why he does this as a professed apostate, although as you suggest, I try to give him the benefit of the doubt when it comes to his motives.
I'm a prideful man, and I don't mind admitting it. You can disagree with me all you like, and I will welcome opposing viewpoints. However, try to make me look like I don't know what "net" and "gross" means, or tell me my maths are "wrong" after I've done so much work, and I will get hot under the collar. It's a shame I can't be more relaxed with such ridicule, but there it is. I'm human.
Cedars
-
nugget
Trying to make meaning out of the societies figures is incredibly difficult since the figures are already massaged before they are published by the society. Peak publishers and other such nonsense bumps up the numbers to the maximum so that someone who finally turns in 15mins after 9 months of inactivity suddenly pops up on the count. Equally someone who failed to report 11 months of the year and puts their report in on the last month for the whole year gets counted as 12 people. But then you have people who attend meetings regularly but who never do field service but still support the society and take up space. In places like India some foreigners living there are unable to go on field service due to restrictions.
Life is messy and statistics are sane and rational but it is a case of imperfect base data which inevitably leads to the need for assumptions to be made.
Number of baptisms it is hoped is a definite figure equal to the total number of people who got baptised in a year and if it is in fact declining then this is a positive sign. After all as the society gets bigger then baptisms should go up as more people are contacted and fewer slip through the net. Baptisms should not go down if the message was one people needed to hear and was appealling and made sense.
What would be valuable is to look at the age profile of witnesses and activity per age group e.g. age of elders, MS, Pioneers etc. Also the age profile of congregations.
If there is an aging population in congregations with more zealous members being over 50 plus then this will have a major impact on the society as these older ones eventually become too frail to fufil the key roles and there is a lack of brothers willing to take up the slack.
A clear picture is very hard to get to grips with but it is great that someone has tried to .
-
factfinder
Thank you for your hard work cedars.
It is true that the wts prints in nearly 600 languages and prints 2 billion publications a year- far more than any other religious group.
But we see that with all of this and more publishers, more pioneers and more bible studies the results are fewer getting baptized.
The preaching work is not effective.
And the percentage of increase keeps dropping.
The society is having less and less success.