Analysis of 2017 vs 2016 Yearbook reports for Europe
I think they announced the British memorial attendance at the meeting in a letter, but I was almost asleep with boredom and I've no idea what it is.
steve2: The absence of reporting country-by-country Memorial attendances for 2017 is also a first in these once slavishly detailed JW reports.
The WT has provided country-by-country Memorial attendances for 2017
It's good to observe these numbers while considering that the Org continuously massages these numbers by making it increasingly easier to report some time. Needless to say that if the standards were the same as they were 20 years ago, the drop would be more significant.
But now if you somehow are able to come with 15m per month of preaching, you are counted, along with standing motionless next to a cart or some of the other activities that are allowed to count as time. It's a numbers game, and the Org will continue to invent ways to keep these number looking somewhat decent.
I don't see how to get the 2017 by-country report on jw. org
sir82: I don't see how to get the 2017 by-country report on jw. org
Home Page > About Us > third item down
On right hand side, under download options, select PDF
Download it, open it and view it - it is a five page document.
Didn't want to be accused of getting info from "apostate" sources
So I guess the question we should be asking JWs is why have the org not shown the average publishers country by country?
They have certainly given us more than many of us feared, but that average publisher figure by country is pretty important. Certainly a lot more accurate than the peak figures which have been published.
Peak publishers is certainly a more volatile number, as it can (and 99.9% of the time does) contain reports from publishers from previous months who have turned in their reports late. That "peak" number may consist of anywhere from 5-15%, or even higher, "late reports".
The only thing I can figure is that the "average no. of publishers" figures were demonstrably and obviously worse than they expected, and so they hid it by displaying only "peak" numbers.
Yes, JWs once prided themselves on highlighting the average number of publishers as a kind of back-handed sign of humility along the lines of, See! We could highlight the peak numbers but instead we look at the average.