konceptual: if most people are baptized at CAs, why on earth are people then so exited about the baptisms at the RCs every year? Hrmpf, apostates!. At least the baptism numbers makes a lot more sense to me now..
Posts by bohm
-
13How baptism rate at conventions relates to yearbook growth rate (Discussion)
by bohm inwe had a number of posters report on the baptism rate at conventions which is usually less than 1% and rates lower than 0.5% is by no means uncommon.
despite this there is still a positive growth rate in the us (0.71% according to the yearbook) and i wonder how these numbers relate.
i wonder if anyone can help me out if these assumptions are true:.
-
-
-
13
How baptism rate at conventions relates to yearbook growth rate (Discussion)
by bohm inwe had a number of posters report on the baptism rate at conventions which is usually less than 1% and rates lower than 0.5% is by no means uncommon.
despite this there is still a positive growth rate in the us (0.71% according to the yearbook) and i wonder how these numbers relate.
i wonder if anyone can help me out if these assumptions are true:.
-
-
bohm
konceptual: It might be a waste of time, but for my own sake I think it would be interesting to get a feeling for how the baptism numbers and conventions relates to the increase in publishers. In your experience is most of the baptisms at RCs or CAs?
Also let me just get this straight: The rate of increase reported in the YB is the increase in peak publishers? (I thought it was in average publishers).
I just noticed the total # of baptisms is given in the YB so i see your point this is probably moot.
-
13
How baptism rate at conventions relates to yearbook growth rate (Discussion)
by bohm inwe had a number of posters report on the baptism rate at conventions which is usually less than 1% and rates lower than 0.5% is by no means uncommon.
despite this there is still a positive growth rate in the us (0.71% according to the yearbook) and i wonder how these numbers relate.
i wonder if anyone can help me out if these assumptions are true:.
-
-
bohm
We had a number of posters report on the baptism rate at conventions which is usually less than 1% and rates lower than 0.5% is by no means uncommon. Despite this there is still a positive growth rate in the US (0.71% according to the yearbook) and I wonder how these numbers relate. I hope someone can help me out if these assumptions appear sound:
Lets suppose in an area of the US there is a baptism rate of r (rate observed) for instance r=0.5% would correspond to 7400 in attendance and 37 baptized because:
r = N(Baptisms at convention) / N(Attendance at convention) = 37 / 7400
We need to relate this quantity to the actual rate of baptisms (yearbook growth rate). There are three principal unknowns:
- q : Fraction of total baptisms which takes place at conventions
- Pa : Chance an average JW "publisher" will attend (and be counted in) the total number of attendants at the convention
- Pb : Chance a random person at the convention is also a JW publisher
q is required because not all baptisms take place at conventions. If q=1 we assume all baptisms take place at conventions and if q=0.5 we assume half of all baptisms take place at conventions.
Pa is the chance a JW publisher will be (counted in) the total number of attendants at the conventions. For instance, if all JWs attend two conventions then Pa=2 and if an average JW attend half of the conventions then Pa = 0.5. This number is lowered by infirm JWs, ill JWs, JWs who are out of the seats getting icecream etc.
Pb is the chance a person who is at the convention is also an "average" publisher (presumably, outsiders, children and DF/DA'd are also counted as attendants at conventions but these are not publishers)
Lets give an illustration: Suppose q=0.75 (75% of all baptisms take place at conventions) and Pa=0.9 (A JW will on average miss out one of 10 conventions when double-attendance is included) and Pb = 0.9 (90% of attendants at conventions are publishers and not faded, DF'd, children, any of you guys, etc.). Then we can compute the total (effective) growth rate as:
G = r * Pa / (q * Pb) = r * 1.33
We need to substract from this number the rate with which JWs leave. First there is death. The death rate in the US is about 0.8%, however we must factor in that we are interested in the rate with which average publishers die (small children who rarely die are not publishers). If we suppose JWs become "average publishers" at age 10 (on average), this would boost the death rate by a little more than 10% (rough guesstimate). In addition many JWs presumably become inactive (due to age) a few years before they die but let's not count that. For simplicity, let's put the death rate at 0.9% (we should also factor in the JW population may be younger/older than the average person or live more/less healthy lives etc.).
Secondly there is the rate with which people leave (DF/DA/fade) and never return. Let's suppose 1 out of 100 leave (i.e. stops being a regular publisher) every year for reasons other than death and half of these never return, that puts the "leave" rate at 0.5%. In total we get the effective growth rate to be:
G(effective) = r * Pa / (q * Pb) - (%Dies) - (%Leaves) = r * 1.33 - 1.4
Thus with these numbers the baptism rate at conventions should be a little more than 1% to maintain equilibrium and about 1.6% to account for the current JW growth rate of 0.71 in the yearbooks (1.6 * 1.33 - 1.44 = 0.71).
Thus, if the baptism rates of 0.5% are representative something fishy is going on with these assumptions... There are a few options:
- I am missing something (the "average publisher" may differ from "the average person" in a significant way)
- The numbers are wrong (q, Pa, Pb, the "leave-rate" or "death-rate"). For instance there could be more DF/Inactives at the convention (Pb is lower than 0.9%). I am probably the worst person to guess these numbers so I hope someone else will give his or her view.
- A few conventions may account for most of the growth whereas the "typical" convention signifies a decline ("the amazing hispanish conventions")
- Ex-JWs who attend conventions with high growth rate don't bother to report the high growth rate here or on reddit because it is discouraging
In conclusion:
To translate the baptism rate reported from conventions into yearbook growth rate we must make several assumptions. It would be interesting to narrow down plausible values for these assumptions to better estimate local growth of the JWs.
-
15
I'm disfellowshipped BUT working my way back
by Want to serve ini figured i would try this out.
i'm currently disfellowshiped but working my way back.
i was wondering if i am the only one?
-
-
bohm
Hi and welcome! There are several disfellowshipped witness on this site however I am not one of them.
I wonder if you could share where you are in the process of getting back? (attending meetings, studying with a witness, etc.).
-
29
What should I do?
by Tameria2001 inhello everyone, it's been quite a while since i was last on this forum.
originally i was under a different user name, but lost all that information when i moved to a different state.
anyways, i had left the jws back in 2001, after being raised up in it most of my childhood life.
-
-
bohm
Yah what Scary21 said. This is totally unacceptable but I think the best you can do is to explain why you got to leave. And I second Flippers suggestion to "overstay" a bit (take a reeeeally long time to say goodbuy).
-
31
Brexit...
by The Rebel inthe london stock exchange up, every share index up, the pound up against the dollar.
where is the fire and brimstone?.
the rebel..
-
-
bohm
It isn't in anyone's interest to tax imports. The UK will not likely get free trade deal, but it'll get a good deal that reflects the above
That's why it was perhaps not the brightest idea of all time to leave the most well-integrated trading block in the world and then try to negotiate a half-baked solution later... You are right, there will be a trade deal between the UK and EU, nobody is disputing that. What is not being disputed either (except by a very small minority) is that it will not be as good as what is currently in place and it will hurt both the UK and the EU in several ways.
-
31
Brexit...
by The Rebel inthe london stock exchange up, every share index up, the pound up against the dollar.
where is the fire and brimstone?.
the rebel..
-
-
bohm
Now the establishment is reeling around in horror, looking for someone to blame and in total denial, ably assisted by the UK press doing their shock horror routine.
They should have had their bases covered.Interesting theory. The wast number of experts concluded that leaving the EU would hurt the UK economy. More than half of the voters disregarded that advice and now the UK government is trying to deal with the fallout. It's a bit like taking a stupid decision and then blaming others for the decision being stupid...
-
31
Brexit...
by The Rebel inthe london stock exchange up, every share index up, the pound up against the dollar.
where is the fire and brimstone?.
the rebel..
-
-
bohm
Whatshallcallmyself: "The big picture" is expenditures vs. revenue from immigrants, i.e. how much they benefit the UK economy. Here is one quote:
European immigrants who arrived in the UK since 2000 have contributed more than £20bn to UK public finances between 2001 and 2011. Moreover, they have endowed the country with productive human capital that would have cost the UK £6.8bn in spending on education.
Over the period from 2001 to 2011, European immigrants from the EU-15 countries contributed 64% more in taxes than they received in benefits. Immigrants from the Central and East European ‘accession’ countries (the ‘A10’) contributed 12% more than they received.
- See more at: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/news-articles/1114/051114-economic-impact-EU-immigration#sthash.5ekm1IGi.dpufNotice this is talking about immigration from EU countries, the UK is in control of it's borders and immigration from non-EU countries.
-
12
Naziaphobe... Why Protect Ideologies from Criticism?
by freemindfade innaziasm is an ideology... islam is an ideology... both encourage dangerous, ugly ideas... .
if i say "screw nazi's" no one is going to call me a racist, a xenophobe, or a naziaphobe.
anyone is capable of snapping, or just being an ahole and committing atrocities, but why does radicalization work so well in islam?
-
-
bohm
Let me compare two ideas: that islam is like nazism and "semi-racist crackpottery"
-
12
Naziaphobe... Why Protect Ideologies from Criticism?
by freemindfade innaziasm is an ideology... islam is an ideology... both encourage dangerous, ugly ideas... .
if i say "screw nazi's" no one is going to call me a racist, a xenophobe, or a naziaphobe.
anyone is capable of snapping, or just being an ahole and committing atrocities, but why does radicalization work so well in islam?
-
-
bohm
Yah sure, just comparing ideas... One idea happens to be islam and the other happens to be nazism...