Interesting point retsof.
To try and find the correct answer I selected an EU country at random. Belgium came out of the hat. Belgium has 236 members and I checked each entry on the all time points listing, sigh.

I selected the cut off point as 30 days or 720 hours. Interestingly those that are above this figure are well above and there are 8 or 9 approaching 720 which suggests they have become inactive. Those that are active are mainly in the 2-50 hour bracket.

This gives the following result: Active members 123 Non active 113 or 52.12% against 47.88% I can see no reason why Belgium is statistically abnormal so applying the 47.88% figure against the front page membership figure gives an active membership of 44,346.

This correlates with the quick scan I did of the UK membership which gave a figure of 40% inactives.

Anyone on Admin want to comment?

Photobytony - you need to get out more

Well, frankly, I am not sure we can truly come up with any ONE number of active users. There would seem to be just too many variables to me. What's an active user? Someone who crunches only during idle time such as when their screen saver kicks in? How do you compare that to a user who crunches 24x7 on their machine? What about the single user running 20 devices? Do you count them as one active user or 20? And not all those devices necessarily run the same amount of time. I don't see the number of users, active or otherwise, as any kind of true measurement of "the project". The number of users is good for one thing, PR, and nothing else.

You want to measure WCG in a way that you can compare it to other DC projects out there? I'd go with total runtime per calendar year. As I recall, it would seem WCG is very close to it's first anniversary and we're fast closing in on 15 THOUSAND years of run time. 15,000 to 1 is not shabby in my mind. Oh some folks will insist on saying 15K years accomplished by 10K users is "better" than 15K years by 100K users. To me, the real point of grid computing is that we've done 15,000 years of computations without adversely impacting any of the users who have been a part of that precisely because grid computing uses otherwise idle CPU resource. I doubt that a supercomputer would have taken 15,000 years to do the same amount of computing but I'd like to see one do it in a year using only it's idle CPU time.

He does

The number one priority is a reliable client/server.....that we have so for me it is sweet.

The other stuff would be welcome but is not really important.

I know a place that discusses the WCG and has PM facilities so I don't much mind that.

Accurate userbase stats would also be welcome....but again, not a critical update.

The project is still relatively young, as is the associated forum.....so we must give it time and room to grow.

Just my tuppence worth.

Back to the crunching I go