There's a rule similar to 80/20 which is 90-9-1. 90% are just observers, 9% react/respond (think upvote), and 1% contribute. I wouldn't be surprised if the HN/Reddit/etc. is close to this or some normalized and skewed version of it.
I'm not sure about HN, but I heard people say that the main editors/volunteers on Wikipedia that do the bulk of the work are somewhere in the 1000+ range (somewhere in the low four-digits).
Comments
I wonder what the actual split is. What is the number of front page stories contributed by the top X users on HN?
There's a rule similar to 80/20 which is 90-9-1. 90% are just observers, 9% react/respond (think upvote), and 1% contribute. I wouldn't be surprised if the HN/Reddit/etc. is close to this or some normalized and skewed version of it.
I don't think that it's that extreme.
The difference between Wikipedia and Reddit/HN is what I would venture calling 'contribution barrier.'
Think how hard is it to contribute to a Wikipedia article vs. Posting or commenting on Reddit/HN. Let alone voting.
I'd imagine that most of the registered users have voted, and a majority have commented. I don't imagine quite a lot of people have posted links.
If I'd have to guess a ratio of lurkers:voters:commenters:posters, I'd say it's 40:30:25:5.
I'm not sure about HN, but I heard people say that the main editors/volunteers on Wikipedia that do the bulk of the work are somewhere in the 1000+ range (somewhere in the low four-digits).