Why so few PE data?

I am new to this forum (as of yesterday) but I will stick out
my head anyway :) . Please, don’t bite it of.

If you check the PE data page you will find only 6 percent
of the registered members (74 out of 1235).
I think this is way too low. Doesn´t there exist some kind
of way to convince the grand majority to send in their data?
I recon that only the most devoted enter their data, but
you can still be a lurker, even after entering your data.
Anyway, you guys who read this, why don’t you make a good
deed and help out this excellent site?

Priapos

Well, my stats are on the data page. Why the other members don’t put them up is probably why they don’t ever post. Who knows?

The PE Database was limited to a hand full of “members only” for quite some time. It is open to all members now though.

Im to lazy to do the math but I expect that less than 10% post anything, not just the data ant progress stuff. Oh well, thanks to those that do.

What is potentially interesting in Size’s work on that page is that over time we may see trends that are useful to all of us. Routines are posted; gains or lack of them are posted; we may or may not learn what works or what doesn’t. But to get the information that he is trying to accumulate, we need more participants.

If nothing else, the page offers a very convenient way of noting progress without making little (loseable) messages to ourselves on teensy bits of paper that are misplaced. And, some posts there are surely an inspiration to us all.

The thing that knocks me out is that it automatically computes the width of your penis. I don’t know what formula is does for that, but it was amazingly accurate.

A lot more of the active posters should post statistics. I have several times checked for some senior members members progress, only to find nothing there.

Minor point: There is a slight problem with the automatic width calculation: it assumes the crosssection is a perfect circle, as opposed to the ellipse it usually is.

This is not a problem, for me the calculation is just about right. Keep in mind some have a circumferance that is closer to a circle, some not. I’m sure that the calculation for a circle is a lot simpler to work with.

You’re right, it assumes a cylindrical shape, which is usually pretty close to accurate, but there enough people with flatter or more elliptical penises to justify possibly giving people the option to manually measure width. That will come with the next page upgrade.

Mine is elliptic and the calculator still works. I don’t get it, but was impressed with its accuracy.

Mine is elliptical (please don’t use it like an elliptical trainer tho’). The calculation was just right.

It would be great if it automatically did the calculation, but then you could override it.