We could post to exhaustion about the effects the decisions made by the Beagles over the years have had on the site, whether the Mass Cull of 2014 was really such a bad thing, whether banning people left, right and centre actually affects the site as a whole, and whether having “prolific posters” like Nemesis45 on board is a good or a bad thing for the site as a whole (as opposed to the individual OPs involved). We would all have an opinion but it would be no more than that.
In order to really appreciate the overall effect that the Beagles’ decisions have had on the site as a whole, we have to look at the numbers. The stats don’t lie. Perceptions are subjective, stats are accurate.
Let’s start by looking at Alexa, a third party website that plots traffic data and ranks websites according to it. The page for Legal Beagles is located here: Alexa site info.
The first thing we see is the chart. As the data is live, its appearance may change by the time you look at it. Below is a screenshot of it as it looks at the time this post was published.
The chart speaks for itself, the steady downward trend is very evident, in particular from October 2015 onwards. It shows Legal Beagles’ rankings steady decline, and, in the past three months, the site has declined 36,967 positions.
Looking at Legal Beagles’ own “hottest threads” unveils some rather interesting facts.
The top four hottest threads are all hidden content! That means a lot more activity takes place behind the scenes than out in the open, which would explain all those times you see all of the site team online yet not posting, and also explains why threads often get missed while they are all obviously posting behind closed doors. The fifth thread is one that was “hot” a year ago.
The hottest posts start with the bank charges victory, which is really something to shout about, however, the following two are both from three years ago, and neither is fully relevant today.
This is the second place: Celestine & PT2537 Join Howlett Clarke Solicitors to Set Up Consumer Litigation Team They joined Howlett Clarke to set up a Consumer Litigation Team but there’s every indication that Kate is no longer there, if you go to the Howlett Clarke website, you’ll find her page has gone. It’s interesting to see that SIX of the people who posted on this thread, offering them their full support and best wishes, are now Ban Club members:
This is the third place: Statutory demand? – **read here first** Like the second place, this is also three years old, and, as noted on this other post: A Special Relationship, not only are statutory demands hardly ever issued these days, Kate appears as working for Howlett Clarke, which is clearly no longer the case.
The fifth place is, once more, “hidden content”, i.e. something posted on a private thread.