How are the stats calculated. - Page 12

Purple · June 16, 2002, 14:59

At least if it's in the FAQs, you can refer to it instead of writing a detaileld reply.

Apocalypse · June 16, 2002, 15:01

Then they'd just complain they couldn't find it in the FAQ. Many people here are lazy.

Skanky Burns · June 16, 2002, 21:07

Still, there are some who aren't. If you cut down the number of people asking for the same information, then its definately a good thing.

FlameFlash · June 16, 2002, 21:21

I think it would be good to put into the FAQ... I mean, sure I wasn't perceptive, but I'm planning on actually reading the FAQ now that I know where it is when I have a question now.

Maybe it just needs to be more obvious where it is.

Apocalypse · June 17, 2002, 00:15

I'm not against putting it in the FAQ, I'm just saying it probably won't change much.

phoenixcager · June 17, 2002, 06:26

One of the first things I did when I join these forums was look at the FAQ (because I was curious about how many posts it would take to get to Chieftain).

I'm sure if there are others like me, that would have cut down a number of redundant threads from being started.

rah · June 17, 2002, 10:37

And, yes, as predicted, the stats have already been relegated to a mere curiosity commented on by the minority.

YOU MUST POST THEM someplace other than the profile.

RAH

MarkG · June 17, 2002, 13:09

Quote:

And, yes, as predicted, the stats have already been relegated to a mere curiosity commented on by the minority.

YOU MUST POST THEM someplace other than the profile.

way more usefull stuff is keeping us busy

rah · June 17, 2002, 13:31

Yes, I can understand that.

In fact, I'm surprised that you spent time on it in the first place, but if you are serious about them, they deserve to be elsewhere than the profile.

RAH

Purple · June 17, 2002, 15:56

I think the profile is the right place for them (if anywhere), at least as until they are finalized and explained. After they're set in stone, they could be given greater prominence.

rah · June 17, 2002, 16:22

Quote:

Originally posted by Purple
I think the profile is the right place for them (if anywhere), at least as until they are finalized and explained. After they're set in stone, they could be given greater prominence.

Agreed. We'll have to wait for Mark to get some FREE time

Maybe some more technical wizards will volunteer to help with it.

But we did see how much discussion his experiment generated when they were under the avatar.

FlameFlash · June 18, 2002, 09:18

Personally I think they should be an optional add-on to a person's sig line...

And... what's free time?

jdd2007 · June 18, 2002, 10:51

edit: never mind

jdd2007 · June 18, 2002, 10:56

...

Lemmy · June 18, 2002, 10:57

hehe, guess you only read the first couple of posts eh?
they were moved to your profile a while ago

J Bytheway · June 18, 2002, 10:57

Profile! Please read at least the last few posts and all will be made clear. Preferably read all posts by MarkG in the thread.

Apocalypse · June 18, 2002, 11:01

See? People don't even both to read threads already on the subject, much less the FAQ.

J Bytheway · June 18, 2002, 11:04

I'd think people would be much more likely to read the FAQ than this bloated and somewhat confusing thread.

Lemmy · June 18, 2002, 11:07

can you blame 'm for not reading this thread, its more than 340 posts, even i who has been following this haven't read everything...

Apocalypse · June 18, 2002, 11:08

They could have skimmed through the last couple pages already.

jdd2007 · June 18, 2002, 11:14

i didnt feel like reading 13 pages. anyway, i didnt see any stats when they were under the avatar

jdd2007 · June 18, 2002, 11:16

make that 14 pages

Apocalypse · June 18, 2002, 11:17

If you do 30 posts/page it is only 12

FlameFlash · June 18, 2002, 14:31

Quote:

Originally posted by Apocalypse
They could have skimmed through the last couple pages already.

You have a really high opinion of our fellow poster's habits don't you?

Finally looked at the FAQ. If I had any questions, they'd be solved now (especially the opst count thing). If this stuff was in the FAQ as well we'd see just us posting here.

Lemmy is right, (and although I've read all the posts) I'm still not sure as to what is going on... hence why the standing request for some of the math.

FlameFlash · June 18, 2002, 14:32

posts per page? On my screen they're showing up 15 pages now...

Dauphin · June 18, 2002, 15:49

You can set it in your options. The default is 20 posts per page. MarkG will no doubt be able to tell you what the preferred rate is.

J Bytheway · June 18, 2002, 16:02

Quote:

Originally posted by FlameFlash
hence why the standing request for some of the math.

Since it appears Mark is unwilling to tell us I tried to figure out the formula myself. It's not nearly so simple as I thought. I expected from the comment "A is logarithmically related to post count" that it would be of the form A = k * ln(PC) for some k - so I plotted A against ln(PC) to determine the value of k, but found that the relation is far from linear. The best relatively simple approximation I've found so far is A = FLOOR(1+0.074*ln(PC)^3.06) (pink line below). But as you can see it doesn't fit very well, especially for high post counts.

Dauphin · June 18, 2002, 17:24

A = Floor((log PC)³,1) + 1

J Bytheway · June 18, 2002, 17:46

What's a floor with two arguments?

Apocalypse · June 18, 2002, 18:48

Quote:

Originally posted by FlameFlash
You have a really high opinion of our fellow poster's habits don't you?

I'm just making a helpful suggestion. At many other forums, there'd be flaming.