Feature Request: full "Top Contributors" list
Sounds like a fair rating, at least for me !
Quote: RaleighCraps
Test One would be an IQ test
That should drive away some current members, and most of any new, perspective members.
now that's irony.
Quote: sodawaterQuote: RaleighCraps
Test One would be an IQ test
That should drive away some current members, and most of any new, perspective members.
now that's irony.
LOL. How the hades did I miss that?
Quote: beachbumbabsAlso would like the Top Posters to link to a list sorted by post number, since I'm not making requests. ;->
Babs, In case you didn't read the first couple pages of this thread, that's exactly what I've created here (see links below).
Quote: AcesAndEightsQuote: 1BB
How about listing who has the most posts in the least amount of time?
Now that request is feasible. I could add a "average posts/day" metric or somesuch to the table. I'll put it on my backlog.
I have released a new version! The list now includes an additional column: "Posts per day (approximate)." This calculation was actually pretty easy to do (especially on a *nix system with the `date` command). If any nerds are interested in the Perl code for the whole kit-and-caboodle, I have made it available here.
I also changed the schedule so that it updates at 3am PST/6am EST and the timestamp at the top of the page is in PST (since that's where I am; and that's where the forum is hosted).
Additionally, I stopped listing members with 0 posts. This cuts down on the page size, and really, what's the point of seeing those names? I could make the cutoff even higher (only list posters with more than 10 posts, maybe?), which I'm considering.
WOV members by post count
DT members by post count
If you have other feature requests, feel free to mention them here. If I find it interesting I'll work on it.
Quote: WizardI've read through this thread and am considering the issue. A question to be addressed is if I get rid of the "top posters" list, what do I replace it with.
I also don't think we need the list of the "newest members." Personally, I've never paid any attention to it.
Please don't get rid of that, quick way to check new Members for duplicate accounts.
I did see it and I really appreciate the work you did on it. I'd like to see your macro on a button somewhere I can find it, rather than digging it out of this thread, for those who care how many posts each person has.
Quote: WizardI've read through this thread and am considering the issue. A question to be addressed is if I get rid of the "top posters" list, what do I replace it with.
I also don't think we need the list of the "newest members." Personally, I've never paid any attention to it.
I think the biggest missing feature is a rating of individual posts. A basic "+1" feature that rewards users for quality replies. Then you could have a top rated users list which I think would be more relevant than just most posts.
ZCore13
Quote: Zcore13I think the biggest missing feature is a rating of individual posts. A basic "+1" feature that rewards users for quality replies. Then you could have a top rated users list which I think would be more relevant than just most posts.
ZCore13
Yes. The best forums on the Web all have ways to reward good posts. A thumbs up/thumbs down button is a must.
Quote: sodawaterYes. The best forums on the Web all have ways to reward good posts. A thumbs up/thumbs down button is a must.
Babs seems to think the opposite:
Quote: beachbumbabsI'm glad that thread ranking gets almost no use. And member and/or post rankings can and will get horribly abused if implemented, with lots of hard feelings; been there, done it, had to disable it or nuke the forum, it got so bad. I would suggest we leave the rankings part alone.
Personally I don't care.
Quote: sodawaterYes. The best forums on the Web all have ways to reward good posts. A thumbs up/thumbs down button is a must.
I think, if it were to work, it would have to be tied directly to the poster.
We have a thread rater here already. It is rarely used. As Doc pointed out, even his hugely popular thread has only 6 votes. And with so few voters, it is easy to skew. Remember when Varmenti went and 5 starred all his stuff? Then other people went in to counteract him? The thread stars mean little.
But if said stars or +1's went directly to an accumulating total for the poster, maybe it'd be something. A sort of "rep counter".
But you'd have to disclude -1's or thumbs down, because the butthurt would be epic.
(Damn Mission, got me using odd words without thinking about it)
Quote: FaceI think, if it were to work, it would have to be tied directly to the poster.
We have a thread rater here already. It is rarely used. As Doc pointed out, even his hugely popular thread has only 6 votes. And with so few voters, it is easy to skew. Remember when Varmenti went and 5 starred all his stuff? Then other people went in to counteract him? The thread stars mean little.
But if said stars or +1's went directly to an accumulating total for the poster, maybe it'd be something. A sort of "rep counter".
But you'd have to disclude -1's or thumbs down, because the butthurt would be epic.
(Damn Mission, got me using odd words without thinking about it)
In fairness, it took me several months to find the little "rate" thing for threads.
I still haven't figured out how to block somebody with fewer than this many clicks:
Preferences > Click here to manage blocked members > Click here to browse list of all members
Then sift through the list off all members looking for the person you want to block, and then click block.
Is there a faster way?
Quote: GHI don't know what forum software Mike uses, but I noticed some sites use software that allows members to "vote" on the quality of a person's posts; which affects their ranking.
They had this on a fitness forum I used to post on and all it did was create drama and "rep trading" (rep = reputation points)
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceIn fairness, it took me several months to find the little "rate" thing for threads.
I still haven't figured out how to block somebody with fewer than this many clicks:
Preferences > Click here to manage blocked members > Click here to browse list of all members
Then sift through the list off all members looking for the person you want to block, and then click block.
Is there a faster way?
Click on user name. Change the word member to block in the URL.
Quote: mipletClick on user name. Change the word member to block in the URL.
Nice! That works really well. There was someone who I had been meaning to block for a while but I hadn't gotten around to it because I was too lazy.
Otherwise this will just turn into a gambling forum !
Quote: BuzzardIs it alright if people just post ? Oh, what a silly question. We absolutely must quantify and qualify everything.
Otherwise this will just turn into a gambling forum !
+1
There, I got one more post! -- how silly --
1) Newest members is a feature only useful for admins. I guess it can be made available to them alone.
2) Top Contributors, Top Threads, etc does not seem to bring useful info to a majority of members, but appears desirable to another minority.
One default: putting too much emphasis on it might create incentive to overpost. Solution: make it available but not conspicuous.
Other default: it does not discriminate between older threads / ancient-or-disappeared members and present threads / contributors. Solution: some sort of weighting according to time elapsed (like in sports or chess rankings). That shouldn't be difficult to add to the code, I'm assuming.
Quote: AcesAndEightsBabs seems to think the opposite:
Personally I don't care.
I agree with Babs. People will inevitably thumbs down on a post based on the person who wrote it, or based on the fact that someone they like disagreed with it, and they will thumbs up an unintelligent post they found funny that has zero to do with the site, or even the topic being discussed in the thread. Also, you will have disgruntled people going around thumbs-downing posts based on their particular mood. I think a facebook-like thing where you can like a post, but not dislike, would be OK, then a list of most liked posts would be interesting.
Quote: SonuvabishI agree with Babs. People will inevitably thumbs down on a post based on the person who wrote it, or based on the fact that someone they like disagreed with it, and they will thumbs up an unintelligent post they found funny that has zero to do with the site, or even the topic being discussed in the thread. Also, you will have disgruntled people going around thumbs-downing posts based on their particular mood. I think a facebook-like thing where you can like a post, but not dislike, would be OK, then a list of most liked posts would be interesting.
I never mentioned anything about a down or negative mark. Only a positive for plus one type mark. BuyY a post having no positive remarks that's basically a negative remark or neutral at minimum.
ZCore13
Quote: Zcore13I never mentioned anything about a down or negative mark. Only a positive for plus one type mark. BuyY a post having no positive remarks that's basically a negative remark or neutral at minimum.
ZCore13
I was not referring to your idea, and I don't think Babs was either--although I don't know if she'd have a different opinion on your ranking system. I think your idea is fine, and it would be interesting to see a list of top posts. Avoids copyright issues by using +1 instead of 'like'. And I don't think it implies a post is bad if it has no good marks, because a lot of posts are banter or questions. It might imply it was bad if the post attempts to answer a question or otherwise offer help, and it is off the mark...and it would be good that no one gives it a rating.
ZCore13
Quote: kubikulann
One default: putting too much emphasis on it might create incentive to overpost.
And quite a trophy this would be....
Quote: SonuvabishPeople will inevitably thumbs down on a post based on the person who wrote it...
There doesn't need to be a "Thumbs Down" for posts. Plenty of forums just have a simple "Thanks" button or "Like" button, and it works fine.
Quote: beachbumbabsAces,
I did see it and I really appreciate the work you did on it. I'd like to see your macro on a button somewhere I can find it, rather than digging it out of this thread, for those who care how many posts each person has.
I briefly considered writing up a Greasemonkey script that you could install, which would replace the "Top Contributors" link with a link to my website. But, I'm too lazy/not bored enough right now :P
April 1, 2015.
EvenBob - 10.04
Baccaratfrom79 - 8.98
AxelWolf - 7.76
Buzzard - 7.70
beachbumbbabs - 7.09
The entire list is updated daily and can be seen by clicking the link on page 3 of this thread.
Quote: 1BBHere are the top five most frequent posters per day as of this morning.
Wow! There really are no gamblers in the game.
EvenBob - 10.00
AxelWolf - 7.88
Buzzard - 7.44
beachbumbabs - 7.09
Baccaratfrom79 - 6.79
Average posts per day updated this morning.
EvenBob - 9.95
AxelWolf - 7.96
Buzzard - 7.20
lion457 - 7.13
beachbumbabs - 7.06
Quote: 1BBIs it June already? Everyone have a safe and happy summer!
Average posts per day updated this morning.
EvenBob - 9.95
AxelWolf - 7.96
Buzzard - 7.20
lion457 - 7.13
beachbumbabs - 7.06
I like the update (+1?). I'm guessing the results are for the previous month only.
Not sure that makes me a 'fan', and I'm not stalking anyone.
But thanks for the update! Does the secret Moderator post ;-) ? 2F
Quote: TwoFeathersATLI'm guessing the results are for the previous month only.
I dont think so. I think the average is for the total life of this board
Buzzard is still on the list and got nuked months ago.
Quote: terapinedI dont think so. I think the average is for the total life of this board
Buzzard is still on the list and got nuked months ago.
Well, I thought about that. But Lion457 wasn't here a month ago, and is now shown as a top contributor.
Maybe others know more about the Lion's roar than I do.... 2F
Quote: beachbumbabsIt's an average per day, so lion's will likely drop rapidly unless he returns with a multi-roar. :) His are averaged over, what, 2 weeks? Mine over 2 years, EB over 4 years, whatever.
And my questions and quips are averaged over, what, a couple months? I like the format of the question....2F
Quote: AcesAndEightsI decided to put this member-post-ranking thingamajigger on a schedule, so it updates now every morning at 1am PST (4am EST).
WOV members by post count
DT members by post count
If JB or the Wizard ask me to remove this, for any reason, I will do so. If they don't like having the list available on philosophical grounds, I disagree but completely understand. If they don't want me scraping all 148 pages of member listings once per day, then I would suggest they add the feature to the website directly using an appropriate DB query :).
Also, because of a mistake I made in the crontab, the thing actually ran every minute between 1am and 2am PST (d'oh) this morning. While I doubt it caused any problems as this site gets a fair bit of traffic, I apologize for the extra load.
The link to WOV isn't working. It was yesterday. The link to DT is working.
Seems like maybe the new guys are listening, and addressing issues.
Best to funnel them all thru one small opening? Just a concept, not necessarily a plan.
Quote: 1BBQuote: AcesAndEightsI decided to put this member-post-ranking thingamajigger on a schedule, so it updates now every morning at 1am PST (4am EST).
WOV members by post count
DT members by post count
If JB or the Wizard ask me to remove this, for any reason, I will do so. If they don't like having the list available on philosophical grounds, I disagree but completely understand. If they don't want me scraping all 148 pages of member listings once per day, then I would suggest they add the feature to the website directly using an appropriate DB query :).
Also, because of a mistake I made in the crontab, the thing actually ran every minute between 1am and 2am PST (d'oh) this morning. While I doubt it caused any problems as this site gets a fair bit of traffic, I apologize for the extra load.
The link to WOV isn't working. It was yesterday. The link to DT is working.
Still isn't working. Isn't it curious that the link to DT is working just fine?
Now, if you want to see page 4, say, of a thread, I have to hope that I can touch a very small box,
Quote: GreasyjohnIf I may add here, I believe we used to have a feature whereby you could make things bigger by expanding the screen with thumb and forefinger. This made it easier to make corrections to spelling or punctuation and such. (I have an i-phone.)
Now, if you want to see page 4, say, of a thread, you have to hope that you can touch I very small box,
I too have noticed that I lost some functionality. Most things on a tablet I can expand by touching with finger and thumb and expanding, at least on a tablet.
How did they take over my tablet? Now my tablet is theirs? I may shoot my tablet..
Quote: 1BBQuote: 1BBQuote: AcesAndEightsI decided to put this member-post-ranking thingamajigger on a schedule, so it updates now every morning at 1am PST (4am EST).
WOV members by post count
DT members by post count
If JB or the Wizard ask me to remove this, for any reason, I will do so. If they don't like having the list available on philosophical grounds, I disagree but completely understand. If they don't want me scraping all 148 pages of member listings once per day, then I would suggest they add the feature to the website directly using an appropriate DB query :).
Also, because of a mistake I made in the crontab, the thing actually ran every minute between 1am and 2am PST (d'oh) this morning. While I doubt it caused any problems as this site gets a fair bit of traffic, I apologize for the extra load.
The link to WOV isn't working. It was yesterday. The link to DT is working.
Still isn't working. Isn't it curious that the link to DT is working just fine?
Not curious at all...the WoV website just underwent a very serious remodel, and as an outsider, my code was simply scraping the HTML of the website. The structure of the HTML has changed dramatically and the code no longer works. DT did not change at all, so that one is still working.
I'll take a look tomorrow to see if I can update it appropriately, but I don't have a lot of time to spend on this. The new site may even have this functionality built in, I will check that as well.
New site looks terrible, IMO. I understand the need to pay the bills with ads, but damn. It's a very big change, and if my past time in the web dev world taught me anything, it's that users HATE change. Routine is key.
Quote: AcesAndEightsNot curious at all...the WoV website just underwent a very serious remodel, and as an outsider, my code was simply scraping the HTML of the website. The structure of the HTML has changed dramatically and the code no longer works. DT did not change at all, so that one is still working.
I'll take a look tomorrow to see if I can update it appropriately, but I don't have a lot of time to spend on this. The new site may even have this functionality built in, I will check that as well
Okay, fixed. Glad someone is getting some usage out of this.
Quote: AcesAndEightsOkay, fixed. Glad someone is getting some usage out of this.
Thanks AcesAndEights! I missed it.
I must know my ranking vis a vis other WoV posters. I've been PASSED by 1BB and am out of the top 20.Quote: 1BBThanks AcesAndEights! I missed it.
This will not stand!
Quote: teddysI must know my ranking vis a vis other WoV posters. I've been PASSED by 1BB and am out of the top 20.
This will not stand!
Cheer up, teddys. You've got me on threads started and you've definitely got me on blogs. With guys like us it's all about the quality. Right? Right? :-)
(1) I have finally (barely) passed buzzpaff in number of posts.
(2) I am still way behind his alter ego Buzzard.
(3) I am next-to-last among top-20 posters in number of threads started.
(4) Among top-20 posters, I am dead last in posts per day.
EvenBob - 9.74
AxelWolf - 7.79
beachbumbabs - 6.90
Buzzard - 6.56
Mission146- 6.09
Wouldn't it be fun to see how many words each of these posters have rather than posts alone? Some posts are long drawn out affairs while others are one or two word zingers. Obviously post count is only one aspect. Then there's the quality over quantity debate which will elicit a wide variety of opinions.
What a fun thread this is! Five of the top 20 posters are no longer posting. Buzzard comes in at number 10, AxiomOfChoice at 14, Buzzpaff at 17, aceofspades at 18 and Beethoven9th at 19.
Buzzpaff's last post was on October 11, 2012, an incredible three years ago, yet there he sits at number 17.
It's been a year this month since Axiom and Beethoven have posted and 10 months for Buzzard.
Aceofspades has been innactive since May.
Does anyone think any of there guys had value? Combined that is a lot of posts.
Quote: HunterhillI think Axiom had alot of value. I was sorry to see him leave.
I agree and he's not the only name in red who had value. Axiom tendered his permanent resignation, a policy that I have always disagreed with. If in charge I would deny him, aceofspades et al the option to self ban or self suspend. Guys, if you don't want to post then don't post. It's really that simple.
