Congratulations!~ And no worries, I will make tweaks but I think the top 6 (>200 PQQ) remain the same. Maybe The Yoyo will make an entrance into it. that's who you gotta watch out for!
Also, you can't go by years, as the rep system started for all of us at the same time....so even if you were here for 10 years, you still started with 0 rep...same as everyone else.... DD
His formula is accounting for a the theoretical amount of rep you would have gotten had the system started earlier. If not, then older users would get punished pretty much for not being compensated for posts they had prior to the rep system.
Such a formula punishes new posters because he does not give them any credit for any theoretical posts they could have made had they been here. So basically the formula currently unnecessarily rewards time on the board. A person who averages less rep per post but has been around for a long time would rank better than a person who has more rep per post but has only been around for 3 or 4 years.
I doubled checked, you're right no Bima. I cede my spot to Bima, although 89 is way too low for someone who's made so many quality posts (and that's not including the articles on the front page).
JFC, go get laid or something before you make the 40 year old virgin list. This is one of the few times I feel real life embarrassed for someone on the internet. (*Makes exception for Bigtexxx)
I have the mind of a basketball genius and I am not ranked. I call foul play! I'm looking at you A_Ngyen. Spoiler I'm like Dr. Dre. I don't post often, but when I do, it is always a platinum post.
It looks like if you post primarily in D&D you get disproportionate amounts of rep relative to the number of posts. Just seems like a more incestuous group that reps each other constantly. (and I'm a clear beneficiary of that)
Anything that ranks b-bob over me is evil and will make puppies cry. I am a better poster than he is but, more importantly, I know way more about physics and sharks than he does. It is true. It is on the internet.
garbage in, garbage out.. until you get the formulas and real numbers the list is crap. You need to know what the post count was for person, when the rep system started to know how many posts with rep they have had since the rep started. From there you can determine rep points per post in a 1:1 relationship. Also it's weighted it seems by who gives the rep. I may have 600 rep points and 3 dots while someone else may have 900 rep points and 3 dots. Basically you are shooting in dark. Giving credit to 'long term posters' is a joke since some are on their 18th moniker by now. Funny how this whole reputation system is like flies fighting over a piece of dookie, but if you are going to put out info, it needs to be accurate. Good post OP by the way ,and I've always wanted to be able to say ' let me have someone from MIT take a look at the numbers' has a nice ring to it.cheers
