Forum Moderators: open
This week sometime, I will be redoing ALL of the member post counts. All posts **system wide** will be included. Private, public, local - all of them.
This will mean a major change in post totals for some people. This is especially true for our Foo'ites and moderators. The new figures will also include total post bytes, and avg bytes per post on member profiles.
All post counts will now be "embedded" in each post. It means the dynamic nature of post counts is over. Once you leave a post, your current post count total will be stuck on that post forever.
Why?
Technical reasons.
The system currently works this way: when you view this thread, each posters member file is loaded and checked. The post count is pulled out of that file. If there are 5 members in this thread, then 5 member files are loaded.
That's all cool, but it means 5 file reads. That's a major slow down.
So, if we embed the post counts right into the thread data, we don't have to read every member file - a major speed up.
Not sure when it will be as there were a few issues that came up that need to be resolved first.
Look forward to it.
Also if i understand it correct, all the posts in the moderator forum will also be counted?
(Hehe, can see Brett's post number reaching 20k very fast!)
I'm curious as to why the inclusion of all Posts - is it just a function of the way rebuild code worked out?
Remember to take a look at Paynt's profile after this change!
Well, the big winner is mivox...
>I'm curious as to why the inclusion of all Posts
One time free giveaway. Just the way it worked out in the code.
I find that quite fair. There are quite a few members who have many long posts. I have been thinking that they really ought to be credited for that. My own average must be one of the lowest.
Not sure, but I _think_ that I was a "senior" member for a couple of days. Has that step been changed?
Nick
Well, the big winner is mivox...
hehehee... and to think I was the little wallflower who never spoke in high school. Oops... there's another one, hehehe.
I thnk paynt wins the avg. byte counts per individual post though... doesn't she? Her posts are always longer and much more substantive than mine. I just talk alot.
>>avg. byte counts per individual post
?
Andreas
P.S. This is an investment into my future post count and, since I added this useless little sentence here, into my future average byte count per individual post/thread/message/thingy [wink] this is slightly longer than just ;) [wink] [wink] [happy]
When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve...
But seriously, I am sure you are right, Andreas.
Is 15 seconds up yet!?
Maybe low will be sexy.
Or perhaps there'll be a prize for anyone who's average is exactly 2512 on Christmas day.
Bigger isn’t better
Taller isn’t braver
Stronger isn’t always wise
Smaller isn’t necessary lesser
Guts can come in any size
Andreas
hehe... That's exactly how it's done! I've seen it - watched it being done on many occasions over time. How it works is a person goes down a whole long thread, pulls out long quotes from a bunch of people and gives a very brief comment on each, like "great post, whatsyername". Great big byte count for the post, nothing actually contributed by the person - it's all quotes from other people.
There are a couple other ways to do it too, I've seen it done many times. I've never thought about it quite that way but yeah, this is a day to take note of. We've uncovered a whole new way of board spamming - spambytes. ;)
[edited by: Marcia at 11:54 pm (utc) on Feb. 25, 2003]
I was working on my goal to my 1000 post. Now I'll never know how long it would have taken me.
Does this mean I don't get a party?
I sometimes think Marcia sees more than is good for her... or for us. <duck>
Instead show a single integer (0 to 10) called PostRank.
Devise an algorithm for setting PostRank based on (say)
Do not reveal the algorithm to anyone. Change it regularly.
Start a forum where people can ask "But I posted 25 times last full moon and I dropped from 6 to 5. Why!?"
Keep it short and snappy.
Victor,
Brett had a thread around somewhere on "threadrank".
Why on earth do we worry about Post Count
OK I'll boost the byte count by quoting myself ;)
But it is a serious point.
Why does post count matter?
Who bothers with it?
Is it a plot to get more posts out of us?
Volunteer directories have, I suspect, for a long time, tapped into the human vanity/desire for seniority/call it what you like, to get "more" out of volunteer editors.
Can it be that "administration" is working on ways to get us to post more, and hence move WebmasterWorld to the next goal of reaching top 500 in Alexa? ;)
Exactly - I'm not so sure a big byte count is desireable. I've seen both ends of the spectrum, and I think the most enjoyable posters generally fall somewhere right in the middle of the byte counts. Too many, and it is too wordy and people don't read that message - too few and you are seen as a frivolous poster to be ignored.
