META: Topic Starter Report Card

20 comments

• AbbieNormal

  •

  19 years ago

  Decided to take a look anyway. I limited the sample to threads started this year and to posters with 3 or more posts. In alphabetical order:
  
  Poster # threads avg replies self replies
  
  AbbieNormal 8 11.9 0
  davids 35 3.6 37%
  FONDL 4 35.5 0
  shadowcat 11 11.8 0
  tropicalH2O 3 18.0 0
  
  I was very stringent on what I called a "self reply" It had to be neither a clarification of a previous post (however re-statement of the question did not count as a clarification) or an answer to another poster in any way. Only one poster had any of these. Of the 126 answers that poster had to threads he started, 47 of them met that criteria. That same poster also had 10 threads where nobody had replied but himself. I also found it interesting that RL didn't make the cut in this period, because he only started one thread.
• AbbieNormal

  •

  19 years ago

  Chandler, I think we're off the charts now. Also I don't think we need to even give that much recognition to one poster's profligacy again. I just skip threads started by some posters because there is nothing worth reading there. Even those who aren't him who reply are wasting their time on those threads as far as I'm concerned.
• davids

  •

  19 years ago

  Yeah, invisible which is how he knows who responds, and why passive aggressive shots in other threads. WE REALLY believe you.
• chandler

  •

  19 years ago

  Wow, Friday night's stats look quaint already, after the troll paroxysm of the past 2-3 days.
  
  By the way, driver01 and JC2003. Nice effort, you guys, but there's no point in bothering. Those threads are invisible to most of us.
• chandler

  •

  19 years ago

  Any script writing energy you might muster, AN, should be devoted to a killfile-like filter for this board. There's got to be some way for us to hide all these junk topics started by sad fucks nobody wants to talk to.
• davids

  •

  19 years ago

  Did I say "here" or are you just making things up so you have something to say. Your shit "humor" obsession is never ending and I am sure NO ONE is impressed. But maybe I'm wrong and someone will correct me and say "no I like parody's grossness/shit humor; it's really cool". I won't hold my breath though.
• AbbieNormal

  •

  19 years ago

  parodyman, I think we've all figured it out and just don't want to bother anymore. We just prefer to go on about our buisness.
• davids

  •

  19 years ago

  parody: Hell, I don't anyone has even said you were funny. "Shit"-humor isn't going to get you many laughs anywhere, dude.
• davids

  •

  19 years ago

  Ok, let's get real here. It's not just me. No-one has ever complemented you on having anything useful to say or being constructive. You are about 30 IQ points shy of being able to acheive that. All you do is try to grab attention by being grossest, which is one thing you have mastered.
• parodyman-->

  •

  19 years ago

  I do mostly respond to davids posts because someone has to continue to point out what a bullshitter and immature little boy he is.
  
  Otherwise I will resopnd seriously to other posts if I have something I believe usefull to add.
  
  This way I get to indulge my sense of humor and still participate when I feel like I have something worthwhile.
• AbbieNormal

  •

  19 years ago

  Chandler, certainly no criticism intended, and I fully understand declining to continue as the scorekeeper. I've been thinking that it shouldn't be too hard to write a script to get all the past threads and extract that information from the sourcefile, then it is a ... you know what, I'm going to step back from the abyss.
• chandler

  •

  19 years ago

  Yes, I just counted up what was active on the list as of 11PM Friday. What surprised me most was that RL's "Repy to Self" rate was only 30%. One of his old topics with 23 replies did skew his stats. If I had thrown out the high and low topics, RL would have been under 2 replies per topic, with about 50% being replies from himself - or 1 reply from others per topic, with most of those being from davids or parodyman - however, throwing out the highs and lows would unfairly distort results for you, AN, and FONDL, since it would only leave 60% (3 out of 5) of your topics for comparison.
  
  *catch breath*
  
  I don't think I'll want to do this again. I got started out of curiosity over how many RL topics were going unanswered by others, and then the geek side of my brain went on a rampage. And now, I'd better bow out of this thread in order to keep my own Report Card spiffy.
• davids

  •

  19 years ago

  I'm kind of biased against responding to certain posters posts here:
  
  If it is AN, the topics are typically to do with trivia which is sometimes interesting, but at other times just drops to the level of inanity or just completely has nothing even remotely to do with SCs. So I might make one follow up if it is interesting trivia, but typical the topics aren't that interesting.
  
  For shadowcat, his typical post is "how to get cheaper extras" or "I am the man because a brand new stripper gave me a HJ after I was her regular for six months". I will post once to make fun of him and that is usually about it.
  
  As for FONDL, well sometimes he posts interesting topics, although his take on things is definitely the pussy-boy approach. But the subjects are at least more usually more interesting and relevent than AN or shadowcat, even though I am almost never agree with his slant.
  
  Most FONDL threads ultimately end up degenerating to him pining about his ATF. Also he starts many threads which are him pining about his ATF right from the beginning. (Might as well get it out of the way right from the start, right?)
  
  RL definitely starts the most interesting threads here, although some of his questions are repeats of the same thing, so I may not bother answering if I have recently answered a very similar thread.
  
• AbbieNormal

  •

  19 years ago

  I just thought of one possible bias in the sample. RL will resurect a lot of his old posts by answering his own question. Even though his posts are 3 and 4 months old sometimes they end up having several replies just out of longevity. It'd be interesting to do a snapshot, like all posts started within a certain timeframe. I'm guessing you just went with current threads?
• AbbieNormal

  •

  19 years ago

  Neat little public service. In my own defense I usually only reply to myself after the thread has changed the initial topic, or to clarify. At least I hope that is the case, otherwise I just must like to type.
• Yoda

  •

  19 years ago

  Nice work Chandler. Your stats reveal some interesting but not surprising tendencies.
• FONDL

  •

  19 years ago

  I bet there are huge seasonal differences. I know I spend a lot more time on the computer when the weather is worse.
• davids

  •

  19 years ago

  Neat stats. Do you have a script to generate this or did you do it by hand?
• FONDL

  •

  19 years ago

  I guess I'm the opposite of Shadowcat. When I start a thread, it's usually with a statement of some belief. So when others challenge it, and I hope they do, it's why I stated it in the first place, I usually feel compelled to respond. Depending on who does the challenging of course.
• parodyman-->

  •

  19 years ago

  did I use "shit" humor here or are you making up things just to have something to say?