TOL Snapshot: Inside the Numbers
- Thread starter Town Heretic
- Start date
:chuckle: Psalmist's birthday threads skew his numbers. But he is intimidating.Maybe I'm intimidating.
I know that would explain Psalmist's numbers.:chuckle:
" (1965)
Abner Kravitz: Gladys, you were born a hundred years too late.
Gladys Kravitz: What do you mean by that?
Abner Kravitz: You'd have made a great town crier.
http://www.imdb.com/character/ch0025460/quotes
did you know that if you rearrange Town Heretic, you get Cheer On Twit?
I think you have been spending too much time with seventh graders lately.
there is truth in your words
i'm in the high school tomorrow and most of next week :thumb:
i'm in the high school tomorrow and most of next week :thumb:
Sky's behavior elsewhere has given me reason to rethink the whole lock down business and instead to remind you why certain members are behaving like adolescents. Back in a second.
Last edited:
Sod deposited this ongoing attempt to distort my point about his and a few other's threads. I think it really belongs here. About the NFL off season thread I started:
In point of fact, what I said was that he and most of the malcontents don't particularly draw on their own.
No one thread tells that story. Heck, Ascon has a thread he's managed to draw with even if on the average it doesn't work out that way. So I went over the last hundred threads to see what, if anything, could be gleaned from those numbers. Also, I noted threads with over a hundred posts and/or threads with over a thousand views were statistically relevant. Combined they're even more so.
Now everyone has threads that aren't meant to either draw comment or necessarily attract a great deal of attention. They're more personal or momentary or both, which is why I went over the greatest number of threads I could, which is why I noted that some (statistically few) posters do so much of that you can't get a real reflection of their impact. Psalmist comes to mind. And others, who don't have as much success as thread creators managed to enliven and add value by virtue of their participation, a fact noted in their reputation numbers.
So it's only a part of the profile, a way of looking at things, but not the only or all inclusive vantage and it was never advanced as such.
Now, as thread creators go, certain methodologies don't appear to lend themselves to moving much interest and I find that encouraging.
Resurrected, by way of example, managed either more than 100 responses or 1000 views about 6 times out of his last 53 threads. He is, to my mind, a mostly negative and trivializing poster, with a great deal of school yard nonsense. Who wants a thread of that? Not many, apparently, though in smaller doses he has something of a following.
I take it he was noting half the equation, the over a hundred posts, but that wasn't the point of my remarks or even an honest reflection of them, only an ongoing attempt by him to skate or revise or declare (the old "I was a statistician and I can blah-blah-blah) his way out of a bit of embarrassment.
In point of fact, what I said was that he and most of the malcontents don't particularly draw on their own.
No one thread tells that story. Heck, Ascon has a thread he's managed to draw with even if on the average it doesn't work out that way. So I went over the last hundred threads to see what, if anything, could be gleaned from those numbers. Also, I noted threads with over a hundred posts and/or threads with over a thousand views were statistically relevant. Combined they're even more so.
Now everyone has threads that aren't meant to either draw comment or necessarily attract a great deal of attention. They're more personal or momentary or both, which is why I went over the greatest number of threads I could, which is why I noted that some (statistically few) posters do so much of that you can't get a real reflection of their impact. Psalmist comes to mind. And others, who don't have as much success as thread creators managed to enliven and add value by virtue of their participation, a fact noted in their reputation numbers.
So it's only a part of the profile, a way of looking at things, but not the only or all inclusive vantage and it was never advanced as such.
Now, as thread creators go, certain methodologies don't appear to lend themselves to moving much interest and I find that encouraging.
Resurrected, by way of example, managed either more than 100 responses or 1000 views about 6 times out of his last 53 threads. He is, to my mind, a mostly negative and trivializing poster, with a great deal of school yard nonsense. Who wants a thread of that? Not many, apparently, though in smaller doses he has something of a following.
Mulla Sadra
Member
Mulla Sadra
Thread(s) : 1
More than 3000 views : 1
More than 300 posts : 1
I am not planning on posting another thread
Thread(s) : 1
More than 3000 views : 1
More than 300 posts : 1
I am not planning on posting another thread
You win! :first:
Mulla Sadra
Member
I hereby announce that Mulla is TOL's most relevant poster!
All the rest of you can go home now
All the rest of you can go home now
Mulla Sadra
Member
I hereby announce that Mulla is TOL's most relevant poster!
All the rest of you can go home now
You are the judge !
Hooray ! :first:
Wait for my second thread
after few centuries.
Then we'll never have a sufficient sample to know much about how you'd draw as a rule. As an exception it's...exceptional.Mulla Sadra
Thread(s) : 1
More than 3000 views : 1
More than 300 posts : 1
I am not planning on posting another thread
Sadly, the best chance res has of being read in his mistaken conclusion is in a thread not of his own making.I hereby announce that Mulla is TOL's most relevant poster!
All the rest of you can go home now
lain:
Mulla Sadra
Member
Then we'll never have a sufficient sample to know much about how you'd draw as a rule. As an exception it's...exceptional.
Ok, if I do second thread with same intensity, would you change your mind ?
Mulla Sadra
Member
Oh, well two threads. That's a virtual avalanche of statistical revelation.
It's lousy till now, drop a comment please :dead:
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=91992