Hey lookie

kokonut said:
PFH
Nov 2004 = 7.5 years with 16,000 posts since you said you were ahead of me by 4,000 to 5,000 posts. You word. My math would work out to be:
16,000/7.5 = 2100 posts per year

Kokonut
July 2006 = 5.0 years with 11,600 posts
11,600/5 = 2300 posts per year but if you exclude the 6 months I was out that would be 11,600/4.5 = 2,500 posts per year.

Either way, I'm ahead of you on the rate of posting I've done each year. So, I could estimate your number of posts would've been around 10,500 posts so far after 5 years of posting which would be 1,100 less posts than mine at this point (or less 2150 posts if you use the 4.5 years).

:D
Click to expand...

Going that way, I'm posting at a rate double you, though I hardly think posting frequency is a useful metric since it all comes down to "what topics are actively being discussed and what's my interest level in them"?

Or, in jillio's case, "how many separate replies can I make to each individual response in a thread instead of grouping them all into one. If I used that reply method, I'd be double where I am now, lol.
 
kokonut said:
PFH
Nov 2004 = 7.5 years with 16,000 posts since you said you were ahead of me by 4,000 to 5,000 posts. You word. My math would work out to be:
16,000/7.5 = 2100 posts per year

Kokonut
July 2006 = 5.0 years with 11,600 posts
11,600/5 = 2300 posts per year but if you exclude the 6 months I was out that would be 11,600/4.5 = 2,500 posts per year.

Either way, I'm ahead of you on the rate of posting I've done each year. So, I could estimate your number of posts would've been around 10,500 posts so far after 5 years of posting which would be 1,100 less posts than mine at this point (or less 2150 posts if you use the 4.5 years).

:D
Click to expand...

Only 490 previous of October 2008. Redo that.
 
StSapphire said:
Don't think so? I could think of two possible methods, one really bad (somehow gain database access, then alter my postcount in the database, or just add 100k rows in the "posts" table to nonexistent forums, etc) and the other would merely be pretty bad (write a Ruby script to loop 100k times and continually post the form to reply to a topic).

Neither one seems impossible, but both seem far more difficult than would be worth the effort, especially since the actual end result for both would be the banhammer.
Click to expand...

The first one is doable, even the ruby script is impossible.
 
BTW, I know of one poster that will just blow you guys out of the water. This poster would blow even Jiro/Jillio away quite quickly.
 
posts from hell said:
The first one is doable, even the ruby script is impossible.
Click to expand...

Er... the Ruby script is the one that would be more doable, unless you're saying that the forum software has some sort of anti-flooding protection (which is possible but would surprise me).

posts from hell said:
BTW, I know of one poster that will just blow you guys out of the water. This poster would blow even Jiro/Jillio away quite quickly.
Click to expand...

Do they post here, or do you just mean someone you know online who posts a lot?
 
StSapphire said:
Going that way, I'm posting at a rate double you, though I hardly think posting frequency is a useful metric since it all comes down to "what topics are actively being discussed and what's my interest level in them"?

Or, in jillio's case, "how many separate replies can I make to each individual response in a thread instead of grouping them all into one. If I used that reply method, I'd be double where I am now, lol.
Click to expand...

Not double, 1.6 times my posting rate.

It's certainly a metric whether the posting frequency is useful or not. It could certainly indicate the amount of "addiction" one has on posting all the time. It's probably not a good metric but I think it does open up a window on seeing such frequency and length of posting that has gone on spanning for years and not months, like yours, to gauge such "addictiveness." Note that I say that in quotes to put it into context loosely.
 
Back
Top