Jump to content


Recruiting Tangent Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Mavric changed the title to Recruiting Tangent Thread

4 hours ago, Toe said:

@4skers89 Heh. Among those on the most rep points leaderboard, it looks like @Ulty is currently #1 for Likes:Posts ratio, with 1.07 likes per post, while I'm at #2 with 1.03, and @Fru is currently right exactly on a 1:1 ratio. Again, that's among those who show up on the leaderboard, which is like the top 75 for total rep. 

 

I think I'm the de facto HuskerBoard custodian of Rep, since I have data going back to 2010, the first year we started the Rep thing when IP Board added it to their base package. My reliable historical data dates from about 2012 when people started asking questions about Rep and I, in response, started keeping a bit of track of it. 

 

What you're saying here is not exactly accurate, as it doesn't account for years when we only had 10 Rep to give per day, or 50, or 100, as decided by the Admins, and announced by @AR Husker Fan, who I don't think most of the people you're citing even know. Back in the day people would just respond to something they agreed with with "+1" or something like, and hitting the rep button wasn't really a thing.

 

So there are stages of Rep based on a few different factors, including a person's longevity, their post count, the amount of Rep we could give per day, etc. It's all fluctuated wildly over the past nine-ish years.

 

I don't have my data in front of me as I reply to this, but off the top of my head, @Guy Chamberlin has a really good post-to-Rep ratio, as does @Ulty, as does @Ads.

 

Weird that the reference links stop after five in a post.

 

Again, off the top of my head, @BigWillie has a really good post-to-Rep ratio, and I don't think he's even in the top 75. @Nexus used to be up there, too. Not sure where he is now, since he's barely posted in five years.

 

The reason we have data on the top 75 or whatever it is is because when we changed to this version of the board about three or four years ago, I asked @Mavric to increase the reporting for Rep to more than the default 10 or 25 or whatever it was, because on a bi-monthly basis I've been keeping track of this stuff for a bunch of years.

 

Year by year, BigRedBuster, Moiraine, me, Landlord, zoogs, and a few others have pretty good post-to-Rep ratios. Those stats will be skewed in favor of people who joined in the last, say, five years when Rep increased to 100 per day.

 

All that's to say that there are basically tiers of people with good rep ratios based on their join dates in relation to Rep-per-day amounts. But it's important to note that someone like Mavric, who does a TON of basic info-posting and other mundane tasks that increase his post count, but don't necessarily always result in +1s, won't ever be up there on a post-to-Rep ratio, but who are very important to the board, won't be counted. A lot of the Mods fit that category, but Mav is the most obvious of them.

 

So Rep ratios are nice, but they need historic context.

  • Plus1 4
Link to comment
21 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

I think I'm the de facto HuskerBoard custodian of Rep, since I have data going back to 2010, the first year we started the Rep thing when IP Board added it to their base package. My reliable historical data dates from about 2012 when people started asking questions about Rep and I, in response, started keeping a bit of track of it. 

 

What you're saying here is not exactly accurate, as it doesn't account for years when we only had 10 Rep to give per day, or 50, or 100, as decided by the Admins, and announced by @AR Husker Fan, who I don't think most of the people you're citing even know. Back in the day people would just respond to something they agreed with with "+1" or something like, and hitting the rep button wasn't really a thing.

 

So there are stages of Rep based on a few different factors, including a person's longevity, their post count, the amount of Rep we could give per day, etc. It's all fluctuated wildly over the past nine-ish years.

 

I don't have my data in front of me as I reply to this, but off the top of my head, @Guy Chamberlin has a really good post-to-Rep ratio, as does @Ulty, as does @Ads.

 

Weird that the reference links stop after five in a post.

 

Again, off the top of my head, @BigWillie has a really good post-to-Rep ratio, and I don't think he's even in the top 75. @Nexus used to be up there, too. Not sure where he is now, since he's barely posted in five years.

 

The reason we have data on the top 75 or whatever it is is because when we changed to this version of the board about three or four years ago, I asked @Mavric to increase the reporting for Rep to more than the default 10 or 25 or whatever it was, because on a bi-monthly basis I've been keeping track of this stuff for a bunch of years.

 

Year by year, BigRedBuster, Moiraine, me, Landlord, zoogs, and a few others have pretty good post-to-Rep ratios. Those stats will be skewed in favor of people who joined in the last, say, five years when Rep increased to 100 per day.

 

All that's to say that there are basically tiers of people with good rep ratios based on their join dates in relation to Rep-per-day amounts. But it's important to note that someone like Mavric, who does a TON of basic info-posting and other mundane tasks that increase his post count, but don't necessarily always result in +1s, won't ever be up there on a post-to-Rep ratio, but who are very important to the board, won't be counted. A lot of the Mods fit that category, but Mav is the most obvious of them.

 

So Rep ratios are nice, but they need historic context.

Excellent overview Knapp, appreciate the rundown.

 

+1 for your contributions.

 

Also, thanks to all the posters who are here to share and discuss the Huskers and eyerolls to the trolls.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment

@knapplc Yeah, I pretty much assumed all of that. Didn't mean for my numbers to be taken too seriously, as I said I was only going by what the leaderboard showed. I figured that lots of posts predated the rep system, although I didn't know that there was a daily limit on reps. Even breaking things into tiers by join date might skew my numbers, since I registered here back in 2007 but didn't make this my regular board until a couple years ago.

  • Fire 1
Link to comment
1 minute ago, Toe said:

@knapplc I pretty much assumed all of that. Didn't mean for my numbers to be taken too seriously, as I said I was only going by what the leaderboard showed. I figured that lots of posts predated the rep system, although I didn't know that there was a daily limit on reps. Even breaking things into tiers by join date might skew my numbers, since I registered here back in 2007 but didn't make this my regular board until a couple years ago.

 

I agree. None of it is to be taken too seriously. The Rep stuff is a fun oddity to look at. A person with zero Rep can make a better point than a person with 5,000 Rep.

 

The whole thing is just fodder for spreadsheets and idle time.

Link to comment

10 hours ago, Huskers93-97 said:

Well actually if we are going off pure facts and not just 1 person's angry viewpoint. The below would contradict your opinion and would actually state more people enjoy my posts than yours. :D

 

I have 1912 +1 to my 2853 posts for an average of 67% of my posts get a +1. While you on the other hand have 1255 +1 to your 2129 posts for an average of 58.9% of your posts get a +1. 

 

b8eaae7e3a27b521b21c7fa1544bd217.gif

 

 

 

 

10 hours ago, Huskers93-97 said:

Probably plenty and I dont really care about that. It was a counter argument to someone attacking all my "stupid posts" 

 

Amount of feedback positive or negative has nothing to do with the stupidity of your posts or lack thereof.

  • Fire 1
Link to comment
14 hours ago, Toe said:

@4skers89 Heh. Among those on the most rep points leaderboard, it looks like @Ulty is currently #1 for Likes:Posts ratio, with 1.07 likes per post, while I'm at #2 with 1.03, and @Fru is currently right exactly on a 1:1 ratio. Again, that's among those who show up on the leaderboard, which is like the top 75 for total rep.

 

Holy crap! All hail Ulty!

 

Image result for queen of filth

 

 

4 hours ago, Landlord said:

Amount of feedback positive or negative has nothing to do with the stupidity of your posts or lack thereof.

 

This is very true. Despite my rep point to post ratio, most of my posts contain a good dose of idiocy. This post included!

  • Plus1 1
  • Haha 1
  • Fire 1
Link to comment
On 4/11/2019 at 8:16 PM, knapplc said:

 

I think I'm the de facto HuskerBoard custodian of Rep, since I have data going back to 2010, the first year we started the Rep thing when IP Board added it to their base package. My reliable historical data dates from about 2012 when people started asking questions about Rep and I, in response, started keeping a bit of track of it. 

 

What you're saying here is not exactly accurate, as it doesn't account for years when we only had 10 Rep to give per day, or 50, or 100, as decided by the Admins, and announced by @AR Husker Fan, who I don't think most of the people you're citing even know. Back in the day people would just respond to something they agreed with with "+1" or something like, and hitting the rep button wasn't really a thing.

 

So there are stages of Rep based on a few different factors, including a person's longevity, their post count, the amount of Rep we could give per day, etc. It's all fluctuated wildly over the past nine-ish years.

 

I don't have my data in front of me as I reply to this, but off the top of my head, @Guy Chamberlin has a really good post-to-Rep ratio, as does @Ulty, as does @Ads.

 

Weird that the reference links stop after five in a post.

 

Again, off the top of my head, @BigWillie has a really good post-to-Rep ratio, and I don't think he's even in the top 75. @Nexus used to be up there, too. Not sure where he is now, since he's barely posted in five years.

 

The reason we have data on the top 75 or whatever it is is because when we changed to this version of the board about three or four years ago, I asked @Mavric to increase the reporting for Rep to more than the default 10 or 25 or whatever it was, because on a bi-monthly basis I've been keeping track of this stuff for a bunch of years.

 

Year by year, BigRedBuster, Moiraine, me, Landlord, zoogs, and a few others have pretty good post-to-Rep ratios. Those stats will be skewed in favor of people who joined in the last, say, five years when Rep increased to 100 per day.

 

All that's to say that there are basically tiers of people with good rep ratios based on their join dates in relation to Rep-per-day amounts. But it's important to note that someone like Mavric, who does a TON of basic info-posting and other mundane tasks that increase his post count, but don't necessarily always result in +1s, won't ever be up there on a post-to-Rep ratio, but who are very important to the board, won't be counted. A lot of the Mods fit that category, but Mav is the most obvious of them.

 

So Rep ratios are nice, but they need historic context.

 

 

The pandering for Rep points is ridiculous. I didn't get one my first two years on the board, and do you see me complaining?

 

By the way, say hi to your Mom. She's a special lady.

 

Also, have you lost weight? 

  • Plus1 1
  • Haha 1
  • Fire 1
Link to comment

  • 2 weeks later...
4 hours ago, MichiganDad3 said:

I wonder if this kid from Texas plays football. I looked around, but couldn't find any reference to football. He just ran the fastest 100 m ever recorded by a HS athlete.

 

https://video.foxnews.com/v/6031530430001/#sp=show-clips

 

Lets send some coaches to Houston and convince this kid how much fun it is to play football at Nebraska :)

 

He is committed to GA

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...