+1will the rep points ever be used to get tangible things like blocks of cheese or husker flip flops? no . all they do is say you spend way to much time on the internet agreeing with strangers.
either that or all the times we went back and forth...I think a majority of Buckys came from that post he made about the Mods secret forum. It was pretty damn good.
Disagree with me, it's an automatic plus 1-2 every time. I think it's generally given by the same 2/3 individuals too.either that or all the times we went back and forth...I think a majority of Buckys came from that post he made about the Mods secret forum. It was pretty damn good.
NO WAY!!Disagree with me, it's an automatic plus 1-2 every time. I think it's generally given by the same 2/3 individuals too.
There would be benefits & drawbacks to such a thing. Probably best left unknown.I wish we could see who goes around and plus's what. I think that would be interesting.
The mods can see it, cant they?There would be benefits & drawbacks to such a thing. Probably best left unknown.I wish we could see who goes around and plus's what. I think that would be interesting.
There would be benefits & drawbacks to such a thing. Probably best left unknown.The mods can see it, cant they?There would be benefits & drawbacks to such a thing. Probably best left unknown.I wish we could see who goes around and plus's what. I think that would be interesting.
Oh, so you are saying this data is not completely accurate? #hangingchadI don't have stats for last place, sorry Charlie.
I kept stats for a "reasonable" amount of people. "Reasonable" being what I could collect going through these pages in about ten minutes. I tried to collect some useful data, but don't forget that I'm by nature a lazy person.
Here's another set of numbers to chew on.
There were 29 members who showed up on both the original Top 50 in 7/2012 and on the final list from 5/2015.
When rep points were discussed, one of the data points people would talk about was the percentage of rep they'd earned per post rather than the bulk number of points. This list includes everyone's total posts in that period, rep earned, and is sorted by percentage:
![]()
Husker_x ran away with the rep-by-percentage with nearly 25% more per-post than the #2 guy. The top ten on that list got a +1 on three out of every ten posts. Volume of posts doesn't seem to matter, as two of the top five have 1,000 or fewer posts in that time frame, and six of the top ten have fewer than 5,000 posts.
I also threw in a rep-per-date total. There were 1,036 days between the first and last time I gathered numbers. Just about half of the list picked up at least one +1 per day.
The name changes were another interesting thing to note. Six of the 29 folks that showed up on the first list had changed their names by the final list:
accountability = Count 'Bility
aspeedlin4589 = ADS
Bucky = Excel
huskerjock = Dewiz
matthew_m_g = VectorVictor
Mills = Hoosker
Po Belini = Rike Miley
NOTE - when I pulled the data for this most recent set I used the 7/2012 list as the baseline which is why everyone's old name is on that list.
That's a good point. I am definitely saying that. To the best of my knowledge it is mostly accurate, but I also know that I didn't see some people some of the time. Some folks should have been in the top 50 but weren't because I flat-out didn't see them.Oh, so you are saying this data is not completely accurate? #hangingchadI don't have stats for last place, sorry Charlie.
I kept stats for a "reasonable" amount of people. "Reasonable" being what I could collect going through these pages in about ten minutes. I tried to collect some useful data, but don't forget that I'm by nature a lazy person.