January 17, 2011 at 3:00 am
Can I please make two suggestions for improving the information shown on your Rankings Page, where you list the top scorers in the QOD and Postings?
1. How about indicating the number of forum members, so that when we are ranked as number 1000, we know how many members there are below us?
2. Can you include an average QOD score and an average number of posts in the rankings for these items?
All this would, as you put it, increase our "bragging capacity" even more.
EDIT (following Lynn's comment): OK, take the average score per question attempted for the QOD ranking. And indicate the number of forum members with at least one post or one QOD answer. That will exclude those whom Lynn describes as "lurkers".
Thanks
Kenneth Spencer
You never know: reading my book: "All about your computer" might just tell you something you never knew!
lulu.com/kaspencer
January 17, 2011 at 3:06 am
Personally, I don't care about how many are beneath me in the rankings. It is immaterial since there are over 1.25 million registered users on SSC. Many maybe lurkers who aren't posting questions, answering questions, participating in the QotD.
I realize where I stand as I post this comment, and that really has nothing to do with my opinion. I have reached this point through a desire to have a positive impact in the SQL Server Community.
January 17, 2011 at 3:53 am
kaspencer (1/17/2011)
Can I please make two suggestions for improving the information shown on your Rankings Page, where you list the top scorers in the QOD and Postings?1. How about indicating the number of forum members, so that when we are ranked as number 1000, we know how many members there are below us?
2. Can you include an average QOD score and an average number of posts in the rankings for these items?
All this would, as you put it, increase our "bragging capacity" even more.
EDIT (following Lynn's comment): OK, take the average score per question attempted for the QOD ranking. And indicate the number of forum members with at least one post or one QOD answer. That will exclude those whom Lynn describes as "lurkers".
Thanks
Kenneth Spencer
Answers to both of your questions are already available (kind of) :
indicating the number of forum members: main page, at the top:
A Microsoft SQL Server community of 1,348,534 DBAs,developers and SQL Server users
relative post count
user-> View Member Profile -> Total Points: 814 point out of 1,039,874 total points. (.08% of total)
Some of them may have answered a question or posted in a forum. Others may not. Those who never answered a QoD or posted in a thread are most likel the ones behind you 😉
relative QoD:
TotalScore -> All members: Points (attempted) 6,664,304 Points (won) 3,888,169 Percent 58%
I don't think there's any value to duplicate this information to any other place then it is right now.
This site is and should be visited because of the knowledge you can gain from the content. Not because of the points.
Regarding your edited comment:
Then you'd also have to define a rule on how to deal with "aliased" logins. Like users having a separate login from work and from home using it in parallel. Or users that have different logins over time.
And what would be the value of it??
Those are only numbers and statistics. I guess you know: Never trust any statistics, unless... 😉
January 17, 2011 at 9:06 am
We would like to surface more statistics and data. I'm working on that. It's a resource thing, and this is relatively low priority, but thanks for the suggestions.
January 17, 2011 at 11:18 am
Thanks alot for the positive reply, Steve.
Regards
Ken
You never know: reading my book: "All about your computer" might just tell you something you never knew!
lulu.com/kaspencer
Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply