Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Problems? Is your data what you think it is?
 
PerlMonks  

RE: RE: Chatterbox stats

by Macphisto (Hermit)
on Nov 10, 2000 at 23:10 UTC ( #40997=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to RE: Chatterbox stats
in thread Chatterbox stats

Sorry about the repeat posts...Mozilla crapped out on me, and when I hit back it just caused more problems I apologize. THe link to the results is Here


Comment on RE: RE: Chatterbox stats
(brainpan) RE: RE: RE: Chatterbox stats
by brainpan (Monk) on Nov 11, 2000 at 09:39 UTC
    If I'm reading the graph correctly I am the most talkative. Unless this place is fairly quiet when I'm not around I'm guessing that your script just happened to monitor things when I was being unusually verbose and the others comparatively quiet. Other possibilities include, but are not limited to, the following: (1) People around here lacked a monastery idiot to add some variety to these otherwise quiet halls. (2) Monks don't tell people to shut up even if the situation calls for it. In either case, I can't help but wonder exactly how coincidental it was that the /chatteroff and /chatteron features were added to the feature list shortly after I arrived...

    I realize that integrating this into jcwren's stats page may give some people undue incentive to make noise, but could we run this again? I'm curious to know how this averages out over a slightly longer / different period of time.

    Also, are your stats measured in number of times text is posted to the chatterbox, or in amount of text submitted?

    And no, I don't own 27 pairs of sweatpants.
      brainpan
      Well, all in all, the script ran as long as it could on jcwren's computer. At times it would fail, and it would take a bit for jcwren to realize and get it started up. So it's not really a pure extraction of data. I don't really want to run it again, because I feel I will get an even less pure extraction. I think, if people knew it was running it would effect the chatterbox. Either people will talk too much or they will feel they shouldn't talk. I ran this under radar so it wouldn't effect anyone.
      Macphisto

      Everyone has their demons....
        As I stated before, I agree that if you let people know that data is being collected about their use of the chatterbox it will impact their behavior; your method of running this "under radar" was the best way to go. My intent in requesting another run at collecting these stats was to try to secure in my own mind why I turned up as the most talkative monk in your sample. Before I saw your reply I figured out why this was the case (to the curious: phase wrapping). Since I have absolved my curiosity I won't have to try to duplicate your experiment. :)

        And no, I don't own 27 pairs of sweatpants.
RE: RE: RE: Chatterbox stats
by and (Pilgrim) on Nov 11, 2000 at 10:28 UTC
    It appears that your script does not distinguish

    and all is quiet...

    from

    and all is quiet...

    because I chat very little. :-)

      That is too funny.

      --
      $you = new YOU;
      honk() if $you->love(perl)

      No, it doesn't distinguish between the two! Sorry about that! We thought about that, but since you don't chat much we know you're not running your mouth.

      Everyone has their demons....

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://40997]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others chilling in the Monastery: (8)
As of 2014-09-16 07:55 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    My favorite cookbook is:










    Results (157 votes), past polls