suggestions about whom to exclude or modify, as inactive users who get the overwhelming majority of their points via voting are not really representative of the ratio
I added fields in "Ranking the Saints by XP Efficiency" to require having visited the site in the most recent N weeks, and having made a minimum number of posts. Did not add a filter to require having posted in the last N weeks, which would have improved the quality of the rankings even more, but I think it could be done. Also my script can be configured to deduct 0.5 XP per day in an attempt to get closer to the XP gained from posting rather than longevity.
The way forward always starts with a minimal test.
| [reply] [Watch: Dir/Any] |
require having visited the site in the most recent N weeks
That helps give the recent average, which might be interesting, assuming the average has changed. But that's hard to detect, unless included when people first logged on or started posting.
having made a minimum number of posts
That's a decent idea. The question is, what is the minimum?
To get into SioB, a certain amount of reputation must be reached, that is, 3000. There is no minimum on posts.
MONK_LEVEL MONK_TOTAL MIN MAX AVG MEDIAN
+ LOWER EQUAL HIGHER
---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----
+------ ---------- ----------
13 205 0 903 238 229
+ 109 2 94
14 145 1 1009 328 312
+ 75 0 70
15 80 4 1236 456 445
+ 42 0 38
16 77 0 1133 553 538
+ 40 0 37
17 44 13 1582 751 767
+ 21 0 23
18 42 51 2565 936 859
+ 23 0 19
19 34 16 4183 1374 1347
+ 18 0 16
20 26 186 4500 2021 2057
+ 13 0 13
21 18 600 5335 3065 2974
+ 10 0 8
22 8 607 4520 3159 3650
+ 3 0 5
23 6 3416 7240 5503 5794
+ 2 0 4
24 2 3001 6420 4711 4711
+ 1 0 1
25 3 6323 7909 6956 6635
+ 2 0 1
28 4 10463 22669 17635 19772
+ 2 0 2
692 0 22669 785 378
+ 531 0 161
The average Writeups per level does seem to be mostly balanced. (Included the median, per LanX's suggestion.) How exactly would we determine the lower bar for Writeups?
deduct 0.5 XP per day in an attempt to get closer to the XP gained from posting rather than longevity.
That's an intriguing idea. On what is the half point based though? | [reply] [Watch: Dir/Any] [d/l] [select] |
"require having visited the site in the most recent N weeks"
That helps give the recent average, which might be interesting, assuming the average has changed. But that's hard to detect, unless included when people first logged on or started posting.
Hm, I was interested in the recent numbers, frankly, because I felt that the environment had changed so much from the early days of the monastery that it's almost not valid to compare a
monk who joined a year ago with one who was active from 2007-2008, say.
"having made a minimum number of posts"
That's a decent idea. The question is, what is the minimum?
Perhaps a function of the overall median reputation per post and the number of their posts? I.e. if your total XP is N and you haven't made at least M posts, your XP is deemed to be overweighted by longevity? Or perhaps better as a function of median rep per post and age as a monk - you should have at least this many posts after this long?
LOL, it's amusing. My goal was to try to evaluate contributions rather than just showing up ...
"deduct 0.5 XP per day in an attempt to get closer to the XP gained from posting rather than longevity."
That's an intriguing idea. On what is the half point based though?
From the Monastery FAQ:
Visiting the site regularly.
You have 25% chance of gaining 2 XP points once a day if you were logg
+ed in within the past 24 hours from when the vote fairy does the roun
+ds.
Cheers!
The way forward always starts with a minimal test.
| [reply] [Watch: Dir/Any] [d/l] |