comment on

But it won't change ...

Please re-read this thread and come back and point out where I asked for change; or suggested change should occur.

No '?'; because that is rhetorical. Ie. I didn't.

I saw something that surprised me; I asked my question; I got my answer. Everything from then onward is my correcting those who simply don't read what is written, preferring to "respond" to something that they simply plucked from thin air.

I've never given any import to the meaningless number. Historically other people would message me to tell me when I had past some arbitrary power of 10 boundary.

What I have given some import to over the past 13 years and 22,000 posts; is the response they got -- individually -- in terms of my peers taking the time to cast their votes. This thread started simply because after all these years I became suddenly and sharply aware that the meaningless ranking that I've ignored all this time, is even more meaningless, arbitrary and capricious that I had previously thought. No big deal. For me at least; it changes nothing.

But, if it is so meaningless & unimportant:

Why does the site bother to calculate it?
And why with such an elaborate formulation?
And why are people expending efforts to recalculate it; correct for historical effects; and derive fairer, more meaningful statistics from it?
And why do so many people feel the need to pipe up just to say that they don't care about it?

Meaningless it is; but boy, for something so meaningless does it ever stir a flurry of comment and high powered vitriol if anyone should question it; or even be misinterpreted to question it. Even when that question is simply: How does it work?

This thread could have consisted of three posts:

I noticed...
Yes. That because link to appropriate documentation
Okay. That sucks, but whatever.

That is continues is not down to me...

With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.

"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". I knew I was on the right track :)

In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

In reply to Re^4: The significance of 2010-03-16? by BrowserUk
in thread The significance of 2010-03-16? by BrowserUk

Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:
<code> <a> <b> <big> <blockquote> <br /> <dd> <dl> <dt> <em> <font> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr /> <i> <li> <nbsp> <ol> <p> <small> <strike> <strong> <sub> <sup> <table> <td> <th> <tr> <tt> <u> <ul>
Snippets of code should be wrapped in <code> tags not <pre> tags. In fact, <pre> tags should generally be avoided. If they must be used, extreme care should be taken to ensure that their contents do not have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor intervention).
Want more info? How to link or How to display code and escape characters are good places to start.


Perl: the Markov chain saw
	PerlMonks