Re^14: "" but true

Hi,

Sorry, but any list of top 50 all time monks that has eyepopslikeamosquito in third place has no credibility.

The script run posted above deliberately excluded non-active monks and low-posting monks, to produce as close to accurate a picture as possible of those who are here and active now.

Here are the top 20 plus Lanx and eyepopslikeamosquito, without limit on posts or recent activity:

$ perl xpe.pl --sort_by posts --order desc --limit 20 --force eyepopsl
+ikeamosquito --force LanX

+---------------------------------------------------------------------
+-----------------+
| Pos | St. | Monk name    |  XP  |     Level      |  Age  | XP/Age | 
+Posts | XP/Posts |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------
+-----------------+
|    1   325 cguevara        6,243       Vicar (15)   5,222   0.8050  
+     5  726.4000 |
|    2    72 uksza          24,593       Canon (20)   6,099   4.0883  
+    45  478.7444 |
|    3    95 lepetitalbert  19,350       Abbot (19)   5,682   3.3623  
+    80  206.3625 |
|    4   176 SankoR         10,732       Prior (17)   5,810   1.5591  
+    39  200.6923 |
|    5   168 bojinlund      11,373       Prior (17)   3,639   3.0385  
+    48  199.0313 |
|    6   239 ablanke         8,048      Parson (16)   1,822   4.5319  
+    36  198.2500 |
|    7    44 roho           34,378  Chancellor (21)   7,054   5.0615  
+   180  171.3944 |
|    8    30 Perlbotics     44,268      Bishop (22)   5,005   9.6570  
+   449   93.0189 |
|    9   482 shriken         4,352      Priest (14)   6,217   0.2315  
+    15   82.9000 |
|   10    24 Gavin          47,608      Bishop (22)   5,548   9.3515  
+   626   71.6198 |
|   11   100 gryphon        18,353       Abbot (19)   7,592   2.2191  
+   221   65.8688 |
|   12    71 scorpio17      24,626       Canon (20)   5,202   4.8996  
+   339   64.9705 |
|   13    62 TStanley       25,760       Canon (20)   7,619   3.3343  
+   474   46.3091 |
|   14   457 jaredor         4,549      Priest (14)   4,591   0.5680  
+    51   44.1863 |
|   15    73 hsmyers        24,328       Canon (20)   7,402   3.2253  
+   526   39.2148 |
|   16   218 bibliophile     8,810      Parson (16)   6,968   0.8846  
+   142   37.5070 |
|   17   171 ajt            10,948       Prior (17)   7,177   1.1868  
+   202   36.4332 |
|   18   161 pme            12,231   Monsignor (18)   7,215   1.3832  
+   258   33.4244 |
|   19    43 FunkyMonk      35,063  Chancellor (21)   5,136   7.3217  
+ 1,024   31.7334 |
|   20   148 dvergin        12,918   Monsignor (18)   7,774   1.3445  
+   311   29.0386 |
|   27    32 eyepopslikeam  42,756      Bishop (22)   6,902   6.5909  
+ 1,718   22.8783 |
|  110     8 LanX           68,269    Cardinal (24)   4,637  16.4581  
+10,112    6.5220 |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------
+-----------------+
[download]

I'd be very interested to hear your theory on how such low-posting monks achieved such heights of XP and sainthood. Votebot? Login-bot?

The way forward always starts with a minimal test.

Comment on Re^14: "" but true Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^15: "" but true by eyepopslikeamosquito (Archbishop) on May 17, 2021 at 00:44 UTC
I'd be very interested to hear your theory on how such low-posting monks achieved such heights of XP and sainthood. Votebot? Login-bot? Sorry, I became so excited on seeing sundialsvc4 breathing down LanX's neck on your top 50 list that I totally missed the point that you and LanX were making, namely that there are a number of non-active/low-posting monks (FunkyMonk, cguevara, and uksza, for example) who appear to be steadily gaining XP by voting regularly, but without ever posting anything. I can only see two logical explanations for that: They are turning up regularly to read and enjoy our many excellent and entertaining PM nodes and voting on them. They are using some sort of (illegal) votebot. I hope it's the former. At least, I don't see any worthwhile (or financial) gain from deploying a votebot. I suspect only the gods could answer this question but -- given that "XP is just a game" -- doubt they would spend any time on an investigation. I'm sure they have more important tasks to fill their limited time. Note that very little time was spent investigating the much more serious crime of the bizarre hacking and vandalisation of brian d foy's account and XP back in 2010.	[reply]
Re^16: "" but true by LanX (Saint) on May 17, 2021 at 01:22 UTC
> They are using some sort of (illegal) votebot. There is no reason to believe this: >25% of cast votes result in XP. It's not difficult to see how this accumulates in thousands of XPs over the years. And I find it disturbing that monks who turn up regularly to read and cast votes are doubted. Just because they don't fit into some simplistic model to rank postings, it must be their fault? edit > "XP is just a game" exactly! Cheers Rolf _{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :) Wikisyntax for the Monastery}	[reply]


There's more than one way to do things
	PerlMonks

Re^14: "" but true

edit