Note -- Your third column should be XP per writeups, not reputation. Reputation is a per-node statistic. (Given reputation for a node, you can estimate statistically how many XP might have been gained for that node, but that information isn't published at the user level.)

And I'm not sure what the "Points" column is supposed to reflect.

I'm surprised to see my name at the top of any such list. Honestly, it makes me a little uneasy; I've done so little compared to others here. The fact that I would appear toward the top of an XP progress list shows that you shouldn't make too much about the numbers. It reminds me of the old saying that has been attributed to, among others, Mark Twain:

There are three types of lies - Lies, damn lies, and stastics.

Mark Twain might even feel uneasy seeing that credited to him; apparently there is some confusion as to who said it first.¹

Anyway, as I was saying... I don't really think I've given as much as I've received from the Monastery. It all just goes to show that XP doesn't really represent anything important, and depending on how you analyze and compare "MonkStats", you can tell many different stories.

Frankly, I feel that I've gotten more out of most of my posts than the sum total of all those who have read them; the questions posted here inspired me to dig into the documents and figure things out for myself. I hope that along the way a few others have learned something too, but more importantly, I hope that the aggregate of all answers provided by all individuals at PerlMonks inspires other people to look at new approaches, and to continue asking inspring questions so that others here -- and to a small degree, I -- can continue pushing forward the collective learning curve.

^1. According to this blog, the quote, "There are three types of lies - lies, damn lies, and statistics." has been attributed to Benjamin Disraeli, Alfred Marshall, Mark Twain and "many other dead people."

I feel that I've gotten more out of most of my posts than the sum total of all those who have read them; the questions posted here inspired me to dig into the documents and figure things out for myself.

I have to agree wholeheartedly with those sentiments. Although I'm still very new to the Monastery, I feel that I've learned so much simply by looking at questions posted to SOPW, and trying to work out the answers for myself. Sometimes I post my answers, and sometimes I don't. But regardless, I find that I learn something new almost every day.

Frankly, I feel that I've gotten more out of most of my posts than the sum total of all those who have read them; the questions posted here inspired me to dig into the documents and figure things out for myself.

I think this is a very common response, and I concur with it wholeheartedly. ("I knew I should have concurred ... why didn't I concur?" -- a loose quote from my vague memories of Catch Me If You Can.)

One of the things that makes PerlMonks work is that it is not a zero-sum game ... the time I spend at PM is often the most productive part of my day. The two minutes someone spends dashing off a quick reply to a question can potentially have a hundred-fold return for the OP, and the ripples spread throughout the monastery.

Another contributor to the success of PerlMonks is proper self-perception, or humility ... I think that a lot of the high-XP monks continue to benefit from the other members because they don't fall into the trap of thinking they have all the answers. I know that I come here more often to learn something I didn't know I needed to learn, than to get an answer for a particular question. There is, after all, more than one way to be a PerlMonk. :)


No good deed goes unpunished. -- (attributed to) Oscar Wilde

There are three types of lies - Lies, damn lies, and stastics.

The ODQ says Mark Twain attributed it to Disraeli in his autobiography, which would explain at least some of the confusion.

Hugo

Please note that for some really old users, that table isn't accurate. XP wasn't a part of the site from the start. Some people who've been here since Christmas 1999 have a lot of unvoted nodes. As well, other users who signed up after others have had the benefit of a higher $NORM.

Another way to look at this is to rank-order monks by XP/writeup and by writeups/month (the latter I used just for a more tractable number in my intermediate calculations). That examines "contribution" in a couple of different ways. Then we can look at who is ranked well in each category. There are I chose two ways of looking at that combination -- minimum combined vector distance (who's closer to rank 1 in both) or a linear average of the two ranks. Using Saints in our Book, here's a look at the top 30 each way:

Top 30 Saints-in-our-Book by Combined Rank (also see a chart of this with a few monks highlighted)

Top 30 Saints-in-our-Book by Average Rank

(Some names got compressed to eliminate whitespace in intermediate processing. Apologies.)

Do a google search for demoronizer.

---
$world=~s/war/peace/g

Sounds very useful. Fine vintage too:

       demoroniser was developed using Perl 4.0, patch level  36.

-sam

Heh. I saw your comment above, and thought:

"How mean, [id://demerphq] is calling this poor original poster a moron!"

I prepared to downvote your node (ah, the awesome power I felt!) and thought, "Why don't I check Google, first?"

It turns out that you didn't coin that name, and that the author of the tool is (apparently) poking fun at MicroSoft (always fair game IMO, comes with the territory) rather than specifically at the OP: Demoronizer

Moral to self: Look before you leap ... to conclusions. :)

There are several twisty corridors here in the Monastery in which demoronizer cobwebs hang from the ceiling; IMO they're well worth pursuing by anyone interested in cleaning up the .html produced by ANY of MS's Word, Excel or supposedly WYSIWYG products. Look under the covers, and what you got was remarkable bloat and non-conformant code.

So, a few keywords for future Super_Searchers: "HTML, html MS, Microsoft, Office, Word, Excel, FrontPage, PowerPoint, Publisher, cleanup, parse" ...and there surely could be more (arguably even Notepad, which when in word-wrap mode adds MS-ish lineends at every displayed wrap position).

davidrw and astroboy offered links to useful alternate tools in Word HTML issues. There also a bit of discussion re the issues implied in samtregar's remark in this thread.

Self-updating of demoronizer is laid out very nicely by derby in Re^3: Reg Ex to strip MS smart quotes

But (... sigh! )...even the the lastest Word->html output does not exactly demonstrate that the allegedly-enlightened giant in Redmond has learned to avoid making the same mistakes in different (ie, incompatible) ways.

...and, oh yes, a (deprecated) disclaimer: I don't hate W32; I just hate cleaning up MS .html to w3c standards.

Fair warning, also: I should probably use a sig like html 4.01 dinosaur

I guess it is Rep_per_Writeup / User_since_days * 1000