Syntactic Confectionery Delight | |
PerlMonks |
comment on |
( [id://3333]=superdoc: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
Sigh ... since many people tend to believe in such "science", here some background:
Here some "alternative" facts: ²
Let's put this into relation with your alleged "top-monk" (which I respect nevertheless)
But well ... this doesn't prove that I'm not saying foolish things from time to time ... So please show me those threads where I stated anything like ... > "That really shouldn't be allowed" ... without giving plenty of evidence, links and even example code? I think I also tend to reply to every new argument without resorting to a cheap "you know I'm kidding" According to your "statistic" this should be an easy game ...
Cheers Rolf °) eyepopslikeamosquito can tell you more about it. Ask yourself, how comes 30% of the top 20 saints haven't been here for years without loosing rank?
updateAnd one also gets XP for voting, which makes it even more complicated. ²) NB: this isn't adjusted to the deflation over the years, because that's not easily done. But it was always consensus that "XP is only a game" anyway. ³) he barely passed your 1000 posts minimum, because he has only 10% of my volume. But if you look at my 54th best post you'll see a reputation of 40 and his 506th only at 16. For more How to Lie with Statistics In reply to Re^13: "" but true (how to lie with statistics)
by LanX
|
|