July 20, 2011 at 3:57 pm #29422
Umm how about not starting a grading system until a user has entered, say, 2 consecutive contests? Up until that point, they could be said to be auditing the course 🙂
There are gaps in my participation, primarily due to serious medical issues. That’s why I have problems with stats that count participation and nothing else- there are many reasons why someone can be a regular participant and still miss out on a block of contests.July 20, 2011 at 4:46 pm #29421
I got an ‘A’, so I can’t complain, but there’s a valid point here being made by ‘them slackers’ 😉 (I keed, you understand?)
Perhaps one’s ‘grade’ could be based upon a rolling ‘semester’ comprising the last 26 contests, or some such. Or at least designate it as a ‘participation grade’, as opposed to what a newb might think regarding the participant’s images versus their participation level–but even then, can we really justify orionid as a ‘C’ player, or U-Man as a B-? It’s akin to judging the top-of-the-class high school graduate by his/her junior high school grades when his/her parents were divorcing and s/he moved twice and had a lot of zits, or whatever might have been going on. “What have you done for us lately” comes to mind.
Personally, I’m just happy I have some stats to let me see how I’m doing, especially the ‘recently’ compared to the ‘annual’ and the ‘overall’, which was my general focus with following the trend on the FSM. It’s exhilarating to see that my recent stats are better than my past year, which are better than my total history–it tells me I’m improving as a photographer, and that encourages me to strive for continuous improvement in composition, execution, and contest picture decisions.
So again–thanks for the hard work. And that shiny apple on the table? It’s from me. But don’t let it bias you’re grades on my essays. 😉
//edit: my bad–it does designate it as a participation grade. So where’s teh beef? Still–hope the points made above have some validity.July 20, 2011 at 9:23 pm #29420
I didn’t really have a problem with it (but I have an A+ so that might had something to do with it) but you could take out the grade and just leave the percentage. I’m guessing you were searching for something to replace the “Ultra/Elite/etc Farktographer” statistics. If that’s the case, I bet schnee wouldn’t mind if you carry that rating over, just ask. That was a rolling formula based on some equation he came up with that weighted more for a lot of recent participation but still had a small penalty for large gaps. It would lend some continuity as we transition to the new site.
Speaking of which, is Bibliostats ready for primetime (i.e. linkage in the boobies post)? We all know that no one reads the boobies anyway but since the FSM isn’t collecting new data we’ll be taking that link out. Anyone curious could come find out the link is here from reading the forum but I didn’t want to start linking it in the boobies unless you were ready for potentially greater traffic.July 20, 2011 at 11:48 pm #29419
Minor Updates Announcement
Just published some minor updates:
- Removed the participation grade entirely
- Shifted the participation rate to the period stats
- Added average entries/contest stat
- Made all contest themes and usernames links to their respective pages
The last one’s the biggie of these. Any place you see a contest theme or username, it should now be a link to take you to that contest’s or user’s page on BiblioStats. There’s still no dedicated nav panel, but this should allow us to browse amongst the usable pages a little easier.
Kes, traffic-wise, BiblioStats is as ready for primetime as it’s gonna get. I’m fine with you posting a link to it, although I’d probably note that it’s a work in progress and also post a link to this thread for clarification.
If you do post a link, you have a couple of choices:
July 21, 2011 at 12:18 am #29418
- Use http://www.bibliostats.com/farktography/contest so that it always points to the latest contest; or
- Use http://www.bibliostats.com/farktography/contest/324 so that it always points to the contest in the thread. If you go with this option, you’ll want to update the contest ID each week. Also note that this option will go to an error page during the TF-only period until the contest is created at midnight.
Ok, I didn’t get a chance to check back here before I posted the boobies, but going forward I think it will go in the boobies! Probably the first link will be the one we use.July 21, 2011 at 12:27 am #29417
Brilliant, man. I think the grades weren’t necessarily a bad idea, but a bunch of us regulars ended up with Fs (myself included) because of gaps. It would be really difficult to design a fair, consistent system of grading that really worked. I don’t think anybody expects you to spend that much time on it!July 21, 2011 at 1:01 am #29416
I wasn’t upset by any means, I just felt like poking at you. Seriously though, thanks for all of this.July 21, 2011 at 1:20 am #29415
I don’t think anybody expects you to spend that much time on it!
Too late for that! I can’t count the time I’ve put into this between the scrapers and uploaders and the website itself. And I say that not to garner sympathy or attaboys, because I’m doing it (mostly) for my own entertainment. Y’all just get to benefit from it. 😉
I wasn’t upset by any means, I just felt like poking at you.
Oh, I know. Besides, we’ve already had conversations about your screwed-up priorities, putting health issues ahead of farktography stats. 😛July 21, 2011 at 1:51 am #29414
Plamadude30kParticipantCauseISaidSo wrote:Too late for that! I can’t count the time I’ve put into this between the scrapers and uploaders and the website itself. And I say that not to garner sympathy or attaboys, because I’m doing it (mostly) for my own entertainment. Y’all just get to benefit from it. 😉
Well, if the community wants grading or grading like criteria, maybe it’s time for us to step up and contribute a little?July 21, 2011 at 2:36 am #29413
Well, if the community wants grading or grading like criteria, maybe it’s time for us to step up and contribute a little?
Fine! I give myself an A++ .. oh, you didn’t mean like that.
I remember the same thing happening when Schnee started the active farktographers page/labels with the different rankings based on participation. Once everyone knew how it was being calculated then it wasn’t a problem, just suddenly finding a label on their details one day caused some people to wonder what they had done wrong/right.
/Didn’t really care about my rank either, just made for a laugh.
//What does NVC stand for??July 21, 2011 at 3:21 am #29412
It’s on the first post, but we’re several pages in now, so here ’tis again:
NVC, which stands for Normalized Vote Count, is the number of votes that an entry would’ve received if the total votes cast in the contest was 1000. Due to the wide disparity of voter turnouts, it’s a more apples-to-apples method of comparing vote counts across contests. For example, someone getting 40 votes in a contest with 3000 votes cast (13.33 NVC) is actually less significant than someone getting 20 votes in a contest with 1200 votes cast (16.67 NVC).
You can also look at it as the percentage of total votes cast in tenths of a percent; e.g., 98.50 NVC = 9.85% of total votes.
The relationship between votes and NVC is most easily seen in the Color Popping Naturally contest which had an even 2000 total votes cast. In that contest, NVC is exactly half of votes.July 21, 2011 at 7:56 am #29411
A couple of minor updates:
July 21, 2011 at 3:19 pm #29448
- User stats are now updated in “real time” (i.e., every 15 minutes). All the stats on your Statistics tab will reflect the status of your current entries.
- Viewing user entries by contest is now sorted in date descending order. (I got tired of having to page to the end to view the active contest.)
Whoa…this is so cool.
May I call you Bibliostatus Rex?July 21, 2011 at 3:39 pm #29410
LOL! Sure, why not? I’ll even let you call me plasmaduke. 😉July 21, 2011 at 3:48 pm #29409
LOL! Sure, why not? I’ll even let you call me plasmaduke. 😉
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.