Sax on the Web Forum banner

Compare Your SOTW Ranking Here!

12K views 64 replies 23 participants last post by  maddenma 
#1 · (Edited)
Use this graph to see how you compare to other SOTW members with regard to posting frequency. All 1,968 members with more than 100 posts were included in this display. The most prolific 20 members are named. These data are current as of today.



Edit: By popular demand, here are the data arranged according to Posts Per Day.

 
See less See more
2
#48 ·
Why milandro do you think so?
The number of posts is really uninteresting and so is the number of posts/day. I say you have a hilarious number of posts already. Go for a vacation and admire your good work here (SOTW) instead. I mean, consider a person who has written a book and posted here once. It could be 5000 pages and considered as the bible of repairing *or* playing. She or he has justed posted once, but have completely covered the saxophone/woodwind subject.
Consider then another person who might have written 10000 answers in a very short time. Thereby will be getting "a high ranking" but could still eventually only have answered yes or no (in the extreme case).

Therefore I say this statistics might be rather misleading and because of that not so interesting. Some people use very few words in their posts and other "speak more" so to say. Ugh! (me Indian)

Best regards
 
#3 ·
Yeah, the clip art on the right is very explicit: the guy enjoys "geeking" while his horn seems to say: "hey chap, it is time for some patterns !" :mrgreen:
 
#5 ·
BTW, I post while playing.
Now there's an idea - a sax with a usb keyboard interface. There are plenty enough notes to cover the alphabet and simple punctuation...but you'd need something to act as a shift key...

Regards,
 
#9 ·
What's that thing beside the guy at the computer?
 
#10 ·
How did you get the data off the site to create the graph?
 
#12 ·
It doesn't take long after first coming to SOTW to figure out who the most prolific posters are. It's right there for everyone to see, and we SEE the prolific posters on a regular basis. What takes a little more time is figuring out who the most consistently helpful posters are. Help is in the eye of the beholder though. I generally don't view advice from players who are primarily Rock & Roll players to be very helpful to *me* because I'm not a Rock & Roll player, never was, and never want(ed) to be. That doesn't make their advice any less helpful to others. The most important thing is whether or not a poster is regularly trying to be helpful to *someone*.

There are some on the list of most prolific posters who almost always try to be helpful. Others...not as often. Without meaning to slight the contributions of others who deserve it by only mentioning one...I would like to take the opportunity to commend Pete Thomas for at least trying to be consistently helpful to as many people as he can. There are many others who deserve similar recognition, but from my experience, Pete is one of the most consistent in that regard. When it comes to ranking...I think it's important to consider both intention and content over sheer volume.
 
#26 ·
It doesn't take long after first coming to SOTW to figure out who the most prolific posters are. It's right there for everyone to see, and we SEE the prolific posters on a regular basis.
Yes, we see the post counts printed all the time, but it's hard to compare them or see where you lie in the ranking of total number of posts. I thought it would be interesting to compare them graphically.

What takes a little more time is figuring out who the most consistently helpful posters are. Help is in the eye of the beholder though. ... When it comes to ranking...I think it's important to consider both intention and content over sheer volume.
I agree. This display is clearly only for ranking people according to number of posts.

I was going to say the same thing as Pete that this is not frequency but total number of posts.
Yes, and I'm glad that people read my wording carefully enough to spot the word "frequency." I should have worded the opening statement differently, perhaps. At least the display is clear. Note, however, that "Number of Posts" is equivalent to "Posts Per 4280 Days" (the earliest Join Date was 4280 days ago), which is an estimate of frequency. So you can actually consider "Number of Posts" a frequency estimate (albeit not a very stable one, as it only counts occurrences across one (long) unit of time.

Frequency of posts per day, in rank order of total number of posts
gary 7.29
hakukani 12.05
grumps 5.36
Pete Thomas 5.34
bandmommy 8.77
milandro 7.55
bruce bailey 4.53
Dr. G 4.05
Carl H. 3.65
Gordon (NZ) 3.51
martysax 4.22
JL 3.36
jazzbluescat 3.23
kcp 3.02
SAXISMYAXE 3.04
jrvinson45 3.01
Shaneygrog 7.90
belliott 2.58
Dave Dolson 2.45
Jazz Is All 5.04

and me (it is, after all, all about me)
MartinMusicMan 4.37
It would be interesting to examine "frequency of posts per day," of all members in ranked order. There are probably many members who have higher post frequencies than the 20 members with the most posts (just as Pete alluded to earlier). Maybe I'll get around to plotting the ranked posting frequencies of all SOTW members some day, but not right now. In the mean time, I invite others to give it a try.
 
#47 ·
Yeah....the only reason my post per day (4.37) made the list is because I've got a bunch of questions (just getting back into playing). As you alluded to...in most on topic threads, I don't have a whole lot to add. My pet thread is pretty much the $h1t though.:mrgreen:
 
#16 ·
Since I've been made an admin, my posting frequency has decreased substantially. Wait.....what?

I've gone from 17 to 12/day.
 
#18 ·
I was going to say the same thing as Pete that this is not frequency but total number of posts. It might be interesting to divide the total number of posts by the number of years that the poster has been on SOTW for a simple frequency number. But it's not interesting enough for me to do it. :D
 
#19 ·
It might be interesting to divide the total number of posts by the number of years that the poster has been on SOTW for a simple frequency number. But it's not interesting enough for me to do it. :D
That simple frequency number is already shown on your profile, but you can only see it on your own profile. I can see mine but I can't see yours and visa-versa. That number fluctuates, but the amount of fluctuation decreases considerably the longer you've been here. My current frequency number is a nice round "1.0 posts per day". I remember it being 1.8 at one time, which made me feel like I was posting too much.
 
#25 ·
Frequency of posts per day, in rank order of total number of posts
gary 7.29
hakukani 12.05
grumps 5.36
Pete Thomas 5.34
bandmommy 8.77
milandro 7.55
bruce bailey 4.53
Dr. G 4.05
Carl H. 3.65
Gordon (NZ) 3.51
martysax 4.22
JL 3.36
jazzbluescat 3.23
kcp 3.02
SAXISMYAXE 3.04
jrvinson45 3.01
Shaneygrog 7.90
belliott 2.58
Dave Dolson 2.45
Jazz Is All 5.04

and me (it is, after all, all about me)
MartinMusicMan 4.37
 
#27 ·
So rank order of posts per day (keep in mind that there may be others with higher frequencies of posts per day; these are the high total posters from the OP)

hakukani 12.05
bandmommy 8.77
Shaneygrog 7.90
milandro 7.55
gary 7.29
Pete Thomas 5.34
grumps 5.36
Jazz Is All 5.04
bruce bailey 4.53
[MartinMusicMan 4.37]
martysax 4.22
Dr. G 4.05
Carl H. 3.65
Gordon (NZ) 3.51
JL 3.36
jazzbluescat 3.23
SAXISMYAXE 3.04
kcp 3.02
jrvinson45 3.01
belliott 2.58
Dave Dolson 2.45

From this I conclude that I should spend more time playing the sax than posting about it.
 
#31 ·
Just so we're on the same page, saxmusicguy...I was in no way trying to quibble over semantics or trying to read the purpose of your post as anything other than it was. I did get it for the way it was intended. I was merely adding other ways of looking at "rankings" in general. It's been an interesting thread, as started by you. :)
 
#32 ·
No worries. And I would certainly classify you, CooolJazzz, among the helpful members here. There are indeed many ways to look at "rankings." In any case, SOTW is a community (of sorts) rather than a competition. The intent of this thread was just to examine some interesting data.
 
#39 ·
Here are the data according to Posts Per Day (I also appended this to the original post):
That data must have taken a while to gather. All it will take is a "newbie" making 400 posts in their first month to knock hakukani from his throne... :mrgreen:

The newer you are to SOTW, the easier it would be to rise to the top of this list if you had a mind to...(or had nothing better to do). :argue:
 
#41 ·
Ya think?
 
#43 ·
This is interesting, and fun! Thanks saxmusicguy.

It's amazing to see how many members there are with high post counts - reading from the graph it looks like there are ~400 with over 1000 posts. Also, it is sometimes suggested to me that maybe I'm spending a bit too much time on SOTW, but these numbers put that in perspective. More than 500 people have higher total post counts than I do, and ~300 post more frequently than I do. I shall remember that, next time someone near and dear to me (not to name names) hints that perhaps I am overdoing it a little.

Could you tell us the mean and median for post count and frequency, by any chance?
 
#45 ·
This is interesting, and fun! Thanks saxmusicguy.

It's amazing to see how many members there are with high post counts - reading from the graph it looks like there are ~400 with over 1000 posts. Also, it is sometimes suggested to me that maybe I'm spending a bit too much time on SOTW, but these numbers put that in perspective. More than 500 people have higher total post counts than I do, and ~300 post more frequently than I do. I shall remember that, next time someone near and dear to me (not to name names) hints that perhaps I am overdoing it a little.

Could you tell us the mean and median for post count and frequency, by any chance?
For the 1,977 SOTW members with more than 100 posts:
Post Counts: Mean = 756; Median = 282
Posts Per Day: Mean = 0.41; Median = 0.17

There are 332 members with more than 1000 posts.

edwin, there are 568 members who have higher post counts than you, and 258 members who have higher "Posts Per Day" than you.
 
#52 ·
This is an interesting thread. I can't believe I have so many posts, but it's mainly because I've been on here for a long time. I get nervous when I see my posts per day rising.

Then again, in terms of spending (wasting?) time on a forum like this, the number & frequency of posts are not the whole story. That doesn't take into account the number of hours spent just reading posts. It would of course be possible for someone to spend 12 hours a day and never post at all. But I don't see how you could do that and resist responding to anything... :)
 
#54 ·
It would of course be possible for someone to spend 12 hours a day and never post at all. But I don't see how you could do that and resist responding to anything... :)
Many times I've joined in the fray only to wish I hadn't. I try to keep telling myself..."Discretion is the better part of valor". I don't listen to myself nearly as often as I should. However...for every post credited to my name, I've typed quite a few more only to think twice and delete them before posting. If I posted everything I've typed here I'd probably have 10,000+ posts to my credit. I censor myself a lot, but not enough sometimes.

Oy! I just went from 1.0 post per day to 1.01 posts per day. I need to back off for a while. I like round numbers better.
 
#57 ·
Oh, and my post count was also reset in one of the previous SOTW incarnations when the board crashed. I'd probably have at least double the number that's showing.

I like to think I'm about the quality rather than the quantity these days.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top