| Winston Smith | 07 Jun 2016 10:15 a.m. PST |
I mean "# of posts" but I doubt that will show up in the title. Some years ago, Dear Editor Bill started putting stats in your profile, and maintained a table if Most Prolific Poster.
Back then it may have been accurate.
To our mutual surprise  the OFM was far in the lead, by thousands. It seemed like a nice dumb milestone to celebrate, so every time I passed a 10,000 mark, I would post Ozymandias.
I was looking forward to celebrating 60,000 posts when massive Bug strikes rendered the count totally u reliable.
My count varied from 113 to 56,000. Daily. When and if ever TMP 4.0 emerges, what are the odds we will have an accurate count?
Then, why bother with it at all?
It was nothing but silly fun back when it was sort of accurate. But it's not now and never will be.
Maybe eliminating it might even free some Bug Zapping electrons. |
| Old Contemptibles | 07 Jun 2016 10:27 a.m. PST |
|
| Winston Smith | 07 Jun 2016 10:43 a.m. PST |
I don't really want a poll on this that makes policy. One dude forcing his opinion on everyone.
I simply want to sample opinions that Dear Editor can choose to follow, or ignore. I just think that if it is not accurate now and never will be, what's the point of even having it?
And if TMP 4.0 solved the "accuracy" issue then bring it back. |
| vtsaogames | 07 Jun 2016 10:59 a.m. PST |
TMP 4.0? Is it coming? This is:
/mivacommon/boards/topics.mv: Line 577: MvLOCKFILE: Runtime Error: Error creating lockfile 'boards/topics.dbf.lck': Timed out waiting for lock |
 Dye4minis  | 07 Jun 2016 11:44 a.m. PST |
|
| Disco Joe | 07 Jun 2016 11:54 a.m. PST |
|
DontFearDareaper  | 07 Jun 2016 12:22 p.m. PST |
who cares one way or the other …. I could barely muster the interest to post how uninterested I am in this  |
| Winston Smith | 07 Jun 2016 12:25 p.m. PST |
But you did. |
| 14Bore | 07 Jun 2016 1:19 p.m. PST |
Don't know what mine is so guess I don't care ones way or another. |
| John Treadaway | 07 Jun 2016 2:03 p.m. PST |
I really, really don't care… John T |
| 53Punisher | 07 Jun 2016 2:41 p.m. PST |
|
| zippyfusenet | 07 Jun 2016 4:38 p.m. PST |
I think it should be removed. A function that's permanently broken is an embarrassment to the site. Also a waste of mips. Also irritating. To me, at least. |
| nazrat | 07 Jun 2016 7:45 p.m. PST |
No, I like it as is, regardless of how broken it is. |
| Cyrus the Great | 07 Jun 2016 8:01 p.m. PST |
I've never kept track. I wouldn't know if my post count is accurate or not. |
| Mute Bystander | 08 Jun 2016 2:11 a.m. PST |
Why get flustered about it. I will be shocked if 4.0 actually appears. |
| Joes Shop | 08 Jun 2016 3:50 a.m. PST |
|
| zippyfusenet | 08 Jun 2016 3:54 a.m. PST |
I will be shocked if 4.0 actually appears. Roger that. That's one reason I want to see this simple, obvious change in TMP.current. The broken post count is like a broken window in a building, or a broken tooth in a pretty face. Doesn't anyone here have any pride of workmanship? |
| Mute Bystander | 08 Jun 2016 8:32 a.m. PST |
zippyfusenet, You really want me to go to the DH? |
| Phrodon | 08 Jun 2016 10:54 a.m. PST |
I would rather see other things fixed/enhanced. Make a list and go to it. Maybe a poll of the top 30 fixes, new items or enhancements and have people vote and start there. Although, maybe this has been done before. |
| John the Greater | 08 Jun 2016 2:06 p.m. PST |
I focus in on these statistics with a compulsive, laser-like intensity. That is, unless I wear my tinfoil hat, in which case I don't care. |
| jdpintex | 08 Jun 2016 6:27 p.m. PST |
Who looks at their stats? |
| zippyfusenet | 08 Jun 2016 8:24 p.m. PST |
You really want me to go to the DH? What's to fear? I'm offering constructive criticism. We both know there's a >99% probability it will be ignored. |
| Patrick Sexton | 09 Jun 2016 3:23 p.m. PST |
|
