One More Block

Phantomboy wrote:Ah, I see! Does the number after the name listed represent the post that listen is related to? For instance your reply was post-55247?

Nah. Its more likely a word count summed from every post a user has made.

Sebastian Lawe wrote:Nah. Its more likely a word count summed from every post a user has made.

Yes, that would make a lot more sense indeed...

I think I'm going to add a new stat called "Stats Developer".
I'll give everybody an equal chance to receive the rank (but you have to develop the stats to get it).

What about a "God" rank? :3

We need another Postmaster rank, like there was on Voxelus. I mean, sure, I don't have the time to attain that one again...but I'm sure StreetLights deserves it just as much for here.

Aww thank you :3

How does the stat generator actually work? Does it scan the website for pages, or use the forum's api or something?

StreetLights wrote:Aww thank you :3

[Bows]

Epowerj wrote:How does the stat generator actually work? Does it scan the website for pages, or use the forum's api or something?

Yes, I've been wondering that as well. Does it scan the forum?

It scans the forum.

"bboy99 is the most serious user."
WHAT DOES IT MEAN?
Does it mean I am boring? Awww

No, it just means you are actually smart.

I believe that stat looks for correct punctuation and specific serious words, ne? I'd imagine if you found out the requirements for each stat, over the course of a few posts you could "game the system" quite well..

Epowerj wrote:How does the stat generator actually work? Does it scan the website for pages, or use the forum's api or something?

I'll try to explain without getting too technical.

First, I read the main page of the website, which basically lists all the forum sections. I built code specifically for reading a page that lists forum sections. So, I read the forum sections, extracting their title, and page link. Then, per section (navigating to their links), I get a bunch of thread names, and their links (I also have code specifically for grabbing threads). Then, per thread (navigating to their links), I get their posts (which uses code specifically for getting posts). Once the entire forum is extracted and stored in a binary format, I generate the actual stats.

Simple answer, I scan the forum like a web, or folder structure. You can have as many folders as you want in a folder, and in those folders, you can have more folders.

Phantomboy wrote:I believe that stat looks for correct punctuation and specific serious words, ne? I'd imagine if you found out the requirements for each stat, over the course of a few posts you could "game the system" quite well..

For the serious stat, every word you've said is compared against a list of "serious" words. And, of course to make it fair, I do this stat based on percentage. If a high percentage of your posts are serious and you have over 100 posts, then you get considered for the stat. By doing things percentage based, people like StreetLights won't claim winner for every stat.

Sebastian Lawe wrote:By doing things percentage based, people like StreetLights won't claim winner for every stat.

Totally fair enough, I'd say. Nothing to complain about here.

So if I made a 500 word post all containing really serious words, would that work?

Newah wrote:So if I made a 500 word post all containing really serious words, would that work?

That sounds pretty superfluously legitimately ostentatiously awesomely applicably applicable to me.

0_o

Nope. I somehow don't think that is going to work so well.

Too much work, first of all.

But hey- to each their own, right?

Also, on a more related note... Sebbie (sorry for the terrible mix of current and past usernames), my friend, would there be any chance of factoring in some new statistical sections as well, for the stats?

Like, I don't know... just different things such as some more "different" types of 'top users' and such? Just a thought maybe. At this point, I'm pleased well enough, but wanted to at least stimulate chatter a little bit if I was going to be a little off topic as well.

Newah wrote:So if I made a 500 word post all containing really serious words, would that work?

Well, lets see. You've said 42161658 words.

500 / 42161658 = 0.0012% of all your posts.

Though, in reality you've used 19034 serious words.

0.045% of your posts have serious words.

SirWrek wrote:on a more related note... Sebbie (sorry for the terrible mix of current and past usernames), my friend, would there be any chance of factoring in some new statistical sections as well, for the stats?

Like, I don't know... just different things such as some more "different" types of 'top users' and such? Just a thought maybe. At this point, I'm pleased well enough, but wanted to at least stimulate chatter a little bit if I was going to be a little off topic as well.

Yup, I could definitely add more sections. I just have to figure out how the dynamically generated HTML will look.

Sebastian Lawe wrote:Well, lets see. You've said 42161658 words.

500 / 42161658 = 0.0012% of all your posts.

Though, in reality you've used 19034 serious words.

0.045% of your posts have serious words.

Yup, I could definitely add more sections. I just have to figure out how the dynamically generated HTML will look.

lol, thanks for doing the math on that for me. I wouldn't really go through all that trouble, but I was wondering if it would work.

I'm adding some new stats to the stats generator. Once the update is released, both the animated signatures and web page will display more data.

Cannot wait! It is really crazy how well this project has taken shape Good job, friend!