Pet peeves results are in!

Off-Topic
#1

anyways… Pet peeves results are in! :slight_smile:

Looks like Richard S is in the lead by 101 post!

[quote]
post_count - contributor
451 - Richard S
350 - Norman P
252 - Gavin S
167 - Mike C
129 - Kem T
127 - Rick A
72 - Dave S
40 - Albin K
40 - Tim H
39 - Danny C
34 - David W
32 - brian f
21 - john b
15 - Jim S
12 - Patrick D
12 - Tim P
11 - Jim C
11 - Eugene D
10 - Christian S
10 - Steve W
8 - David C
7 - Louis D
7 - Dirk C
7 - Brad H
6 - Tony M
6 - Chris M
6 - Jeff T
5 - Joseph M
4 - Matthew C
4 - Michel B
4 - Syed H
4 - Peter F
4 - Paul R
4 - Simon B
3 - Alexander v
3 - Tim J
3 - Eric B
3 - Karen A
3 - Chris B
3 - Markus W
2 - Dana B
2 - Grant S
2 - Jason C
2 - Bill G
2 - Frederick R
2 - Torsten G
2 - Alyssa F
2 - Hamish S
2 - Gary M
2 - Jason K
1 - scott b
1 - Anthony D
1 - Dale A
1 - Rick Y
1 - Massimo V
1 - Paul S
1 - Alain B
1 - Oliver O
1 - Joseph C[/quote]

#2

dang it… I’m still in the TOP 10 :frowning:

#3

Total bunch of time wasters!

#4

[quote=102562:@Rich Hatfield]anyways… Pet peeves results are in! :slight_smile:

Looks like Richard S is in the lead by 101 post![/quote]
Man Im slippin’ :slight_smile:

#5

I assume you’re using the term “contributor” in the loosest possible sense.

#6

I guess participant could have worked as well :slight_smile:

#7

How on earth did you get those statistics???

#8

very carefully :slight_smile:

but if you are really curious… I had to load the page in full and then parse the page. from here, I could break it down by posters before I loaded everything into sql to build stats.

#9

Ooo you could actually load it dynamically following the Load More links ajax queries.
That’d actually be an interesting tool.

I did that once to parse Tumblr archives and create lists of every image on them. It worked really well until tumblr changed something. (this was a while ago, I don’t recall exactly what they did that broke it, but I wasn’t too invested in fixing it)
(yes, I do stupid things for fun)

#10

Yeah dont pound the forums like that please
It ranks right up there with scraping the wiki as an activity we’d have to take steps to limit or make run so slow your tool would be useless on the forums

#11

Oh hell no - you didn’t just perform analysis on THAT thread!

MUTED :slight_smile:

#12

Just quoted for no reason.

[quote=102586:@Rich Hatfield] Richard Summers How on earth did you get those statistics???

very carefully :slight_smile:

but if you are really curious… I had to load the page in full and then parse the page. from here, I could break it down by posters before I loaded everything into sql to build stats.[/quote]

You should “contribute” there, you can waste your time faster in small doses.

#13

Some people have too much time.

#14

You are not alone Chris, I envy them as hell too. :stuck_out_tongue:

#15

:slight_smile:

In the last weeks, I started more and more to use the mute feature of the forum to not see several threads.

#16

As an observer of that thread, I might offset the space time continuum if I comment in there. I made the mistake of doing it once and esotalk responded by double posting my words.

I will go back to lurker status :slight_smile:

#17

[quote=102688:@Christian Schmitz]:slight_smile:

In the last weeks, I started more and more to use the mute feature of the forum to not see several threads.[/quote]
I note that you posted ten times in Pet Peeves before deciding you should mute it :wink:

#18