NegTZ
5-Sep-23 5:16pm
#1 MrBean
Revisiting an old topic - https://gametz.com/S...
Does the report below equate to those that neg the most? If so, wow... One person leads the charge by leaps and bounds. Really only a handful of people that own all of the negs. Why so angry? Regardless, shows that overall population here are positive, like minded folks.
https://gametz.com/?...
(note you have to use desktop site)
Also, love bills advice! I keep debating bailing on all of them but damnit, they do serve good purposes when utilized properly. Just so tired of the stupidity and negativity out there.
"p.s. Also, quit Facebook, Twitter and all social media. Turn off your phone. Go for a walk outside. Eat more vegetables. etc."
Side note - saw whitefire in that thread, been a bit since he's been around ... anyone know what happened to him? Damn, just looked at his last post ... just over a year ago!
#1 MrBean
Revisiting an old topic - https://gametz.com/S...
Does the report below equate to those that neg the most? If so, wow... One person leads the charge by leaps and bounds. Really only a handful of people that own all of the negs. Why so angry? Regardless, shows that overall population here are positive, like minded folks.
https://gametz.com/?...
(note you have to use desktop site)
Also, love bills advice! I keep debating bailing on all of them but damnit, they do serve good purposes when utilized properly. Just so tired of the stupidity and negativity out there.
"p.s. Also, quit Facebook, Twitter and all social media. Turn off your phone. Go for a walk outside. Eat more vegetables. etc."
Side note - saw whitefire in that thread, been a bit since he's been around ... anyone know what happened to him? Damn, just looked at his last post ... just over a year ago!
5-Sep-23 5:25pm
#2 Bleed_DukeBlue
No surprise that @Scott has the highest positive score. He seems like a nice dude. Also, I just realized that you can go to "my-users" and see who you personally + or - the most, which was fascinating.
#2 Bleed_DukeBlue
No surprise that @Scott has the highest positive score. He seems like a nice dude. Also, I just realized that you can go to "my-users" and see who you personally + or - the most, which was fascinating.
5-Sep-23 5:30pm
#3 MrBean
Bleed_DukeBlue wrote:
No surprise that @Scott has the highest positive score. He seems like a nice dude. Also, I just realized that you can go to "my-users" and see who you personally + or - the most, which was fascinating.
Ohhh that is cool, didn't see that! My lowest towards other users is -2, highest is 54.
#3 MrBean
Bleed_DukeBlue wrote:
No surprise that @Scott has the highest positive score. He seems like a nice dude. Also, I just realized that you can go to "my-users" and see who you personally + or - the most, which was fascinating.
Ohhh that is cool, didn't see that! My lowest towards other users is -2, highest is 54.
5-Sep-23 6:46pm
#4 bill
I think these stats are somewhat deceptive. They are biased toward people who use scoring a lot.
I wouldn't say, "a handful of people that own all of the negs". I also I wouldn't assume they are angry. There could be many reasons to neg. Someone may neg someone else for being angry, for example.
#4 bill
I think these stats are somewhat deceptive. They are biased toward people who use scoring a lot.
I wouldn't say, "a handful of people that own all of the negs". I also I wouldn't assume they are angry. There could be many reasons to neg. Someone may neg someone else for being angry, for example.
5-Sep-23 7:55pm
#5 MrBean
Good probability I'm not understanding the data correctly, but my interpretation ...
There are 1,820 negs on active forum messages:
- The #1 owns 708 = 39%
- The top 4 own 1,234 = 68%
- From #5 to #25 - the range is 0.7% to 2.6% (average of 27 [2%] or a STDEV of 12.8)
So this tells me that the minority owns the majority of the negs. So more often than not, if negs exist, it's probably one of the top 4 repeat offenders, no?
Apologies in advance If I'm not understanding the data properly, good chance I'm off here.
#5 MrBean
Good probability I'm not understanding the data correctly, but my interpretation ...
There are 1,820 negs on active forum messages:
- The #1 owns 708 = 39%
- The top 4 own 1,234 = 68%
- From #5 to #25 - the range is 0.7% to 2.6% (average of 27 [2%] or a STDEV of 12.8)
So this tells me that the minority owns the majority of the negs. So more often than not, if negs exist, it's probably one of the top 4 repeat offenders, no?
Apologies in advance If I'm not understanding the data properly, good chance I'm off here.
6-Sep-23 5:41am
#6 bill
That's all incorrect. Sorry, I guess the presentation is not that clear. The way that page does stats is a little odd because it's trying to do it all in the same interface. Mostly, it's meant to show you the top scoring posts, the other stats were packed in there as an after thought (maybe I should remove them if it's confusing).
At the top, it says, "Lowest score totals for ForumMessages (all that are active), showing their sum and then total number of scores for the person scoring."
For the first person it says: "-708 of 1,256". The -708 is the sum of all their scores. In other words, for every neg it counts -1 and every plus it's 1, then add them all up. The second number is the count of times they made a score. If I look up the numbers by hand, their total negs are: 982, total pluses: 274. 274-982 = -708 (sum). 982+274 = 1256 (total number of scores).
Where do you get 1,820 negs on active forum messages? The list isn't showing total negs made at all. It's just a per-person sum/count thing. Looking up the total site scores, as I write this, the total number of negs in the system is: 10,283. Total plusses: 28,100. So, #1's percent of negs is 982/10,283 or 9.55%. #2 is 271/10,283 or 2.64% etc.
#6 bill
That's all incorrect. Sorry, I guess the presentation is not that clear. The way that page does stats is a little odd because it's trying to do it all in the same interface. Mostly, it's meant to show you the top scoring posts, the other stats were packed in there as an after thought (maybe I should remove them if it's confusing).
At the top, it says, "Lowest score totals for ForumMessages (all that are active), showing their sum and then total number of scores for the person scoring."
For the first person it says: "-708 of 1,256". The -708 is the sum of all their scores. In other words, for every neg it counts -1 and every plus it's 1, then add them all up. The second number is the count of times they made a score. If I look up the numbers by hand, their total negs are: 982, total pluses: 274. 274-982 = -708 (sum). 982+274 = 1256 (total number of scores).
Where do you get 1,820 negs on active forum messages? The list isn't showing total negs made at all. It's just a per-person sum/count thing. Looking up the total site scores, as I write this, the total number of negs in the system is: 10,283. Total plusses: 28,100. So, #1's percent of negs is 982/10,283 or 9.55%. #2 is 271/10,283 or 2.64% etc.
6-Sep-23 7:32am
#7 benstylus
-113 of 403 for me.
So does that means I plus about three times more often than I neg?
#7 benstylus
-113 of 403 for me.
So does that means I plus about three times more often than I neg?
6-Sep-23 7:45am
#8 bill
No. If the first number is negative, it means you neg more than you plus.
You're a negger. It's OK.
At the moment, you have 147 plusses and 260 negs.
147-260 = -113
147 + 260 = 407 total scores
#8 bill
No. If the first number is negative, it means you neg more than you plus.
You're a negger. It's OK.
At the moment, you have 147 plusses and 260 negs.
147-260 = -113
147 + 260 = 407 total scores
6-Sep-23 8:06am
#10 benstylus
Do the stats have an easy way to tell how many of those plusses are on my own posts? I want to know how well I'm living up to my sig
#10 benstylus
Do the stats have an easy way to tell how many of those plusses are on my own posts? I want to know how well I'm living up to my sig
6-Sep-23 8:24am
#11 Scott
Bleed_DukeBlue wrote:
No surprise that @Scott has the highest positive score. He seems like a nice dude.
Likewise buddy!
#11 Scott
Bleed_DukeBlue wrote:
No surprise that @Scott has the highest positive score. He seems like a nice dude.
Likewise buddy!
6-Sep-23 8:32am
#12 Scott
bill wrote:
I think these stats are somewhat deceptive. They are biased toward people who use scoring a lot.
This is true, I'm a compulsive scorer. If I like a post, I plus it, if I REALLY don't like a post, I neg it. I actually neg a fair amount, but I plus way more so it balances out.
Back when I was still on Facebook, I was the same way, liking tons of posts and stuff (why wouldn't I "like" something that I like??") I don't really regret that, but I'm so glad I'm not on Facebook anymore.
#12 Scott
bill wrote:
I think these stats are somewhat deceptive. They are biased toward people who use scoring a lot.
This is true, I'm a compulsive scorer. If I like a post, I plus it, if I REALLY don't like a post, I neg it. I actually neg a fair amount, but I plus way more so it balances out.
Back when I was still on Facebook, I was the same way, liking tons of posts and stuff (why wouldn't I "like" something that I like??") I don't really regret that, but I'm so glad I'm not on Facebook anymore.
6-Sep-23 8:43am
#13 Scott
It's not very well known at this point since it's been so long, and so many past users have left the site, but "shadow negging" used to be a really big problem here, so BIll put some measures in place to help prevent it. If somebody goes through a thread and negs the majority of the posts, or negs a particular user too many times in a short period of time, then all of their negs get removed, I think at the end of the day. So, the neg stats aren't very accurate. The people who are on the "top neggers" list are those who neg sporadically (but a lot). The list would look very different if negs weren't being removed.
Bill, do you think the shadow negging protection is still needed? It doesn't seem like it's much of a problem anymore. I remember I used to see it in action very regularly...I'd have negs, especially in a heated thread, then the next day they'd be gone. I don't really see that happen anymore. Maybe my shadow negger(s) left the site!
#13 Scott
It's not very well known at this point since it's been so long, and so many past users have left the site, but "shadow negging" used to be a really big problem here, so BIll put some measures in place to help prevent it. If somebody goes through a thread and negs the majority of the posts, or negs a particular user too many times in a short period of time, then all of their negs get removed, I think at the end of the day. So, the neg stats aren't very accurate. The people who are on the "top neggers" list are those who neg sporadically (but a lot). The list would look very different if negs weren't being removed.
Bill, do you think the shadow negging protection is still needed? It doesn't seem like it's much of a problem anymore. I remember I used to see it in action very regularly...I'd have negs, especially in a heated thread, then the next day they'd be gone. I don't really see that happen anymore. Maybe my shadow negger(s) left the site!
6-Sep-23 8:46am
#14 Scott
MrBean wrote:
Side note - saw whitefire in that thread, been a bit since he's been around ... anyone know what happened to him? Damn, just looked at his last post ... just over a year ago!
The last I remember, he was catching a lot of heat on here for initiating sales, taking the money, disappearing for a while, then eventually cancelling the trades and refunding. The popular opinion was that he was basically taking advantage of people to get free Paypal loans.
It seems like he got past all of that and was still around for a bit after, so I'm not sure why he eventually left for good. The cancelled trades weren't a good look, but other than that, I always thought he was one of better users here.
#14 Scott
MrBean wrote:
Side note - saw whitefire in that thread, been a bit since he's been around ... anyone know what happened to him? Damn, just looked at his last post ... just over a year ago!
The last I remember, he was catching a lot of heat on here for initiating sales, taking the money, disappearing for a while, then eventually cancelling the trades and refunding. The popular opinion was that he was basically taking advantage of people to get free Paypal loans.
It seems like he got past all of that and was still around for a bit after, so I'm not sure why he eventually left for good. The cancelled trades weren't a good look, but other than that, I always thought he was one of better users here.
6-Sep-23 9:09am
#15 bill
whitefire requested account delete about a year ago, so his account has been purged since then.
What happened with him (from my perspective) is explained in the BTR I filed on him (then deleted) ~18 months ago. https://gametz.com/?... Essentially, I put his account into a state where it shows "Recently Resolved BTRs" and prevented him from having a good trader star because of all the grief he'd repeatedly caused people by not sending stuff for months.
Initially, he seemed OK with this action I took to remove his good trader star. Later he was unhappy with it. He mentioned "many thousands of trades and giveaways, and no one ever lost a single cent due to me" then "I don't see a point in being a part of it anymore ".
#15 bill
whitefire requested account delete about a year ago, so his account has been purged since then.
What happened with him (from my perspective) is explained in the BTR I filed on him (then deleted) ~18 months ago. https://gametz.com/?... Essentially, I put his account into a state where it shows "Recently Resolved BTRs" and prevented him from having a good trader star because of all the grief he'd repeatedly caused people by not sending stuff for months.
Initially, he seemed OK with this action I took to remove his good trader star. Later he was unhappy with it. He mentioned "many thousands of trades and giveaways, and no one ever lost a single cent due to me" then "I don't see a point in being a part of it anymore ".
6-Sep-23 9:13am
#16 bill
Scott wrote:
Bill, do you think the shadow negging protection is still needed?
I do know. It doesn't even report to me when it does it, to be honest. Maybe, I'll turn the reporting back on just to see. Very likely, the site's decline is a factor and related to the level of fighting between users being much lower now.
Looking at the code, I see there was a special exception made for the Politics forum. That reminds me that it was likely worse when there was more political fighting/feuds. We do have a new Presidential race just getting started... will it get bad again?
I think the shadow negging protection doesn't do much harm if it doesn't trigger so much anymore.
#16 bill
Scott wrote:
Bill, do you think the shadow negging protection is still needed?
I do know. It doesn't even report to me when it does it, to be honest. Maybe, I'll turn the reporting back on just to see. Very likely, the site's decline is a factor and related to the level of fighting between users being much lower now.
Looking at the code, I see there was a special exception made for the Politics forum. That reminds me that it was likely worse when there was more political fighting/feuds. We do have a new Presidential race just getting started... will it get bad again?
I think the shadow negging protection doesn't do much harm if it doesn't trigger so much anymore.
6-Sep-23 9:35am
#17 bill
benstylus wrote:
Do the stats have an easy way to tell how many of those plusses are on my own posts?
There's no easy way to do this, but it's possible.
#17 bill
benstylus wrote:
Do the stats have an easy way to tell how many of those plusses are on my own posts?
There's no easy way to do this, but it's possible.
6-Sep-23 9:44am
#18 MrBean
benstylus wrote:
Do the stats have an easy way to tell how many of those plusses are on my own posts? I want to know how well I'm living up to my sig
I believe this: https://gametz.com/?...
all - highest - my-users
#18 MrBean
benstylus wrote:
Do the stats have an easy way to tell how many of those plusses are on my own posts? I want to know how well I'm living up to my sig
I believe this: https://gametz.com/?...
all - highest - my-users
6-Sep-23 9:46am
#19 MrBean
bill wrote:
Where do you get 1,820 negs on active forum messages? The list isn't showing total negs made at all. It's just a per-person sum/count thing. Looking up the total site scores, as I write this, the total number of negs in the system is: 10,283. Total plusses: 28,100. So, #1's percent of negs is 982/10,283 or 9.55%. #2 is 271/10,283 or 2.64% etc.
1820 = sum up the negative numbers from this report: https://gametz.com/?...
Lowest score totals for ForumMessages (all that are active), showing their sum and then total number of scores for the person scoring.
You can see who is making the most positive or negative scores.
So these numbers show the individual users overall score - which includes negative and positive. So the #1 is at -708 of 1,256 - meaning they dished out 708 negs, and 548 pluses yeah?
#19 MrBean
bill wrote:
Where do you get 1,820 negs on active forum messages? The list isn't showing total negs made at all. It's just a per-person sum/count thing. Looking up the total site scores, as I write this, the total number of negs in the system is: 10,283. Total plusses: 28,100. So, #1's percent of negs is 982/10,283 or 9.55%. #2 is 271/10,283 or 2.64% etc.
1820 = sum up the negative numbers from this report: https://gametz.com/?...
Lowest score totals for ForumMessages (all that are active), showing their sum and then total number of scores for the person scoring.
You can see who is making the most positive or negative scores.
So these numbers show the individual users overall score - which includes negative and positive. So the #1 is at -708 of 1,256 - meaning they dished out 708 negs, and 548 pluses yeah?
6-Sep-23 9:54am
#20 bill
1820 = sum up the negative numbers from this report
Well, you shouldn't do that. First, it's like a top list so it's not giving you all the numbers. Second, the negative numbers are not what you think they are.
they dished out 708 negs, and 548 pluses yeah
No. I tried to explain it above, but you're still not getting it. So, I'm not sure what to say. Should I try to explain again? I admit it's an odd/confusing stat.
I'm looking at ways to present the data better, but it's really hard. Since that page is mostly for showing the posts that got the most scores, the "scorer" stat is forced into a format that doesn't allow me to show counts of negs/plusses.
Maybe I should just remove it since it likely just causes confusion. I'm still looking at it to see if there's some way to just show neg/plus counts as that's clearly what people want.
#20 bill
1820 = sum up the negative numbers from this report
Well, you shouldn't do that. First, it's like a top list so it's not giving you all the numbers. Second, the negative numbers are not what you think they are.
they dished out 708 negs, and 548 pluses yeah
No. I tried to explain it above, but you're still not getting it. So, I'm not sure what to say. Should I try to explain again? I admit it's an odd/confusing stat.
I'm looking at ways to present the data better, but it's really hard. Since that page is mostly for showing the posts that got the most scores, the "scorer" stat is forced into a format that doesn't allow me to show counts of negs/plusses.
Maybe I should just remove it since it likely just causes confusion. I'm still looking at it to see if there's some way to just show neg/plus counts as that's clearly what people want.
6-Sep-23 9:57am
#21 benstylus
So these numbers show the individual users overall score - which includes negative and positive. So the #1 is at -708 of 1,256 - meaning they dished out 708 negs, and 548 pluses yeah?
I think its 982 negs to 274 pluses.
Total 1256, but 274 plus and 982 neg = -708
#21 benstylus
So these numbers show the individual users overall score - which includes negative and positive. So the #1 is at -708 of 1,256 - meaning they dished out 708 negs, and 548 pluses yeah?
I think its 982 negs to 274 pluses.
Total 1256, but 274 plus and 982 neg = -708
NegTZ