Great! Now I'm a newbie ... again

[ulfschack]

Wonder how many hundreds of posts I've made since I started here in october 2001? After the migration a while back we were all back to scratch. And today it seems like a good chunk of the posts since then have been lost track of again.

I want some respect *fist slam* goddammit! Gimme my well deserved post score back! give it baaaaaaaack *dwindling* !

respectfully

Ulf

[Ookami]

>And today it seems like a good chunk of the posts since then have been lost track of again.

Doom9 did probably some pruning.

And everyone who read your very informative posts has respect for you... :)

It doens't matter how much postings someone has, everyone remembers you, in good or in bad memory :D .

Cheers,

Ookie.

[ulfschack]

You are of course right regarding what should be accounted for as quality and not quantity. Nevertheless a high number of quality posts is even more impressive :)

Thanks for your encouraging praise. This will make me wanna do more for the forum, although it'll probably not amount to the level of knowledge taken anytimes soon :)

cheers

[Nic]

LoL Ookie :D

-Nic

[ulfschack]

Grins, winks and LoLs . Over my head?! What's with ya? You think I'm blind. You think I'm paranoid? I say ... WHO WANTS TO KNOW ?

cheers :)

[jggimi]

I always thought the member description was more useful than the number of posts.:stupid:

[movmasty]

why number of posts is counted then?

just cut it out........:rolleyes:

[cofferscuffs]

kaizen is working on it..... so no-one feels insecure

[movmasty]

or at least posts should be weighted, es:
brute number of posts x post weight-relevance

then

mmasty post(56)x 0.001(relevance)=0.056=baby member

[ChristianHJW]

Originally posted by movmasty
mmasty post(56)x 0.001(relevance)=0.056=baby member ... loooool ... movmasty, its nice to see you have a real sense of humour :D !!