GoKunming Forums

Interesting statistic regarding frequency of posting on GK

Tonyaod (824 posts) • 0

What does the following statistic mean? I have no idea, but is an interesting barometer, me thinks. Is there a correlation between quantity and quality? Free to make your own conclusions.

As of this posting:
==================================
GK Member #1:
Date registered: June 26, 2012
Forum Posts: 376
Total number of days registered: 460
Average 0.82 posting/day
Average 1 posting every 1.22 days

—————————————————————-

GK Member #2:
Date registered: August 3, 2011
Forum Posts: 465
Total number of days registered: 780
Average 0.60 posting/day
Average 1 posting every 1.68 days

—————————————————————-

GK Member #3:
Date registered: August 23, 2008
Forum Posts: 499
Total number of days registered: 1863
Average 0.27 posting/day
Average 1 posting every 3.73 days

—————————————————————-

And to be a good sport, myself:
Date registered: December 1, 2006
Forum Posts: 284
Total number of days registered: 2494
Average 0.11 posting/day
Average 1 posting every 8.78 days

Magnifico (1981 posts) • 0

GK Member #2 is a real idiot! He's full of hot air.
You're right. We need more quality, not quantity!
Good point.

Magnifico (1981 posts) • 0

Hey Tony,

The few posts I've read of yours, you go out of your way to come across as Charlie Brown. You finish all your posts with "Cheers" and a happy sunny smile and like you're everybody's best friend.

You seem to go out of your way not to be offensive and claim that you're "not taking sides" with anyone. You go out of your way to use the most polite language and tone possible.

And then what? Then, you go snooping around and compiling statistics about posters and insinuating that certain people should post less often.

Creep.

Tonyaod (824 posts) • 0

@Magnifico

The reason I may sound "Charlie Brown" to you is that I don't believe in hiding behind the anonymity of the Internet. If I'm going to make a strong personal remarks about someone I'll be sure that they know who I am. Since the purpose of my posts is to engage in a thoughtful discussion based on the merits of the argument (or at least to the best of my abilities), I see no need for personal attacks or to get nasty in my posts.

As to the use of "Cheers~" it was something I learned from JJ and Janice as a literal device signifying that I meant no harm. As I have stated in the other thread, readers cannot hear the tone of voice in the postings and so it is even more important that we choose our words carefully or find ways textually to convey our emotional state of mind.

Looking at public profiles is NOT snooping, all it took was one click one the poster's name (and if you notice, your number of posts is prominently displayed underneath your name in your postings. It was not a convoluted process of using sniffers and data mining to get this data.

Buddy, what happened between your first post and the second? You went from agreement to being offended. Since there was a minimum of at least 30 minutes (my best guess) between the two posts, did you not realize who GK Member #2 was when you first made the remark? And then became hot-headed when you did? I thought you were being tongue-in-cheek with the first post when I read it and thought to myself that this guy is a good sport, but maybe I was wrong?

Regarding the statistics, I was not insinuating anything, that was the conclusion that you made based on the statistics that I've provided. Without making a value judgement, I was noting how some people are very active in their posts while others are not. As to whether these posts are of quality, it is incumbent upon individuals that care to read the actual posts to make that determination of quality.

Case in point:
laotou:
Date registered: November 24, 2009
Forum Posts: 957
Total number of days registered: 1405
Average 0.68 posting/day
Average 1 posting every 1.47 days

laotou is much more prolific than you and I very much respect both him as a person and his opinions. I may not necessarily agree with everything he has said but he has a reputation in the forum as being witty, insightful, and respectful; I genuinely look forward to all of his posts. I can say this because I have read MANY of his postings, however, since I was lazy and just didn't really care about GK member #1, #2, and #3, I didn't not make an assessment on them, simply provided some statistics. I leave the assessment to the people that care and it seems that you DO care. So please "enlighten" us and give us your quality assessment of member #1, #2, and #3, I have a feeling you know who they are. If you don't maybe you can do a little "snooping" of your own. And if you don't know how, PM me and I'll show you.

While you have decided to make a personal attack on me, I will not respond in kind, only with sharp words. However, there will be no "Cheers~" for you.

==================================================

@laotou

Since you didn't appear in the previous hotly debated threads, I didn't take it upon myself to involve you in the debate, however, your silver tongue was sorely missed. Hope you have a happy and safe National Day festival.

Cheers~

The Dudeson's (1106 posts) • 0

@Tonyaod
Let me get this straight you want to revolutionize the internet by exposing the people using it?
The reason is why the internet is so awesome and useful is because you don't have to show your identity to others.

It is creepy that you snoop around others diregarding if it's public or not especially that your post doesn;t mean anything the number of posts in whatever time don;t say anything....literally!
1000 or 1 post don;t say anything about what people want, have or will say in terms of quality.

It's sad ...

Tonyaod (824 posts) • 0

@Dudeson

I'm not trying to revolutionize anything, if I wanted to call people out I would've used names instead of aliases.

Regarding anonymity, I only mentioned to counter a specific attack on my character. For a whistle blower anonymity is a great tool, however, it becomes cowardice when used for personal attacks. And that's why I refrain in my posts.

Please define snooping? How is looking at easily accessible information snooping or creepy? Am I snooping when I lookup the name of a CEO of a corporation? You may not agree with my actions but it does not necessarily equate creepy. And besides, it doesn't really matter to me what you personally think anyway.

Numbers are objective but conclusion are subjective, that's why I didn't give any. It may not mean anything to you but it may mean something to some one else. Data and statistics are the foundation of science. It is what it is, no more no less.

It is sad that one would comment on something that they admittedly said means nothing.

And one last thing: lighten up! It was a tongue in cheek post, why take everything so seriously? Now, if you do wish to engage me in a discussion over the merits of this thread then I would be more than happy to oblige as long as it remains civil and respectful. Thank you

The Dudeson's (1106 posts) • 0

@Tonyaod
First, then you data has to mean something. As i said the no. of posts doesn't mean anything, except at best excessive spare time.

Being anonymous is helpful for all of us because we can share an opiniin without harm. About jobs, lifestyle etc.

But, well you didn't look up a CEO, you were
looking up, posting and comparing a peer member. And that is cowardice,too. If you can't bring up a reasonable argument, then just let it be.
I don't know if it's right or wrong but i know it is creepy, if it's public data or not and if you care or not.

Related forum threads

Login to post

This thread is locked.