Inactive Ranks

Just a question, how long do inactive accounts stay on this list:


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1-100 101-200 201-300 301-400 401-500 501-600 601-700 701-800 801-900 901-1000 1001-1100 1101-1200

Rank Icons Name WU'S Fri Thur Wed Tues Mon Sun Sat Total
501 TheXrGuy 138 Inactive 0
502 RainMaQer 137 Inactive 0
503 Bruiser on new upgrade now PIII800e@920mhz and p100 tank there goes the average 135 Inactive 0
504 madagent00 133 Inactive 0
505 sfaok 133 Inactive 0
506 cybergump 132 Inactive 0
507 Yosk 132 Inactive 0
508 HYDRO 131 Inactive 0
509 mspxihuo 131 Inactive 0
510 Gresyth (#2) 131 Inactive 0
511 hardass 131 Inactive 0
512 Fuzzy 700e @ 910 130 Inactive 0
513 Qualtran 130 Inactive 0
514 craigiz1 130 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 11
515 Demont 130 3 6 6 7 5 7 6 40
516 Martin Jones 128 Inactive 0
517 Ryan Alexander 128 Inactive 0
518 r1ngo 128 Inactive 0
519 JKooL 126 4 1 6 6 7 7 31
520 Johnny Mac (cA2 600E @ 806) 123 Inactive 0


Maybe a new board for the most w/u completed

I bet a lot of us would like to see all of the inactives off the list, it would let us climb the ladder a lot faster.

The ladder so to speak is not dictated by the stats team, but instead by the official Berkeley team roster. We could potentially not list inactive members on our own web site, but your team rank is not going to change unless you move up on your own by means of work unit output. It would get to be pretty complicated to keep two separate team rosters. What's more, if we removed those people from the team we lose any work units they've contributed. So, while it may not be pretty as you cruise past all of the stalled crunchers, rest assured if you're producing work units you'll be zooming up the ladder pretty fast - especially considering the vast majority of the members 500 and up are not crunching.

Thanks for the info. I'll drop the post.

Won't let me drop it, Ill try later today.

Why drop it - I'm sure other people have the same question.

OK it stays

Recent Discussion

If I might add one other thing to this discussion, recently the team members had an open discussion concerning this matter and one over-riding point seemed to be on everyone's mind. That point was whether a member is at present inactive or not, if he or she had at some point contributed to the team's WU total, then they deserved to be acknowledged for that contribution by being shown in the stats. Also there are many members who have stopped crunching SETI in order to help out the "Folding Team" in their efforts or other things, who full well intend to rejoin our team in the future, and their account and stats with this team will be there waiting for them upon their return.

In both of the cases I have stated I believe the individual has earned and deserves the right of continued representation in our stats. I do think it is an important question that needs to be asked and answered occasionally, so that newer members can understand that as a team we respect and honor every persons contribution to the team no matter how large or small.

SkyHook

I under stand about stopping for while to go and do some other things, I didn't mean to drop the inactive, just move them to a different board.

I just started folding today with a PIII 800, running both Seti and Folding on it, I'll see how it goes.

Wolverez said:

I bet a lot of us would like to see all of the inactives off the list, it would let us climb the ladder a lot faster.

Click to expand...

The climb up the ladder would be a lot slower. If everyone is active, they keep moving forward as you do, making the climb slower. Picking off inactives gives you the ability to shoot for top rank jumper.

That is true, but, it won't look like all of the rats are jumping ship, with all of inactives off the boards.

More like top fad jumper - all those inactive people that said "woa that's cool" signed up, joined a team, and then forgot about it

maybe instead of "top 100 movers and shakers" change it to just to "movers and shakers", and then just have the total WU's of that week for everyone who completed at least 1. (list them in order from most to least of course). that way we would have a list of who was active that week... and who was the most active.

hey, just noticed i got a 5th star, cool

[/thread hack]

Demont said:

maybe instead of "top 100 movers and shakers" change it to just to "movers and shakers", and then just have the total WU's of that week for everyone who completed at least 1. (list them in order from most to least of course). that way we would have a list of who was active that week... and who was the most active.

Click to expand...

The Top 100 movers and shakers is a great board, everyone is active on it, it's the boards for 0-100, 101-200 and so on.

Good for you (Demont), a new GOLD STAR

Recent Additions

Well there again up until just a couple of months ago, we had the stats pages and that was the extent of it. Then Basher slowly started introducing new things, like the name colors for various production levels, and the torch icons, and lastly the "Top 100 Movers & Shakers" page. There is also the "Gold Coat" & "Blue Coat". All these things are meant as forms of recognition for a members efforts and to try to spur new interest in those who's drive may be waning a bit. But I must still respectfully disagree with any idea of segragating the "inactives" to another list. I view those as testaments to fallen comrades. More so now that I am up into some fairly serious numbers(at least by my standards), but when I overtake and pass an inactive, I wonder what circumstances caused someone who had invested so much to get this far to abandon their effort. That is purely a personal thing and I don't expect anyone else to understand it, but it is one man's opinion.

SkyHook

Wolverez said:

The Top 100 movers and shakers is a great board, everyone is active on it, it's the boards for 0-100, 101-200 and so on.

Good for you, a new GOLD STAR

Click to expand...

top 100 movers and shakers is different than the normal 1-1000 daily stats... it just has the top 100 crunchers for the week right? (total WU's crunched that week only)

Top 100

Actually the Top 100 page does vary day to day according to daily production and how it effect the weekly total. Yesterday I might have been ranked 35 on the top 100 and if I had a good day today I might move up to 31 or whatever. But there are daily adjustments in the rankings of that page.

SkyHook

Re: Recent Additions

SkyHook said:

Well there again up until just a couple of months ago, we had the stats pages and that was the extent of it. Then Basher slowly started introducing new things, like the name colors for various production levels, and the torch icons, and lastly the "Top 100 Movers & Shakers" page. There is also the "Gold Coat" & "Blue Coat". All these things are meant as forms of recognition for a members efforts and to try to spur new interest in those who's drive may be waning a bit. But I must still respectfully disagree with any idea of segragating the "inactives" to another list. I view those as testaments to fallen comrades. More so now that I am up into some fairly serious numbers(at least by my standards), but when I overtake and pass an inactive, I wonder what circumstances caused someone who had invested so much to get this far to abandon their effort. That is purely a personal thing and I don't expect anyone else to understand it, but it is one man's opinion.

SkyHook

Click to expand...

ok I understand where you're coming from... but my idea was to keep the list the way it is now, but just change the movers and shakers list to reflect ALL active members, rather than just the top 100 active members... this is more seggregating the active people not the "fallen commrades" seggregation is an ugly word for it, its nothing different than other stats anyways.

Re: Top 100

SkyHook said:

Actually the Top 100 page does vary day to day according to daily production and how it effect the weekly total. Yesterday I might have been ranked 35 on the top 100 and if I had a good day today I might move up to 31 or whatever. But there are daily adjustments in the rankings of that page.

SkyHook

Click to expand...

oh ok i see now.

Maybe a Bad Choice

"Segragation" may have been a bad choice of words, and certainly was not meant in an overly negitive way. My apologies to anyone I offended by my comment.

SkyHook

Re: Maybe a Bad Choice

SkyHook said:

"Segragation" may have been a bad choice of words, and certainly was not meant in an overly negitive way. My apologies to anyone I offended by my comment.

SkyHook

Click to expand...

don't worry about it man, anyone who gets offended by just a word needs to get a head check. it made sense to say it in the context you did, i was just referring to myself using it.