Subject:
|
Re: Posting frequency?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.people
|
Date:
|
Thu, 2 Jan 2003 04:12:23 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
5657 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.people, Kerry Raymond writes:
> I think what we can safely conclude from this thread is that:
>
> 1) there are lies, damned lies and statistics (I apparently have posted 287,
> 321 or 481 times in 2002)
Indeed there are. The real fun comes when you start treating the first two
as the third. (Not to be confused with treating the third as either of the
first two of course :-) ).
I think that this thread must be the longest (chronologically) on LUGNET,
having continued for a number of years... (but this record - if it is one -
could be easily broken at any moment).
For instance, regarding Kerry's posts:
287 was for 2000 (http://news.lugnet.com/people/?n=1396)
321 was for 2001 (http://news.lugnet.com/people/?n=2817) (replacing the
earlier of 5 posts for 2001 http://news.lugnet.com/people/?n=2809)
and
481 was for 2002 (http://news.lugnet.com/people/?n=3410)
> 2) no matter how you caculate it, Larry posted most :-)
>
> 3) people need to learn to trim the quoted original message!
Also, starting new threads for what is (more or less) a new topic (eg 'Top
Noisemakers for 2000', 'top Noisemakers for 2001' etc) wouldn't hurt either.
Cheers
Richie
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Posting frequency?
|
| I think what we can safely conclude from this thread is that: 1) there are lies, damned lies and statistics (I apparently have posted 287, 321 or 481 times in 2002) 2) no matter how you caculate it, Larry posted most :-) 3) people need to learn to (...) (22 years ago, 2-Jan-03, to lugnet.people)
|
114 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
