 | | Re: top poster statistics
|
|
(...) That list used incorrect values since Dan posted two versions of the 2001 list. Here's the correct one: (URL) Best regards, /Tobbe (URL) (remove SPAM when e-mailing) (22 years ago, 31-Oct-03, to lugnet.people)
|
| |
| | Re: top poster statistics
|
|
(...) This is the list for 2003 (meaning: the list that gives stats for 2002) timj (22 years ago, 30-Oct-03, to lugnet.general, lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: top poster statistics
|
|
(...) I'll second that, mind you how do you find time to do any Lego-ing, I know I spend far too much of my available time on Lugnet and I'm not on it nearly as much as you seem be (Lar) Tim (22 years ago, 30-Oct-03, to lugnet.people)
|
| |
| | Re: top poster statistics
|
|
Thanks, I should of thought of searching using the word frequency but I would never have thought of noisemakers as a search term tim (22 years ago, 30-Oct-03, to lugnet.general, lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: top poster statistics
|
|
(...) I had all the news articles in the thread in a linear view. I seen this near the bottom: (URL) shows 2001 and 2002 postings and the differential. I hope that helps. Ben M. (22 years ago, 30-Oct-03, to lugnet.people)
|
