At 11/7/04 03:32 PM, Denvish wrote: Hmmm. I feel your pain. 8)
Bet you're getting more pissed off with these lists by the week... =)

Actually, I'm not feeling any anger. Mild irritation, yes. It's just something that I need to catch in the act myself so I can keep my program from having problems with it in the future. If anybody can get the "server extreme stress" message and quote it exactly, word for word in this thread for me, I would love them forever and ever for it.

I have seen it a few times in the past week or so. It usually only lasts for <5 minutes. If I see it again, I'll capture the text & page source & email it to you. I don't want you love for ever and ever in return, though, thanks, I'd rather have a nice cake or something.

I would bet money I have posted word for word the under extream load msg. I am surpirsed the time you chose to run your program. TRhe sever was still busy at that time.

At 11/7/04 03:56 PM, Denvish wrote: I have seen it a few times in the past week or so. It usually only lasts for <5 minutes. If I see it again, I'll capture the text & page source & email it to you. I don't want you love for ever and ever in return, though, thanks, I'd rather have a nice cake or something.

Aw, but I can't send a cake through the Internet...

At 11/7/04 03:58 PM, ramagi wrote: I would bet money I have posted word for word the under extream load msg. I am surpirsed the time you chose to run your program. TRhe sever was still busy at that time.

Yeah, and it was a rather short period of time, too. It took about 4 hours to do the update, so (30000 / 1026590) * 240 minutes = about 7 minutes of down-time. Okay, maybe it wasn't that short. Still weird, though. If I use that same estimate to figure out the time, I'd say it happened around 2:50 AM (Eastern). Weird.

At 11/7/04 05:36 AM, ShittyKitty wrote: * We had a second person get more than 6 blam/saves per hour! MPA just barely made it over the threshold with 6.028 b/p's per hour, or 458 points since Wednesday. Congrats!

Nice work MPA =)

At 11/7/04 10:50 AM, YoinK_VineS wrote: Does anybody know why the day after Christmas is called "D0GMA Day"???

Mouse over that day on the chart and it shall be revealed ... unless you're using IE (which doesn't understand it's own code ) so you'll have to View Source to work it out.

At 11/7/04 07:40 PM, D0GMA wrote: Mouse over that day on the chart and it shall be revealed ... unless you're using IE (which doesn't understand it's own code ) so you'll have to View Source to work it out.

Heh, nice tooltip. Bad time of year to have a bday though (my mum's is on xmas day), everybody gives you a 'joint' present...

At 11/7/04 08:00 PM, Denvish wrote:

Heh, nice tooltip. Bad time of year to have a bday though (my mum's is on xmas day), everybody gives you a 'joint' present...

Actually, it's a great time of year ... providing you are mercenary enough in the way you look at the quality of what you're opening versus the quantity. Since it's also a single present, people tend to feel guilty about that and notch up their spending a bit, so the value of it typically more than the combined value of presents you would have received had your B-Day been some other time of the year.

I've asked around and people with similar birthdays have the same things happen ... it's just that some of them think your way until they talk to me ;) Instead of a couple of Barbies (~$20), they get some entire Barbie play set and the Barbies (~$80). Instead of some Matchbox cars (~$10), they get an entire Matchbox box play set along with the cars (~$60). Instead of a computer game and some books on separated dates (~$50), I get a Pocket PC (~$250)... things like that happen every year. Everyone thinks we're screwed on presents, which just feeds into us getting better ones .

Well, I've uploaded the working version of the Sunday, November 7, 2004 update of the NG Total Listing.

Stupid fucking FTP servers gave me a ton of trouble with this one. Deciding to stop halfway through an upload, going at a snail's pace, and other general fuck-ups. I hate FTP servers. Damned things.

A few notes:

* The missing profiles from the bad update I posted earlier are back. Everything is working fine.
* The Blam/Save Lifetime list is working correctly now. No more "Rank Change" column adjustments.
* Something happened that I was afraid would happen: When I ran this update, MPA fell from just above 6 b/p's per hour to 5.554. Since this should not have happened, I feel that it's only right to give MPA back his star. So it has been done. (If you don't agree, tough shit, my list.)

http://ngtotallist.tk

*goes and takes out his anger and frustration on pillows*

At 11/7/04 09:03 PM, ShittyKitty wrote: * Something happened that I was afraid would happen: When I ran this update, MPA fell from just above 6 b/p's per hour to 5.554. Since this should not have happened, I feel that it's only right to give MPA back his star. So it has been done. (If you don't agree, tough shit, my list.)

Well quite a few others peoples rates changed on that list too. I don't think anyoen should be punished for a simple program issue. A few people fell in each color range. I'm just gald that you got the problem fixed.

Well it's good to see that it's all sorted out, I probably would have just said oh well I'll fix it next update, but you're way too dedicated for that... much thanks =P ... Woohoo for blue text... =D

It seems like there is something funny going on with the estimated days till rank up.

At 11/7/04 10:14 PM, BeFell wrote: It seems like there is something funny going on with the estimated days till rank up.

Ah, crud, I left the wrong data in the backup for that column. Oops. Please disregard the "est. days til rank-up" column. It'll be correct on Wednesday.

At 11/7/04 10:19 PM, ShittyKitty wrote:

At 11/7/04 10:14 PM, BeFell wrote: It seems like there is something funny going on with the estimated days till rank up.

Ah, crud, I left the wrong data in the backup for that column. Oops. Please disregard the "est. days til rank-up" column. It'll be correct on Wednesday.

No big deal, thanks for the update.=)

At 11/7/04 07:40 PM, D0GMA wrote: Mouse over that day on the chart and it shall be revealed ... unless you're using IE (which doesn't understand it's own code ) so you'll have to View Source to work it out.

whoa, so your b-day is the day after Jesus's b-day. how nice! It must be very difficult to forget your b-day.

Shittkitty, hehe i love the new update, the old one had me behind MACRUS in reviews, but now i'm ahead of him. I hope MACRUS isn't mad at me. :D

At 11/7/04 11:34 PM, YoinK_VineS wrote:
whoa, so your b-day is the day after Jesus's b-day. how nice! It must be very difficult to forget your b-day.

Very hard to forget yes, but I'm actualy ~three months from Jesus' b-day. It's kind of like we celebrate "President's Day." There's an actual date to celebrate, but it's sheer luck if any of them were actually born on the day we celebrate it.

Q: If you worship an outlawed religion, when's the best time to celebrate?
A: When even the cops are drunk.

Ever wonder where "the Twelve days of Christmas," came from? The Jovian festival in the Roman Empire, celebrating the return of the sun and the start of the new year, started on the winter equinox and lasted 12 days. By day 4, even "the cops" were drunk.

At 11/7/04 11:34 PM, YoinK_VineS wrote: Shittkitty, hehe i love the new update, the old one had me behind MACRUS in reviews, but now i'm ahead of him. I hope MACRUS isn't mad at me. :D

wrong j00 4r3.
i am currently hating you atm :P hahah.
well, my end of year exams start in 3 days...
and guess how much study i've done for them.
yes, you all guessed it, about this much *holds up zero shape with hand*. eh, im gona try for at LEAST an hour a night now... boy its gona be hard...
THX TWO SK FOUR T3H UPDAYAT!

Thanks for the update SK looks like im closing in on the top 500 b/p, yaaay : ) .

At 11/8/04 12:56 AM, M-A-R-C-U-S wrote:
wrong j00 4r3.
i am currently hating you atm :P hahah.
well, my end of year exams start in 3 days...
and guess how much study i've done for them.
yes, you all guessed it, about this much *holds up zero shape with hand*. eh, im gona try for at LEAST an hour a night now... boy its gona be hard...

Well sounds like you are going to have loads of fun. Well good luck to you on those.

At 11/2/04 12:19 AM, ramagi wrote:

At 11/1/04 07:38 PM, gfoxcook wrote: So yeah, 29th kinda bites considering she's #2... and that when the current system began, she was #1 in pure final-vote blams... before the first save on NG was gained.

Accually had such a list done the day before this current sytem I was tied at the top of the blam list. My avg would of been #2 on the list cause the person who was tied with me had a lower sign up date.

Ah. So Sizzler has a lower PID# and woulda won the bppd average battle.

Yeah, but compared to how easy points are to get now, as you've often reminded people, people hardly had any blams at all back in those days. Weren't there like 2 people over 1000 blams?

Yep there were 2. Sizzler and me both with 1337, Thejoe and Junon had 800 some.

Hooray! I remember my NG b/p history so well!

Yeah, and I don't even make the top 50. seventy-fucking-nine. Seventy-fucking-nine. ;_;

And now I've fallen to the 80s, BTW... even though my rankchange column says "+5" in it. Mind explaining that one, ShitKit? O_o

Still, it's an interesting list, even if SK doesn't find a fairer way to make it from when the system started... instead of when the profile system started. 1999 /= 2002.

Scary thought my avg gone from 2.3 two years ago to what SK list showed it at.

All our averages would be boosted quite nicely. Let's just say, for the hell of it, that the current b/p system is.... 366 + 365 + 20 days old. I think that's a fair estimate... I just hit 46,000 b/p...

46000 / 751 = 61.25 bppd <--- my true average

versus...

26.xx on SK's list, which averages my bppd FOR OVER TWO YEARS BEFORE THE B/P SYSTEM WAS CREATED!!!! (sob)

hmph.

At 11/2/04 12:58 AM, ShittyKitty wrote: Ay caramba, you people had a field day with this concept, didn't you? Well, interestingly enough, out of the tens of thousands of profiles, there's only one person who has less than 200 experience, but enough b/p's to have over 2.00 VP. What, you wanted to know who? Sheesh, you want everything handed to you on a silver platter, no? Heh, without further ado: Zfire (user #697734). He's got 80 experience, but he's an Elite Guard Private.

Well, it wouldn't have been THAT hard to find had I really wanted to. Thanks for that, though. And hey, 80 exp, eh?

At 11/1/04 10:48 PM, gfoxcook wrote: Yep, police officer. If both you and I came up with that off the top of our heads, it's probably accurate. Now of course that's assuming the person has 90 exp. They might have less. They might have stalled at 80 exp, or even less. What about Crimson_Edge or whatever? The dude with 40 exp? I dunno what his b/p rank is, but someone like him who doesn't want to leave level 1 or level 2, and thus remains under 100 exp... but doesn't mind getting b/p... could easily get a VP over 2.00.

HA HA! "They might have stalled at 80 exp"

I = TEH WINNAR! #;-}>

hmm crimson_edge *checks nope 1.40, but of course he's a level one still so that makes sense, but i guess i don't know who has it, it'd be the weirdest thing though, i mean you can get 90 XP i 4 or 5 days, and then he gets all those points, then NOTHING, all gone ... seems just too weird, but i guess the doesn't want to leave 1 or 2 theory may work, but i know i'd've never done it :\

Crimson_Edge is still citizen. He could boost his VP by hitting safety patrol... that's the only way he can boost his VP, in fact, since he's staying put at 40 exp.

At 11/2/04 11:33 PM, ramagi wrote: That is interesting. I would think if they are voting they would lcik the deposit linlk. I mean it be one thign if they wern't votign at all, but to vote and not cclick that depossit link. unthinkable.

Well, that's exactly what Crimson_Edge does. He's been at 40/50 exp for a loooong time, but he has 86 b/p. He's been avoiding the deposit link EVERY time he votes on any movies (which might be a rare occasion for all I know). He is simply teh BBS posting machine (he'll probably pass me in total posts in a few more weeks).

At 11/8/04 09:13 PM, gfoxcook wrote: And now I've fallen to the 80s, BTW... even though my rankchange column says "+5" in it. Mind explaining that one, ShitKit? O_o

ZenWeasel 92 -23
bear1229 102 -22
Black_Widow_2004 110 -35
werdnanor 112 -59

Couldn't find the other one.....

Well, it wouldn't have been THAT hard to find had I really wanted to. Thanks for that, though. And hey, 80 exp, eh?

Yeah, but it was easier for me to find it; all I had to do was load the EXP and VP profile lists into a differencing program. :-D

At 11/3/04 07:47 PM, ShittyKitty wrote: A new poll on the website: "Should I add Blam and Save Ratio lists?" This would be two lists, one for blams/saves and one for saves/blams. I know that D0GMA has these already, but they're only top 50, if I'm not mistaken. Anywho, I just thought I'd throw that out there.

Yes, only top 50...

but why bother making save/blam and blam/save ratio lists past 50 if you're not going to also make pure blam and pure save lists, as well?

IOW, if you're going to make the ratio lists, you might as well make a Total Saves List and a Total Blams List as well.

Those two lists would help make my life a WHOLE lot easier with regard to the pentalist, BTW... because I could base who I'm tracking for 10k blams and 10k saves off of them... instead of hunting through the 50-200 region of Dogma's EGRL for people nearing 10k blams or saves... (that method's a lot harder, obviously).

At 11/7/04 12:19 PM, IamNone wrote: nice list sk, but it's a pity you forgot me.

Hmmm...

At 11/7/04 01:49 PM, Pure_Greatness wrote: I'm beginning to think I'm just blind, but as far as I can see I'm not listed... on any of the lists.

Double hmmm...

At 11/7/04 03:24 PM, ShittyKitty wrote: If your profile was between numbers 717877 and 747311, then you were inadvertently left off of the lists. I am re-doing the update right now using data from the last update. So...it'll just be like I ran the Sunday update later than usual.

Ah HA!!!

IamNone = 724870
Pure_Greatness = 744377

DING DING DING. We have answer. Make your time.

At 11/7/04 10:19 PM, ShittyKitty wrote:

At 11/7/04 10:14 PM, BeFell wrote: It seems like there is something funny going on with the estimated days till rank up.

Ah, crud, I left the wrong data in the backup for that column. Oops. Please disregard the "est. days til rank-up" column. It'll be correct on Wednesday.

Speaking of estimated days until rankup... why on earth do some people have data in that column and others don't? I noticed most of the current EG Generals had no estimate in that column yesterday... despite the fact that they DO have a >0 bpph amount... and yet one of the EGGs... DID have an estimate. MPA, I think.

Whatever, it just seems really weird and arbitrary.

At 11/8/04 12:14 AM, D0GMA wrote: Ever wonder where "the Twelve days of Christmas," came from? The Jovian festival in the Roman Empire, celebrating the return of the sun and the start of the new year, started on the winter equinox and lasted 12 days. By day 4, even "the cops" were drunk.

Well, okay... but then why the relationship between the 12 days of Christmas and Three Kings Day?

i.e. that January 6th = the Feast of Epiphany/Adoration of the Magi/Manifestation of God/Caspar, Melchior, and Balthazar's Mega Party Disco Day.

At 11/8/04 09:27 PM, ShittyKitty wrote:

At 11/8/04 09:13 PM, gfoxcook wrote: And now I've fallen to the 80s, BTW... even though my rankchange column says "+5" in it. Mind explaining that one, ShitKit? O_o

ZenWeasel 92 -23
bear1229 102 -22
Black_Widow_2004 110 -35
werdnanor 112 -59

Couldn't find the other one.....

Um... no, what I was asking is for an explanation of how my line from the 10/31 BP Lifetime list:

gfoxcook 79 45342 Elite Guard Supreme Commander 1716 26.42

and this line from the 11/07 BP Lifetime list:

gfoxcook 82 +5 45912 Elite Guard Supreme Commander 1724 26.63

... can possibly be compatible?

IOW, I fell 3 spots, but +5 indicates I ROSE 3 spots. How do you explain THAT, sir? ;_;

At 11/8/04 09:34 PM, gfoxcook wrote: Speaking of estimated days until rankup... why on earth do some people have data in that column and others don't? I noticed most of the current EG Generals had no estimate in that column yesterday... despite the fact that they DO have a >0 bpph amount... and yet one of the EGGs... DID have an estimate. MPA, I think.

From my website:

Why don't I have a number in the "Est. Days Til Rank-Up" column of the Blam/Protect list?
All of the following must be true in order for you to have a number in this column:
* You must have been listed last week
* You must have gotten at least 1 blam/protect point over the last week
* You must be able to rank up (in other words, Elite Guard Supreme Commanders will always have an infinity symbol: ¥)
* Your estimated days must be less than 400 (i.e. no slow people will have numbers)

Um... no, what I was asking is for an explanation of how my line from the 10/31 BP Lifetime list:

gfoxcook 79 45342 Elite Guard Supreme Commander 1716 26.42

and this line from the 11/07 BP Lifetime list:

gfoxcook 82 +5 45912 Elite Guard Supreme Commander 1724 26.63

... can possibly be compatible?

Hrm. Well, the "rank change" problems I was having might have something to do with that. To be perfectly honest, that 11/7 update was a great big mess. Wait another update or two, it should start working correctly again.

IOW, I fell 3 spots, but +5 indicates I ROSE 3 spots. How do you explain THAT, sir? ;_;

You're being marked as rising in rank, and you're complaining?!? :-P

At 11/8/04 10:05 PM, ShittyKitty wrote: From my website:

Why don't I have a number in the "Est. Days Til Rank-Up" column of the Blam/Protect list?

Heh. Whoops. I HAVE read most of your site and the FAQ type stuff, BTW. I guess it just skipped my mind to check that area.

All of the following must be true in order for you to have a number in this column:
* You must have been listed last week

Check for all the people I was curious about...

* You must have gotten at least 1 blam/protect point over the last week

Check.

* You must be able to rank up (in other words, Elite Guard Supreme Commanders will always have an infinity symbol: ¥)

Check.

* Your estimated days must be less than 400 (i.e. no slow people will have numbers)

Ahh... that'd be it, then. They didn't look like they were THAT slow, but I guess they were.

gfoxcook 79 45342 Elite Guard Supreme Commander 1716 26.42

gfoxcook 82 +5 45912 Elite Guard Supreme Commander 1724 26.63

Hrm. Well, the "rank change" problems I was having might have something to do with that. To be perfectly honest, that 11/7 update was a great big mess. Wait another update or two, it should start working correctly again.

Okay.

IOW, I fell 3 spots, but +5 indicates I ROSE 3 spots. How do you explain THAT, sir? ;_;

You're being marked as rising in rank, and you're complaining?!? :-P

If you wanted to stay in the top 100 of a list, let's just say... and you were ranked #50.... okay?

And then next week, the list was updated... and you were #90 on the list... but it said you rose 10 spots on the list...

would the +10 make you happy? When the reality of the situation is... you're about to get bumped out of the top 100, whatever the rankchange column says?

So, if that doesn't tell you why I'm complaining, then I'll just simply say that my rankchange could say +100... but the simple facts are that I was in the 70s a week ago, and now I'm in the 80s. That ain't progress. And that's despite my bppd average RISING, BTW. I had a good week, and yet I lost 3 spots on this list. ;_;

Are you going to ever consider changing the list (or making an alternate one) where all signups prior to October 2002 don't get penalised for having an account older than the b/p system, BTW?

I'd really prefer to have a more accurate 61 bppd... instead of the current flawed 26 bppd. #;-}>

At 11/8/04 10:25 PM, gfoxcook wrote: Are you going to ever consider changing the list (or making an alternate one) where all signups prior to October 2002 don't get penalised for having an account older than the b/p system, BTW?

I'd really prefer to have a more accurate 61 bppd... instead of the current flawed 26 bppd. #;-}>

Oy. Alright, I've gotten enough complaints about this thing, so I've set the maximum sign-up date to October 14, 2002 (thanks to Ramagi for the exact date). I'm testing the program right now to make sure I didn't fudge the code. Since I'm doing this, I've scrapped the old BSL ranks. So, no numbers in the "Rank Change" column on Wednesday; we're starting over from scratch.

At 11/8/04 10:33 PM, ShittyKitty wrote:

At 11/8/04 10:25 PM, gfoxcook wrote: Are you going to ever consider changing the list (or making an alternate one) where all signups prior to October 2002 don't get penalised for having an account older than the b/p system, BTW?

I'd really prefer to have a more accurate 61 bppd... instead of the current flawed 26 bppd. #;-}>

Oy. Alright, I've gotten enough complaints about this thing, so I've set the maximum sign-up date to October 14, 2002 (thanks to Ramagi for the exact date). I'm testing the program right now to make sure I didn't fudge the code. Since I'm doing this, I've scrapped the old BSL ranks. So, no numbers in the "Rank Change" column on Wednesday; we're starting over from scratch.

WOOO HOOOOO!!!!!

BTW, I think you'd basically gotten 3 complaints from me, 1 or 2 from ramagi, and 1 from Dogma regarding ramagi's ranking or something... so... I'm glad my 3rd complaint did the trick. #;-}>

YOU ARE NOW OFFICIALLY MY HERO, MAN!!!!

oh wait, you have been since you released NG Lister...

hmmm...

YOU ARE NOW OFFICIALLY MY HERO-GOD, MAN!!!!

NO problem providing the exact date. I didn't really complain, I just point out the results before they were made.

leik ogm !

m i wineng ?

Welcome to the Wednesday, November 10, 2004 update of the NG Total Listing

A few notes:

* The Blam/Save Lifetime list has been modified so that the maximum sign-up date is October 14, 2002. This was done to reflect the date on which the current blam/save system was started.
* Due to a lack of change in the rankings, I'm changing the Reviews list from bi-weekly to weekly. Also, it's adding 75% more profiles to the Wednesday updates, making them really slow.
* I finally got over 3 b/p's per hour! Yay!!

http://ngtotallist.tk

At 11/10/04 03:53 PM, ShittyKitty wrote: Welcome to the Wednesday, November 10, 2004 update of the NG Total Listing
* I finally got over 3 b/p's per hour! Yay!!

Grats ShitKit : ) .
----
Thanks for the great update, anyway, i just broke into the top 500 b/p : ) but it looks like no many inactives ahead so that sucks. Thanks again SK-