I didnt know people kept track of this sort of thing. I kinda blammed stuff every now and then and didnt really notice how many points I had until one day I looked at my profile and thought, hey, thats not too bad! Of course, I only have 750 points total. Then I see this list and Im like oh damn. Long way to go.

At 9/21/03 12:52 AM, CoopCooper wrote: I didnt know people kept track of this sort of thing. I kinda blammed stuff every now and then and didnt really notice how many points I had until one day I looked at my profile and thought, hey, thats not too bad! Of course, I only have 750 points total. Then I see this list and Im like oh damn. Long way to go.

actually, you've got 829 now... and 829 compared to ramagi's 32713ish is actually not so bad when you compare it to your 11 posts to format's 12,000ish, percentage wise (you're at 2.5% of the blam/protect leader's points, but only at 0.09% of the BBS posting leader's posts... so cheer up! #;-}>).

blammer rank, number, name -- as of 07/26/2003 at 05:36 CDT

blammer rank, number, name -- as of 07/28/2003 at 03:21 CDT

blammer rank, number, name -- as of 08/02/2003 at 02:42 CDT

blammer rank, number, name -- as of 08/08/2003 at 15:21 CDT

blammer rank, number, name -- as of 08/15/2003 at 05:45 CDT

blammer rank, number, name -- as of 08/21/2003 at 09:36 CDT

blammer rank, number, name -- as of 08/28/2003 at 18:45 CDT

blammer rank, number, name -- as of 09/02/2003 at 23:45 CDT

blammer rank, number, name -- as of 09/15/2003 at 22:36 CDT

blammer rank, number, name -- as of 09/22/2003 at 05:55 CDT
01 20,563 *** ramagi
02 20,172 *** TheJoe324
03 18,900 *** fixit
04 15,386 *** Crono-
05 15,346 *** RyoHahn
06 13,987 *** thisisasignin
07 12,982 *** NemesisM66
08 11,035 *** Stormwarden
09 9,353 *** GridLock
10 8,800 *** gfoxcook
11 8,714 *** Recon_Rebel
12 8,272 *** D0GMA
13 7,905 *** DrMSM
14 7,827 *** Bila
15 7,180 *** helldoll81
16 7,103 courtday
17 7,089 *** poxpower
18 7,087 *** Newgrundling
19 6,860 *** XkwiziTOnE
20 6,803 *** HAQnSPITT
21 6,780 nimmer
22 6,779 *** chaotic1
23 6,749 *** Captain_Bob
24 6,553 AdrenalineMJ
25 6,353 *** alexsmolik
26 6,335 Syme
27 6,316 *** stafffighter
28 5,759 *** Mr_Chuckles
29 5,659 *** HeRetiK
30 5,595 *** Denvish
31 5,595 *** RageVI
32 5,427 *** staphita
33 5,405 GuineVir
34 5,359 *** vuorimies
35 5,320 *** leeboy105
36 5,236 *** b33r53x
37 5,179 *** _lightning_
38 5,160 Hice
39 5,154 Nostrant
40 4,947 DarkJaymz
41 4,789 Drimarki
42 4,729 *** Dark00Stir-fry
43 4,642 *** YoinK
44 4,606 *** kevr1
45 4,566 innphernoe
46 4,393 FlameClock
47 4,299 *** biteme2514
48 4,267 skum001
49 3,905 Narcissus
50 3,872 dl_Monk

Congrats to:

chaotic1 on his promotion to Elite Guard First Lieutenant (20th)

since the last update of the list.

Welcome to:

no one.

Farewell to:

no one.

DANGER ZONE:

(yawn) ... no danger here. Kinda sad, too. The blams list is supposed to be more active than the saves list, but... eh.

Greg's Notes:

Well, after many many months of the same exact format (aside from the addition of the ***s to indicate being on both lists that was introduced when the second list was introduced), I've decided to try out something new. While the update above this addendum is the same as usual, there will be an additional update BELOW this post. Mostly due to lightning's mentions of wanting to know total b/p points along with the blamcount or savecount, and also because of the recent discussions of %ages.

The new format features two columns of ranks, both this update's and last update's. I thought about doing a +/- thing after the name like Dogma does, but it would mean more work for me. The way it is now, all I have to do is copy the column in excel after I reorder the list but before I manually change the numbers of those who rose/fell spots on the list, paste that right next to the actual 1-50 order and there ya go. Please note that this new column will pretty much eliminate the need for me to sum up the action on the list in this section of the addendum, but I may still cover any major highlights.

It also features, as I pretty much revealed above, the save-to-blam and blam-to-save percentages for every member of the saviors and blammers list respectively. The percentage is calculated by dividing the saves by the blams or the blams by the saves and multiplying by 100, NOT by dividing saves or blams by the total b/p. Please remember this before asking why the %s here are different than those Dogma listed a month ago. I could reformat to do it that way, but I've had it this way since I made the excel file back in March and I'd rather not change it.

On the blammers list, everyone is pretty much >100% but <1000%, so 3 digits reign. On the saviors list, however, many are <100% and thus 2 digits, many are >100% and thus 3 digits, and some... (i.e. toocool100) are 4 digits to the left of the decimal point, and thus.... the list may look a little less aligned. We'll see if it looks okay.

And finally, it features the total blams and saves of each member. I could have included the blams (on the saves list) and the saves (on the blams list), but I felt it would be redundant to the EXTREME, and also even more confusing.

So anyway, I give the peoples what they be wanting. Now it's your turn: tell me if you like the new way (Whether in actuality or in principle), and if you want to, give advice on making it look better if you feel you've noticed something no one else has. But mostly:

PLEASE VOTE whether you want it to stay the way it always has been or change to this new (more informative but busier-looking) format. THANK YOU!

You may check out the most recent Top 50 Protectors List by clicking the link I just posted. Enjoy comparing the lists to each other and to the Top 50 Combined B/P List. People on both the Top 50 Blammers List and the Top 50 Protectors List are denoted with ***.

blammer rank / previous rank / blams / blam-to-save % / total b/p / name -- as of 09/22/2003 at 05:55 CDT
01 01 20,563 168.78% 32,746 *** ramagi
02 02 20,172 303.11% 26,827 *** TheJoe324
03 03 18,900 190.68% 28,812 *** fixit
04 05 15,386 273.14% 21,019 *** Crono-
05 04 15,346 138.92% 26,393 *** RyoHahn
06 06 13,987 165.98% 22,414 *** thisisasignin
07 07 12,982 267.50% 17,835 *** NemesisM66
08 08 11,035 208.40% 16,330 *** Stormwarden
09 09 9,353 259.45% 12,958 *** GridLock
10 10 8,800 111.39% 16,700 *** gfoxcook
11 11 8,714 128.83% 15,478 *** Recon_Rebel
12 12 8,272 209.31% 12,224 *** D0GMA
13 13 7,905 115.25% 14,764 *** DrMSM
14 14 7,827 113.35% 14,732 *** Bila
15 15 7,180 158.85% 11,700 *** helldoll81
16 18 7,103 344.30% 9,166 courtday
17 16 7,089 117.41% 13,127 *** poxpower
18 17 7,087 174.99% 11,137 *** Newgrundling
19 21 6,860 153.40% 11,332 *** XkwiziTOnE
20 19 6,803 179.59% 10,591 *** HAQnSPITT
21 20 6,780 265.47% 9,334 nimmer
22 23 6,779 160.45% 11,004 *** chaotic1
23 22 6,749 187.00% 10,358 *** Captain_Bob
24 24 6,553 245.52% 9,222 AdrenalineMJ
25 26 6,353 118.37% 11,720 *** alexsmolik
26 25 6,335 266.51% 8,712 Syme
27 27 6,316 170.89% 10,012 *** stafffighter
28 28 5,759 131.54% 10,137 *** Mr_Chuckles
29 29 5,659 138.16% 9,755 *** HeRetiK
30 30 5,595 188.89% 8,557 *** Denvish
31 31 5,595 145.67% 9,436 *** RageVI
32 32 5,427 176.72% 8,498 *** staphita
33 33 5,405 272.98% 7,385 GuineVir
34 34 5,359 120.48% 9,807 *** vuorimies
35 35 5,320 123.03% 9,644 *** leeboy105
36 37 5,236 160.71% 8,494 *** b33r53x
37 39 5,179 173.38% 8,166 *** _lightning_
38 38 5,160 217.72% 7,530 Hice
39 36 5,154 484.40% 6,218 Nostrant
40 40 4,947 224.66% 7,149 DarkJaymz
41 41 4,789 180.17% 7,447 Drimarki
42 42 4,729 148.52% 7,913 *** Dark00Stir-fry
43 43 4,642 161.97% 7,508 *** YoinK
44 44 4,606 145.62% 7,769 *** kevr1
45 45 4,566 182.13% 7,073 innphernoe
46 46 4,393 160.04% 7,138 FlameClock
47 48 4,299 129.53% 7,618 *** biteme2514
48 47 4,267 211.55% 6,284 skum001
49 49 3,905 300.15% 5,206 Narcissus
50 50 3,872 144.86% 6,545 dl_Monk

Well i dont know about anyone else but, i really like the new format, more informative as always........

Damn ... I'm still veeeeery far from that damn list ... freaking school ... fucking broken network ...

how i make those blames/saves?
what i that and why is it good for?
and how i leveling in it?

i got 2 spots higher =) and i vote for the new format then i don't have too check the old one every time

The general consensus at the moment seems to be to keep the new statistics. My vote's a yes anyway.

At 9/22/03 12:46 PM, leeboy105 wrote: The general consensus at the moment seems to be to keep the new statistics. My vote's a yes anyway.

I vote yes as well, it is a interesting addition to the stats.

At 9/22/03 10:43 AM, Prox_M wrote: how i make those blames/saves?

Do a search.

what i that and why is it good for?

Do a search.

and how i leveling in it?

You've run out of questions, but I'll be nice and say you're at the back of a VERY long queue.

At 9/22/03 08:17 AM, XkwiziTOnE wrote: Well i dont know about anyone else but, i really like the new format, more informative as always........

Yeah, more information is always good. However, if it's at all possible, I'd also like it if the username and the number of Blams on this list were put in bold text. As for the Top 50 Protectors List, make it the username and the number of Saves. Of course, this is just a suggestion. I don't want to make updates any harder for you, dude...

At 9/22/03 10:07 AM, Mystboy wrote: Damn ... I'm still veeeeery far from that damn list ... freaking school ... fucking broken network ...

AAAAAKKKKKK...

~X~

okay, based on the positive responses to the new format, I've cropped the list to the top 10 from the last update, and changed it to three different formats that should improve readability a bit. I'm doing this in both top 50 topics, BTW. Please vote on whether you like the top, middle, or bottom one best (top has boldface, as recommended by biteme, middle has --s in a couple of good places, and bottom has both):

blammer rank / previous rank / blams / blam-to-save % / total b/p / name -- as of 09/22/2003 at 05:55 CDT
01 01 20,563 168.78% 32,746 *** ramagi
02 02 20,172 303.11% 26,827 *** TheJoe324
03 03 18,900 190.68% 28,812 *** fixit
04 05 15,386 273.14% 21,019 *** Crono-
05 04 15,346 138.92% 26,393 *** RyoHahn
06 06 13,987 165.98% 22,414 *** thisisasignin
07 07 12,982 267.50% 17,835 *** NemesisM66
08 08 11,035 208.40% 16,330 *** Stormwarden
09 09 9,353 259.45% 12,958 *** GridLock
10 10 8,800 111.39% 16,700 *** gfoxcook

blammer rank / previous rank -- blams / blam-to-save % / total b/p -- name -- as of 09/22/2003 at 05:55 CDT
01 01 -- 20,563 168.78% 32,746 -- *** ramagi
02 02 -- 20,172 303.11% 26,827 -- *** TheJoe324
03 03 -- 18,900 190.68% 28,812 -- *** fixit
04 05 -- 15,386 273.14% 21,019 -- *** Crono-
05 04 -- 15,346 138.92% 26,393 -- *** RyoHahn
06 06 -- 13,987 165.98% 22,414 -- *** thisisasignin
07 07 -- 12,982 267.50% 17,835 -- *** NemesisM66
08 08 -- 11,035 208.40% 16,330 -- *** Stormwarden
09 09 -- 9,353 259.45% 12,958 -- *** GridLock
10 10 -- 8,800 111.39% 16,700 -- *** gfoxcook

blammer rank / previous rank -- blams / blam-to-save % / total b/p -- name -- as of 09/22/2003 at 05:55 CDT
01 01 -- 20,563 168.78% 32,746 -- *** ramagi
02 02 -- 20,172 303.11% 26,827 -- *** TheJoe324
03 03 -- 18,900 190.68% 28,812 -- *** fixit
04 05 -- 15,386 273.14% 21,019 -- *** Crono-
05 04 -- 15,346 138.92% 26,393 -- *** RyoHahn
06 06 -- 13,987 165.98% 22,414 -- *** thisisasignin
07 07 -- 12,982 267.50% 17,835 -- *** NemesisM66
08 08 -- 11,035 208.40% 16,330 -- *** Stormwarden
09 09 -- 9,353 259.45% 12,958 -- *** GridLock
10 10 -- 8,800 111.39% 16,700 -- *** gfoxcook

At 9/22/03 12:46 PM, leeboy105 wrote: The general consensus at the moment seems to be to keep the new statistics. My vote's a yes anyway.

At 9/22/03 01:43 PM, Captain_Bob wrote: I vote yes as well, it is a interesting addition to the stats.

At 9/22/03 11:29 PM, biteme2514 wrote: Yeah, more information is always good. However, if it's at all possible, I'd also like it if the username and the number of Blams on this list were put in bold text. As for the Top 50 Protectors List, make it the username and the number of Saves. Of course, this is just a suggestion. I don't want to make updates any harder for you, dude...

6 votes total (Xkwizit, Mystboy, lightning, leeboy, Captain_Bob, biteme), and every single one says yes... so a nice unarguable 100% vote for the new way.

Anyway... thanks for the suggestion, biteme. The only reason I didn't have boldface, underlining, or italics in my list already is that I like my lists to look good in the text files I create each update between the excel file and posting it here, for one thing, and also I don't want my excel spreadsheet bogged down with HTML tags and links (Dogma has his that way, but he HAS to with the amount of work his list involves, I do mine a bit more old-fashioned).

But after I read your post, I had an idea. As it is now, I copy the columns from my spreadsheet that I need and paste them into a new spreadsheet (that I won't save) to reorder the columns and get it all set for the text file... all I had to do to add this extra info was to bring a few more columns into it (that I was already keeping track of the info... in fact, there's even MORE info that I'm not putting here on the BBS, but that's mostly people's overall b/p combined ranking and also their rank name/number/etc.)...

anyway, so what I'm going to do in the future is, in those new blank spreadsheets for each list, I will add a column of just AAA or BBB or something between other columns. Instead of notepad, I will paste into wordpad, and there I will run a find/replace on AAA and BBB and CCC and however many I need, and put in boldface tags and/or --s for column separators instead.

I think this method will work fairly well and not require much extra time and effort, so it'll be good for the list, good for how you guys see the list, and good for how I like to keep my excel files lookin' nice for myself. Good all around, IOW. I may update the lists tomorrow or day after to get a good idea of how this process is going to go, but for now the 3 top 10s I just posted in both top 50 threads should do. Please vote on which ones you guys like the most, I hope this time it won't be 100% for one option (well, it'd be okay if it was, and I suspect the bottom choice will be favored as the boldface PLUS the -- column separators make things look the best, IMO, but we'll see)...

I liked the third format much. It's easier for the eyes ...

I agree with Mystyboy the third one is the best. Although i thought the first one was pretty good, the text seemed to merge into one giant block and read-ability was poor. The problem has been fixed though in the last one.

At 9/23/03 05:56 PM, leeboy105 wrote: I agree with Mystyboy the third one is the best. Although i thought the first one was pretty good, the text seemed to merge into one giant block and read-ability was poor. The problem has been fixed though in the last one.

The last one does look best but after seeing it, I'm going to shoot out another suggestion. See, having those dashes and those asterisks there spaces out the information from the usernames too much and to me, it kinda looks weird. If you could put the asterisks after the username instead of before, that might look better. Once again, this is just a suggestion but I still want to see what people think of it...

At 9/23/03 07:23 AM, gfoxcook wrote: okay, based on the positive responses to the new format, I've cropped the list to the top 10 from the last update, and changed it to three different formats that should improve readability a bit. I'm doing this in both top 50 topics, BTW. Please vote on whether you like the top, middle, or bottom one best (top has boldface, as recommended by biteme, middle has --s in a couple of good places, and bottom has both):

The schematic of the bottom makes the stats more readily readable. One thing I would like to see is you add columns fore and aft of current rank with <.b> and <./b>, giving it more of a textured read from left to right. Abbreviations for the column titles will lend to better alignment/ascetics as well. In future installments, similar to my breaking up the batches into 50 with headers, maybe insert an extra header at 25? Now that there is more info to digest ~shrug~ you now I'm not one to complain about more data =) I can pretty much sift through whatever gets posted, just trying to help out for those who aren't dataheads like us lol

At 9/23/03 08:01 PM, biteme2514 wrote: The last one does look best but after seeing it, I'm going to shoot out another suggestion. See, having those dashes and those asterisks there spaces out the information from the usernames too much and to me, it kinda looks weird. If you could put the asterisks after the username instead of before, that might look better. Once again, this is just a suggestion but I still want to see what people think of it...

the reason the asterixes have always been to the left of the names (since the first time I introduced them, at least, something is telling me they may have been to the right of the names on that first update of both lists, the old saves list and the newly introduced blam list)...

is that if I put it to the right of the names, the asterixes will be nowhere NEAR in the same column. that's why names come last on each line, even though in my excel file, names actually come right after the spot on the list (i.e. 1 Ramagi #SAVES #BLAMS S-2-B% S+BTOTAL etc. etc.)

I know what you mean, though. I COULD get rid of the second --s if that would make it better. Most people DO have the ***s, so they would still serve as a buffer, along with the boldface, from the raw number data, and there's only 14 people on each list who don't have the ***, so it might look okay. You tell me:

01 01 -- 12,183 59.25% 32,746 -- *** ramagi
vs
01 01 -- 12,183 59.25% 32,746 *** ramagi

At 9/23/03 09:22 PM, D0GMA wrote: The schematic of the bottom makes the stats more readily readable. One thing I would like to see is you add columns fore and aft of current rank with <.b> and <./b>, giving it more of a textured read from left to right.

You mean that I should boldface not only blams/saves and username, but also current rank, to offset it a bit from last update's rank?

Abbreviations for the column titles will lend to better alignment/ascetics as well.

yeah, I know what you mean. In the temporary text files I whipped up to post those top 10 x 3 tests in both threads, there are tabs between each column, since that's how excel does it (BTW, do you know if there's an easy way to tell excel to substitute spaces for tabs when you paste clipboard data to another application, such as notepad?)...

so anyway, the tabs made all the data rows pretty spread out under the headers, and it looked fine there. But on the BBS, of course, once the tabs became spaces, the column headers stick WAY out to the right.

So, in short, I was already thinking about changing that, but I haven't decided what would be the best way. Just abbreviating things would probably cause people to go "huh?" so I guess I could have a sort of legend or something up at the top with things like:

s2b% = save-to-blam % (explanation blah blah)

and so forth... I'll test that out before I post the actual updates tomorrow/whenever I hit 17,000.

In future installments, similar to my breaking up the batches into 50 with headers, maybe insert an extra header at 25? Now that there is more info to digest ~shrug~ you now I'm not one to complain about more data =) I can pretty much sift through whatever gets posted, just trying to help out for those who aren't dataheads like us lol

heh. Ummm... I don't really like the idea of breaking it in half at 25 for some OCDish reason, but I'll tell you what. It may be slightly counterintuitive, but what would you say to the column headers also being made into column tailers (IOW, placed underneath #50 on the list as well as above #1).

In any event, already went into this in the other thread, but once again, I'd like to summarise the progress in both threads:

A) blahblahblah blahblah! blah blah BLAH!
B) blahblahblah -- blahblah! -- blah blah BLAH!
C) blahblahblah -- blahblah! -- blah blah BLAH!

Once again, six people (Mystboy, alexsmolik, toocool, leeboy, biteme, Dogma) have all voted the same way! Heh. Third choice (i.e. the blahblahblah C option from above #;-}>) wins, hands down, unless 7 people come along in the next day or so wanting the first or second choice, and I doubt that very muchly.

T-MINUS 4 POSTS TO 3000.....

At 9/24/03 07:54 AM, gfoxcook wrote: Third choice (i.e. the blahblahblah C option from above #;-}>) wins, hands down, unless 7 people come along in the next day or so wanting the first or second choice, and I doubt that very muchly.

I Vote for C.

it just looks better then the other ones.

So looks like it will most likely win

At 9/24/03 07:54 AM, gfoxcook wrote: I know what you mean, though. I COULD get rid of the second --s if that would make it better. Most people DO have the ***s, so they would still serve as a buffer, along with the boldface, from the raw number data, and there's only 14 people on each list who don't have the ***, so it might look okay.

Is there a way you can get the people who don't have asterisks to have those dashes and just leave the people who do have asterisks alone? That way, the entire list might look more even. Everything would be spaced out properly and reading it might even be easier. Think you could pull that off instead?

At 9/25/03 12:20 AM, biteme2514 wrote:

At 9/24/03 07:54 AM, gfoxcook wrote: I know what you mean, though. I COULD get rid of the second --s if that would make it better. Most people DO have the ***s, so they would still serve as a buffer, along with the boldface, from the raw number data, and there's only 14 people on each list who don't have the ***, so it might look okay.

Is there a way you can get the people who don't have asterisks to have those dashes and just leave the people who do have asterisks alone? That way, the entire list might look more even. Everything would be spaced out properly and reading it might even be easier. Think you could pull that off instead?

Sure, I can do that. Won't take much work at all. As it is now, the ***s are off to the left of the rest of the chart, and after I paste cells into a new excel file temporarily on their way to a text file (and from there on their way to here), I reorder the columns to the ***s are where they are now. I can put ---s instead of ***s for the people who aren't on both lists, and that'll keep the names more even and more apart from the data without putting them TOO far apart with both -- and ***. Here's a little test to see how many -s I need to even with the 3 asterixes:

6,000 *** blahblah
4,444 -- blehbleh

6,000 *** blahblah
4,444 --- blehbleh

6,000 *** blahblah
4,444 ---- blehbleh

okay, one of those has got to look okay.

At 9/24/03 12:53 PM, -Sphere- wrote: could you do the most recent top 100 blammers list cuz i'm not sure if i am or i ain't on it.

You probably aren't on the top 200 blammers list. Once you rank improves from the 400s to the 200s, you'll pop onto Dogma's 51+ list fulltime, but until then... you've got no chance of making a top 100 list, sorry.

Update within a few hours, barring major NG crashage.

The Unofficial Newgrounds Top 50 Blammers List -- as of 09/26/2003 at 20:20 CDT

Congrats to:

Recon_Rebel on his promotion to Elite Guard Lieutenant Colonel (10th) &
RageVI on his promotion to Elite Guard Second Lieutenant (28th)

since the last update of the list.

Welcome to:

no one.

Farewell to:

no one.

DANGER ZONE:

Once again, no real danger to anyone at the bottom of the list. For one thing, they're moving steadily enough upwards, and for another, the 3 or so people parked within a couple hundred blams of the 50 spot are just NOT moving, so... safety rules on this list, once again, for now.

Greg's Notes:

New format is here, and here to stay, but it doesn't have to stay THIS way. If you have major problems with it, let me know. Otherwise, I will continue to retool it. Keep in mind that I'm not trying only to make it aesthetically pleasing, but also easy for me to update from my excel file. As it is now, it's easy. Too much column alignment would add time to my updates and thus make them happen less often.

In a kind of flip-flop of the action on the top 50 saviors list, here on the blammer list, action was quite common, but strangely enough, it was mostly in the 10-30 section.

That's right, you heard me: NO MOTION below #31 (Denvish being pushed down from #30, along with several others, by a fast-moving RageVI, who apparently was motivated by the rank he was aiming for and pushed past).

Very very interesting. Check it all out, the new this week/last week-ish format should make that easy, as lightning has gushed several times since I changed the list last time.

You may check out the most recent Top 50 Protectors List by clicking the link I just posted. Enjoy comparing the lists to each other and to the Top 50 Combined B/P List. People on both the Top 50 Blammers List and the Top 50 Protectors List are denoted with ***.

List Column Legend

rank = this update's rank
prev = last update's rank
--
blams = approximate # of blams as of the update time
b2s% = blam-to-save % (i.e. ratio of blams to saves, or: blams/saves x 100)
b/p = approximate combined blam and protect points as of the update time
*** = on both the top 50 protectors and top 50 blammers lists
----
name = username (not current name in all cases due to some who change their names often)

rank / prev -- blams / b2s% / b/p ---- name
================================================
1 1 -- 20,713 169.42% 32,939 *** ramagi
2 2 -- 20,456 304.90% 27,165 *** TheJoe324
3 3 -- 19,283 192.20% 29,316 *** fixit
4 4 -- 15,606 273.07% 21,321 *** Crono-
5 5 -- 15,354 138.86% 26,411 *** RyoHahn
6 6 -- 14,310 167.64% 22,846 *** thisisasignin
7 7 -- 12,997 267.48% 17,856 *** NemesisM66
8 8 -- 11,072 208.16% 16,391 *** Stormwarden
9 9 -- 9,501 260.66% 13,146 *** GridLock
10 10 -- 9,000 112.50% 17,000 *** gfoxcook
11 11 -- 8,846 130.03% 15,649 *** Recon_Rebel
12 12 -- 8,288 209.08% 12,252 *** D0GMA
13 13 -- 7,952 115.25% 14,852 *** DrMSM
14 14 -- 7,888 113.68% 14,827 *** Bila
15 16 -- 7,260 344.24% 9,369 ---- courtday
16 15 -- 7,184 158.80% 11,708 *** helldoll81
17 18 -- 7,174 176.01% 11,250 *** Newgrundling
18 17 -- 7,089 117.41% 13,127 *** poxpower
19 19 -- 6,944 153.76% 11,460 *** XkwiziTOnE
20 22 -- 6,927 162.45% 11,191 *** chaotic1
21 20 -- 6,803 179.55% 10,592 *** HAQnSPITT
22 21 -- 6,802 265.50% 9,364 ---- nimmer
23 23 -- 6,800 187.22% 10,432 *** Captain_Bob
24 24 -- 6,561 245.82% 9,230 ---- AdrenalineMJ
25 27 -- 6,384 171.11% 10,115 *** stafffighter
26 25 -- 6,383 118.49% 11,770 *** alexsmolik
27 26 -- 6,337 266.37% 8,716 ---- Syme
28 31 -- 5,797 148.07% 9,712 *** RageVI
29 28 -- 5,759 131.36% 10,143 *** Mr_Chuckles
30 29 -- 5,659 138.16% 9,755 *** HeRetiK
31 30 -- 5,605 188.72% 8,575 *** Denvish
32 32 -- 5,429 176.78% 8,500 *** staphita
33 33 -- 5,413 272.28% 7,401 ---- GuineVir
34 34 -- 5,406 120.97% 9,875 *** vuorimies
35 35 -- 5,377 123.33% 9,737 *** leeboy105
36 36 -- 5,299 161.80% 8,574 *** b33r53x
37 37 -- 5,206 173.13% 8,213 *** _lightning_
38 38 -- 5,167 217.92% 7,538 ---- Hice
39 39 -- 5,154 484.40% 6,218 ---- Nostrant
40 40 -- 4,947 224.66% 7,149 ---- DarkJaymz
41 41 -- 4,789 180.17% 7,447 ---- Drimarki
42 42 -- 4,731 148.59% 7,915 *** Dark00Stir-fry
43 43 -- 4,678 161.98% 7,566 *** YoinK
44 44 -- 4,612 145.72% 7,777 *** kevr1
45 45 -- 4,566 182.13% 7,073 ---- innphernoe
46 46 -- 4,520 162.18% 7,307 ---- FlameClock
47 47 -- 4,403 131.55% 7,750 *** biteme2514
48 48 -- 4,267 211.55% 6,284 ---- skum001
49 49 -- 3,913 298.25% 5,225 ---- Narcissus
50 50 -- 3,878 144.92% 6,554 ---- dl_Monk
================================================
rank / prev -- blams / b2s% / b/p ---- name

At 9/26/03 11:03 PM, gfoxcook wrote: rank / prev -- blams / b2s% / b/p ---- name
================================================
1 1 -- 20,713 169.42% 32,939 *** ramagi
2 2 -- 20,456 304.90% 27,165 *** TheJoe324
3 3 -- 19,283 192.20% 29,316 *** fixit
4 4 -- 15,606 273.07% 21,321 *** Crono-
5 5 -- 15,354 138.86% 26,411 *** RyoHahn
6 6 -- 14,310 167.64% 22,846 *** thisisasignin
7 7 -- 12,997 267.48% 17,856 *** NemesisM66
8 8 -- 11,072 208.16% 16,391 *** Stormwarden
9 9 -- 9,501 260.66% 13,146 *** GridLock
10 10 -- 9,000 112.50% 17,000 *** gfoxcook

arghghghg. I was just looking at both lists to see how they looked (I didn't spend much time looking last night, and after I woke up from my 3 hour nap, the BBS was down till about 15 minutes ago, so I didn't get any chance to look at them until now really).

So anyway, I was staring at the way the list jumped WAY to the right from #9 to #10 and realised it's BECAUSE I DIDN'T PUT THE 0's IN FRONT OF THE ONE DIGIT NUMBERS like I did with the other list. Cripes!

Oh well, if that's the biggest mistake I made, count me among the lucky. Still, frustrating that after months and months of ALWAYS remembering to put in 0s in front of 1-9 on the lists, I forget on one of the two lists this time. Probably because of all the bold tags everywhere. (1 isn't the first thing on the list anymore, now it's a column of boldface openers, then the numbers, then boldface closers, etc. etc.)... but still, I remembered on the other list. BLAH!

rank / prev -- blams / b2s% / b/p ---- name
================================================
01 01 -- 20,713 169.42% 32,939 *** ramagi
02 02 -- 20,456 304.90% 27,165 *** TheJoe324
03 03 -- 19,283 192.20% 29,316 *** fixit
04 04 -- 15,606 273.07% 21,321 *** Crono-
05 05 -- 15,354 138.86% 26,411 *** RyoHahn
06 06 -- 14,310 167.64% 22,846 *** thisisasignin
07 07 -- 12,997 267.48% 17,856 *** NemesisM66
08 08 -- 11,072 208.16% 16,391 *** Stormwarden
09 09 -- 09,501 260.66% 13,146 *** GridLock
10 10 -- 09,000 112.50% 17,000 *** gfoxcook
11 11 -- 08,846 130.03% 15,649 *** Recon_Rebel
12 12 -- 08,288 209.08% 12,252 *** D0GMA
13 13 -- 07,952 115.25% 14,852 *** DrMSM
14 14 -- 07,888 113.68% 14,827 *** Bila
15 16 -- 07,260 344.24% 09,369 ---- courtday
16 15 -- 07,184 158.80% 11,708 *** helldoll81
17 18 -- 07,174 176.01% 11,250 *** Newgrundling
18 17 -- 07,089 117.41% 13,127 *** poxpower
19 19 -- 06,944 153.76% 11,460 *** XkwiziTOnE
20 22 -- 06,927 162.45% 11,191 *** chaotic1
21 20 -- 06,803 179.55% 10,592 *** HAQnSPITT
22 21 -- 06,802 265.50% 09,364 ---- nimmer
23 23 -- 06,800 187.22% 10,432 *** Captain_Bob
24 24 -- 06,561 245.82% 09,230 ---- AdrenalineMJ
25 27 -- 06,384 171.11% 10,115 *** stafffighter
26 25 -- 06,383 118.49% 11,770 *** alexsmolik
27 26 -- 06,337 266.37% 08,716 ---- Syme
28 31 -- 05,797 148.07% 09,712 *** RageVI
29 28 -- 05,759 131.36% 10,143 *** Mr_Chuckles
30 29 -- 05,659 138.16% 09,755 *** HeRetiK
31 30 -- 05,605 188.72% 08,575 *** Denvish
32 32 -- 05,429 176.78% 08,500 *** staphita
33 33 -- 05,413 272.28% 07,401 ---- GuineVir
34 34 -- 05,406 120.97% 09,875 *** vuorimies
35 35 -- 05,377 123.33% 09,737 *** leeboy105
36 36 -- 05,299 161.80% 08,574 *** b33r53x
37 37 -- 05,206 173.13% 08,213 *** _lightning_
38 38 -- 05,167 217.92% 07,538 ---- Hice
39 39 -- 05,154 484.40% 06,218 ---- Nostrant
40 40 -- 04,947 224.66% 07,149 ---- DarkJaymz
41 41 -- 04,789 180.17% 07,447 ---- Drimarki
42 42 -- 04,731 148.59% 07,915 *** Dark00Stir-fry
43 43 -- 04,678 161.98% 07,566 *** YoinK
44 44 -- 04,612 145.72% 07,777 *** kevr1
45 45 -- 04,566 182.13% 07,073 ---- innphernoe
46 46 -- 04,520 162.18% 07,307 ---- FlameClock
47 47 -- 04,403 131.55% 07,750 *** biteme2514
48 48 -- 04,267 211.55% 06,284 ---- skum001
49 49 -- 03,913 298.25% 05,225 ---- Narcissus
50 50 -- 03,878 144.92% 06,554 ---- dl_Monk
================================================
rank / prev -- blams / b2s% / b/p ---- name

I don't know about anyone else, but I never get tired of looking at these lists, they are both informative and entertaining - thanks GFOX you have done it again....

At 9/27/03 08:32 AM, gfoxcook wrote: rank / prev -- blams / b2s% / b/p ---- name
47 47 -- 04,403 131.55% 07,750 *** biteme2514

It's looking good. Thanks for using my idea. Oh well, the updates look great now. I'll still be checking in from time to time and dropping my two cents in wherever I can. Loving these lists, dude. Keep 'em coming.