Difference between revisions of "Talk:Most active graticules/old"
From Geohashing
imported>Robyn (Counting home graticules.) |
imported>Thomcat (removed outdated info that I was only preserving so as to show the difference... not needed now I think.) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | ==Discussion== | |
| − | == | + | === Editor's Note === |
I added to the table for monthly totals. The Boston crew led for the first few months then vanished - is there an expiration date for internet memes and mobs? I also added the monthly leaders. My intention is to update this once a month, and keep an eye out for any old expedition page edits that might change the totals. I'd also like to add something to track metro areas and split cities - Vancouver and Surrey are together, etc. --[[User:Thomcat|Thomcat]] 18:43, 2 October 2008 (UTC) | I added to the table for monthly totals. The Boston crew led for the first few months then vanished - is there an expiration date for internet memes and mobs? I also added the monthly leaders. My intention is to update this once a month, and keep an eye out for any old expedition page edits that might change the totals. I'd also like to add something to track metro areas and split cities - Vancouver and Surrey are together, etc. --[[User:Thomcat|Thomcat]] 18:43, 2 October 2008 (UTC) | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
===Calculating Rankings=== | ===Calculating Rankings=== | ||
Revision as of 19:51, 8 October 2008
Discussion
Editor's Note
I added to the table for monthly totals. The Boston crew led for the first few months then vanished - is there an expiration date for internet memes and mobs? I also added the monthly leaders. My intention is to update this once a month, and keep an eye out for any old expedition page edits that might change the totals. I'd also like to add something to track metro areas and split cities - Vancouver and Surrey are together, etc. --Thomcat 18:43, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
Calculating Rankings
- one) Woo hoo! Slave Lake made the charts! Go me and ICWB! I don't think we'll manage the same for Grande Cache, Alberta. It's really mountainous here, and winter is coming on.
- two) I think of the people in my graticule as a team who are out to beat mother nature as much as possible. I wish there were some way to register the people who belong to a graticule and then have all their exploits count. For example I remember recently that Vancouver and Bellingham coordinates were both do-able, but I chose the latter because I hadn't logged Bellingham yet. One of the Seattle meetups was actually me, dragging a local and another Vancouver person. So I effectively scored on my own net there, allowing Seattle to edge Vancouver in the standings. It's not really a competition, so who cares, but the standings don't accurately show how rabidly active the Vancouver graticule is, and I'm proud of us.
- We could add a category (or more if people from multiple graticules at the hashpoint) to each successful expedition: "Category:Count for (Coordinates e.g. Vancouver)". So if you go from Vancouver to Seattle, the expedition would (via an automated script) get 1 point for Seattle (because the expedition page name is 2008-10-08_Seattlecoords) and 1 point for Vancouver (because the page is included into the "count" category for Vancouver). This would lead to one ranking for "graticule with most active geohashers", one for "most visited graticule" and perhaps a combined one. Danatar 13:31, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
- Theoretically that's quite possible to do automatically, just by having a standard section name for Participants and for any participant that has a User page, a standard way to display home graticule there. Or you could list your home graticule in a standard way with your name in the participants list. -Robyn 19:10, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
- We could add a category (or more if people from multiple graticules at the hashpoint) to each successful expedition: "Category:Count for (Coordinates e.g. Vancouver)". So if you go from Vancouver to Seattle, the expedition would (via an automated script) get 1 point for Seattle (because the expedition page name is 2008-10-08_Seattlecoords) and 1 point for Vancouver (because the page is included into the "count" category for Vancouver). This would lead to one ranking for "graticule with most active geohashers", one for "most visited graticule" and perhaps a combined one. Danatar 13:31, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
- three) The best register of graticule activity would probably be something like persons attending geohashes, divided by graticule population, multiplied by a million, so that the numbers aren't tiny fractions of one. You'd have to have graticules include an estimate of their population on their graticule page. This would also make the comparison more fair when considering split graticules, because including more potential geohashing locations would also include more population.
- four)Thank you for the work you did in updating this, and I don't expect you or anyone to ever do it by population. It's just theory.
-Robyn 19:48, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
