…no hit would be registered for users' hits that were close either temporally or geographically. for example – a hit would not be counted of it was from another user (above the level of newbie – don't want to discourage the joiners!) that was sooner than XX days from the previous entry, unless it was entered by a user more than YY km away. XX and YY to be determined in some equitable fashion (we long-term users know that a median value of lapse between first entry and first hit is often longer than 30 days or more). the note would still be "tracked", of course, but no score would accrue nor would it register as a hit in the counts for the users.
this might allow us to get back to "tracking money" :)
again… this would be if I were running the site… :)
RudyK - you sound like a scientist. Are you among those responsible for the global warming scam?
(Manipulate and hide the data!)
If I were running the site, I would point out that this "General Discussion" topic would more appropriately fit under the "anything to do with the website [sic]" forum entitled "www.cdn-money.ca".
I thought you thought you were running the site?
As I read this forum it soulds like a thread from another forum.
Maybe do away with the point system all together and hits listed for each user then it would not seem so much like a game to members. I would be happy just to be notified of hits on my bills so I could see where they go the points mean nothing to me nor does where I am on the top 100 list.
Ok rudyk..let it go….your wearing this a little thin already.
'often longer than 30 days?' how about 230 days?? haha. I think there should be red flags for when newly entered bills get instant hits.
Sramic comments:
'often longer than 30 days?' how about 230 days?? haha. I think there should be red flags for when newly entered bills get instant hits.
ahh… a constructive reply! :) indeed, sramic, my suggestion would certainly take care of those instances. and i chose 30 days to be the period somewhat arbitrarily – the true median would certainly be much larger (as you correctly note!) but i think 30 days would ensure some sort of reasonable period.
as for the red flags… not to worry, i have complied a long list that could be entitled a "red flag list". it was started when dr first suggested a programme for vetting hits.
Enough already.
dr has asked me to step in and quell this raucous 'debate'.
The bottom line is that you can't please everyone. Both sides of this discussion bring valid arguments to the table. Since both viewpoints have merit, it behooves those of us caught in the middle to bring up an old saw and say "let's just agree to disagree."
thank you pooga!… for the acknowledgement that it actually WAS a debate. i was having my doubts.
the converse of that old saw is that "a compromise means that no-one is happy". i guess your mileage may vary.
