The new 2^n Badges
-
So each of the new 2^n badges contain this clause:
Examples of posts that are automatically excluded are:
(a) The Likes thread (and any thread with an 'excessive' number of posts),
(b) Any post to a topic in a restricted category (Bugs, One Post, Lounge) and
(c) Private messages.What I'm curious about is the "any thread with an 'excessive' number of posts". Does this mean that @PJH is buying into Jeff's claim that posts don't naturally reach a certain post count? Is it an attempt to discourage the creation of massive threads? And what constitutes an excessive number of posts?
Inquiring minds must know.
-
Also: WTF @Arantor? How do you have time to create 2^11 posts in non excluded categories/topics and still participate in the excluded topics?
-
By not having a life.
Did I mention, over 5 years, I managed 60,000 posts elsewhere on a single forum, while also writing tens of thousands of lines of code in add-ons and research for fixing things?
-
If you did, I've apparently missed that. Or forgotten.
-
It's almost embarrassing, actually.
-
-
What I'm curious about is the "any thread with an 'excessive' number of posts". Is it an attempt to discourage the creation of massive threads?
No just to stop such threads being a way to 'game' the system.
Rather than exclude manually the Likes and Status threads (I don't feel that posts in those threads are particularly worthy to contribute to such badges) I've picked a number that most threads won't (well, shouldn't) reach and automatically exclude them. (Hence the clause about how the badges may temporarily be rescinded until more posts were made.)
-
Wow you beat my record on the old DailyWTF forums. I only managed like 10,000 posts in 5 years, and a lot of those were just calling people idiots.
-
Did I mention I have no life already?
-
Not bad, I've hit nearly 14k on a car forum.
-
For the interested, on a backup from not too long ago:
SELECT topic_id, count(topic_id) from restore.badge_posts group by topic_id order by count(topic_id) desc
topic_id count 1000 12856 254 1366 1673 939 270 529 1092 501 1315 460 1269 442 344 440 238 405 1158 344 407 338 1025 313 914 309 1008 304 759 290 593 275 893 250 1481 227 1356 222 1081 214 1353 211
So, that's the Likes thread, Status and Bad Ideas's thead currently being ignored for the purpose of these badges at the moment.
-
Idiot.
-
Well, yes. We completely agree on this subject.
-
There you go, already catching up...
BTW, don't you two hate each other? Did I miss something?
-
I think the bad ideas thread isn't exactly spammy.
-
Agreed, but any problems with me getting at least something in place and I can tweak it afterwards? :)
-
But I want it nooooooooooooow.
-
Likes thread, Status and Bad Ideas's thead currently being ignored for the purpose of these badges
Are those the only topics being ignored? If I subtract my posts to those three topics from the total shown on my profile, I get a result > 2^10, but I don't have the 2^10 badge.
-
Don't forget to look at the categories that are being ignored as well.
-
Are those the only topics being ignored?
No. Very short ones are also being ignored.
-
So, that's the Likes thread, Status and Bad Ideas's thead currently being ignored for the purpose of these badges at the moment.
Okay, The Likes Thread is obviously out, Status I can understand, but the Bad Ideas thread is pretty much the only one to legitimately arrive at such a high number.
I'd say "rule out Likes and perhaps Status explicitly, some categories, and eventually add some more spammy threads to the exclusion list".
One's posts don't suddenly become worthless because the post counter hits 1000 someday. Granted, that's nothing short of what I'd expect from Jeff, but we're a bit smarter than that, aren't we?
-
Don't forget to look at the categories that are being ignored as well.
Ah, yes, Lounge and Bugs, at least. Yeah, that's probably enough to drop me back to just under 2^10.
-
I'd say "rule out Likes and perhaps Status explicitly, some categories, and eventually add some more spammy threads to the exclusion list".
Hmm - ok, it makes the SQL a bit more complicated - give me a while..
-
Hmm - ok, it makes the SQL a bit more complicated - give me a while..
Done. Any more badges handed out?
-
Done. Any more badges handed out?
Empirical evidence would suggest including the Bad Idea's thread resulted in exactly one 2^3 badge being handed out, and that was it...
-
Whatever you did wasn't enough to get me back over 2^10. Should be real close, though.
-
I guess the way the badges work, you can't really make it so you only get the highest one and it replaces the one from before (in case you set it as title)?
Filed Under: Better make everybody have 10000000 badges :D
-
To ask a question to which I'm sure the answer is no, I have 21 badges-- is there an easy way to see/filter based on which can be set as titles?
-
On your preferences you can choose the ones you want to set as title. So that gives you a basic idea. Not sure if you can easily find out about all the ones you don't have, yet, though.
Filed Under: Then again, why would you want to look at a title you can't use anyway :D
Addendum: I was faster than @PJH!
-
To ask a question to which I'm sure the answer is no, I have 21 badges-- is there an easy way to see/filter based on which can be set as titles?
On the form where you can actually set the title? http://what.thedailywtf.com/mypreferences
-
If the answer equates to "no", please just say "no".
On another note, I actually have three different Mediocre Poster badges apparently, and all can be set as title. (It shows up three times in the SELECT.)
-
We need a new category for threads such as the likes and status ones. It'd be easier to just filter the category out.
-
We need a new category for threads such as the likes and status ones. It'd be easier to just filter the category out.
Putting the Likes into a restricted category would remove all the Nice Post badges, and putting it in an unrestricted but excluded category wouldn't make it any easier for my SQL queries since it would require a join on another table to figure out which category the posts were in...
-
-
No Nice Post badges for the Likes thread? I fail to see the issue.
-
I wouldn't be too upset about that, either, but it would make the Mediocre, etc., redundant.
-
Hrm... I'm surprised I have as many posts that contribute to these badges as I do.
-
http://what.thedailywtf.com/badges
Nice logarithmic progression we have here. I made a graph:
It almost-exactly-halves for every increment of 3 in "x".
-
I wonder, will someone join me in 2^11 before I get to 2^12?
I'd say enquiring minds need to know but they really don't, we already know I don't have a life
-
Holy shit, how do you have that many posts D:
-
-
Holy shit, how do you have that many posts D:
I only have 5200 and so here. Time was when I could do that in a single month on a forum. These days I have a bit more of a life. Not a lot more though.
-
I wouldn't be too upset about that, either, but it would make the Mediocre, etc., redundant.
I'm sure that the badges could be reworked to accommodate the categories.
-
Holy shit, how do you have that many posts D
I am ashamed that I have more than half as many posts as @arantor does :(
-
Ashamed that you have that many, or ashamed you don't have enough? Either is fine
-
That I have that many. Granted, most are on Likes topic during the madness pre10k. I have probably ~1300 "legit" posts by the 2^x metric.
-
You've got at least 1024 by that metric.
I love how disorganised the badges page is, by the way. The 2^n badges are not in any semblance of order, not alphabetic, not order of creation, not order of being awarded. It feels so random.
-
Did you not see my comment about how Discourse is the world's most complex PRNG?
-
Yes I did, I just forgot it extended to every single aspect of Discourse.
-
Despite my having the 2nd most 2^n badges to only you, and tied with about 20 others, I feel they are de-valuing the rest of my badges
I had 20, now I have 31.
You had 16, now you have 28.
I had 125% as many as you.
Now it's just 111% (and even if you hadn't gained 1 on me from posting more, it'd still just be 115% as many).