User Controls
What's your thank: post ratio?
-
2016-03-14 at 3:11 AM UTCGo to your thanks page. There are 15 thanks per page. I have 9 pages of thanks, so it was 15 x 8, plus the amount of thanks on my last page.
Formula: (15 x n) + m where n = number of pages - 1 and m = last page
(15 x n) + m = T
Then divide your post count by number of thans
P / [(15 x n) + m] = P/T
P/T = 1261 / 132
1261 / 132 = 9.56
My official poster value is 9.56 -
2016-03-14 at 3:29 AM UTC(15 x 4) + 7 = 67
400/ 67 = 5.97
My official poster value is 5.97 which makes me objectively better than you since the goal is to have a value of 1. -
2016-03-14 at 4:47 AM UTCLol you fucked up the math and had to re-edit. You didn't even create the formula, you just applied the formula and still messed it up.
-
2016-03-14 at 4:50 AM UTCAh fuck didn't realize I messed up some of the syntax though. There was no reason to have m in parentheses.
-
2016-03-14 at 5:35 AM UTC
Lol you fucked up the math and had to re-edit. You didn't even create the formula, you just applied the formula and still messed it up.
[greentext]>Literally mad that even though I fucked up my math I am an objectively more valuable poster either way.[/greentext]
TOP ME! -
2016-03-14 at 5:41 AM UTCI am ostracized for my profound giftedness
-
2016-03-14 at 5:45 AM UTC[greentext]>giftedness[/greentext]
So thats what they are calling assburgers these days?
-
2016-03-14 at 6:08 AM UTCYou could have never created this formula
-
2016-03-14 at 6:25 AM UTC[greentext]>Being this rump rammed that you are a low value poster[/greentext]
Yeah. I guess creating a simple algebraic formula is beyond a high value poster like me. Though you didnt realize that order of operations rendered your parentheses unnecessary, so who is the real idiot? Fucking low value posters shitting up my forum.
In any case it doesnt matter since I have an objectively better poster value than you. -
2016-03-14 at 6:30 AM UTCYour cranial nerves are showing.
[greentext]>Implying the parentheses aren't there to make it easier to read[/greentext]
Are you even 23? -
2016-03-14 at 6:47 AM UTCFucking low value 9.5 poster trying to rag on a high value 5.9.
[greentext]>Implying anyone believes the parentheses are there to make it easier to read.[/greentext]
Are you even high value? No. No you are not. -
2016-03-14 at 6:50 AM UTCP / [(15 x n) + m] =
Multiply 15 by n, add m, and then divide P by the result
Vs
P / 15 x n + m
P is divided by 15 multiplied by n plus m
Which one in clearer -
2016-03-14 at 6:55 AM UTCMy argument was that you only have a higher thank to post ratio because your IQ is closer to the median of this website's IQ a.k.a. lower than my IQ. I proved this in the OP by the formula that you would have never thought of, ever, and due to the fact that you couldn't even use it. Your rebuttal is that my formula is flawed, but I then point out the additions of parentheses add clarity, which nullifies your argument, and thus supports the end conclusion that my thanks to post ratio would be objectively higher if I wasn't a million standard deviations above the mean.
-
2016-03-14 at 7:01 AM UTC[FONT=helvetica][SIZE=12px]Proof:[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=helvetica][SIZE=12px]This is silly in many different ways. 1. why would you go into a cemetary for no reason? 2. Why would you be too scared to go a year after when the trip last 12 hours? 3. Why would you be afraid to find your own grave when you are and have been quite obviously living your life? 4. Why do you allow such a powerful experience be seen as negative? 5. Why do you not take this experience as a new understandign of death? Jenny is a fucking retard.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=helvetica][SIZE=12px]This is hilarious because 1. the CIA has experiments literally medically documenting the mind expanding effects of LSD and 2. any drug dealer that sells acid wouldnt push you towards it if you obviously dont want to do it. Your bad trip will fuck up their bottom line when you tell your friend about it. 3. Drug dealers are motivated by profit. This is true. But the best way to attain that profit is to have the drugs that people want on hand. Not to be a pushy asshole saying "TRY THIS DRUG!". They just want you to buy your shit and get out. Or stay and smoke a bowl. They probably dont really care that much what you do.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=helvetica][SIZE=12px]This is actually true. If you take a shitload of heroin you will die. If you take just a bit you will feel great. The problem is people think of "poison" in such a terrible and evil way rather than realizing it in its medical pharmacological sense of being a substance that affects the natural function of the nervous system or other aspects of physiology. People have willingly poisoned themselves for recation for thousands of years. Its not gonna stop now just because some website says "DRUGS ARE POISON!".[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=helvetica][SIZE=12px]Here is my favorite quote from the page:[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=helvetica][SIZE=12px]"LSD users call an LSD experience a “trip,†typically lasting twelve hours or so. When things go wrong, which often happens, it is called a “bad trip,†another name for a living hell."[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=helvetica][SIZE=12px]This one misleads the reader into thinking a bad trip will last 12 hours and that it is indeed a living hell. This is inaccurate especially if you have a good trip sitter. You know how you end a bad trip? See it at its come on. Talk to the affected. Be light hearted and jovial. Say something like "how ya feelin?" they will say "bad" or something and you say "Oh man you just got the 15 minuet jitters. Oh what? Its been 10 minuets? It will be over in 5 mins top friend". Then move the conversation away from the bad trip and towards good stuff. Guaranteed to end a bad trip if you do it right. A 12 hour bad trip is highly improbable with adequate trip support and fair mental health status.[/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=helvetica][SIZE=12px]tl;dr[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=helvetica][SIZE=12px][greentext]>scientology[/greentext][/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=helvetica][SIZE=12px]My post was objectively better than your post, but your post is more likely to receive a thank. Why is this? Because you tried really hard and people don't want you to feel lonely. I summed up your entire 500+ word thought process in less than a sentence, but the fact that I was able to simplify the thought process into such an elementary principle could be dismissed as "shitposting", because lower IQs are not aware of all that is entailed by "Scientology", they come with the presumption that longer = more comprehensive, and they think a giant post means high IQ, when in fact, the best principles are the most concise. The contrast between the average IQ of this website and my IQ creates thanks that are lost in translation. I would have a poster value of AT MOST 4.00, if only I huffed more starter fluid and became less attuned to the quantum shape space.[/SIZE][/FONT] -
2016-03-14 at 7:09 AM UTC
My argument was that you only have a higher thank to post ratio because your IQ is closer to the median of this website's IQ a.k.a. lower than my IQ. I proved this in the OP by the formula that you would have never thought of, ever, and due to the fact that you couldn't even use it. Your rebuttal is that my formula is flawed, but I then point out the additions of parentheses add clarity, which nullifies your argument, and thus supports the end conclusion that my thanks to post ratio would be objectively higher if I wasn't a million standard deviations above the mean.
I could use it though silly low value Sploo. My high value answer was correct both times under the parameters set by the equation. Essentially I ended up doing the right high value math with the wrong numbers. My rebuttal is not that the formula is flawed, something you would see if you were a high iq high value poster like me, but rather that you, being the low value poster you are of a lower value than I, a highly valued poster on this fine website.
Maybe if your IQ wasnt so low value you could compete with us high value IQ posters intellectually. Unfortunately you cannot so you choose to pick out formula 3-1 out of your 9th grade algebra text book and copy its function into determining poster value (and objectively determining you are a of lower value than my high value self. Low value move fella. Low value move.[FONT=helvetica][SIZE=12px]My post was objectively better than your post, but your post is more likely to receive a thank[/SIZE][/FONT]
This statement is objectively low value because it comes from a low value poster. Thus the argument that follows as well as the post it is directed at is also low value. This mean, using the law of objective values, that every single one of my posts is objectively better than every single one of your because of my high value status.
Good luck trying to make yourself feel better now that you found out how low value you are. Bet you with you never even mad this low value thread. -
2016-03-14 at 7:17 AM UTCthanks are still irrelevant to post quality, post quality is an average, rather than one-off posts that get 600 thanks
i have no sense of humor holy shit -
2016-03-14 at 7:31 AM UTC
My high value answer was correct both times under the parameters set by the equation. Essentially I ended up doing the right high value math with the wrong numbers
kek spelled backwards is also kek -
2016-03-14 at 7:37 AM UTCA low value observation. High value posters such as myself not only observe but also make high value deductions.
Observe:
An anagram for "the holy ghost" is "yo they shot lg". -
2016-03-14 at 7:51 AM UTCYour bias is: my number was higher, so arguments for why my number isn't actually higher are irrelevant, even though my higher number is actually illusory when all concepts are considered holistically.
Your score is inflated from your objective post value. Mine is not, and perhaps even deflated. If the sociological implications of being an outlier were to be considered, my post value would be far higher than yours.
An example of a sociological implication: You average 11.31 posts a day and I average 6.73
5.9 / 11.31 = 0.52
Since you have almost twice the community involvement I do, your post value is bound to be inflated by forum codependency.
If you take a value of 5.9 and divide it by 0.52, your value is actually 11.3
Now my value
9.5 / 6.73 = 1.41158989599
9.5 / 1.41 = 6.7
6.7 > 11.3
I am a superior poster. -
2016-03-14 at 9:48 AM UTCLow value retort. Any idiot can see that you didnt take into account the fact that you have been posting since September and I have started posting last month. Your post count being well over 1200 and mine being well under 500. I assure you that post frequency has nothing to do with post value. Only thanks determine that. The Law of Thanks requires that Value be determined by the overall thanks to post ratio, as you so eloquently put it total posts / [(15 thanks per page x number of pages of thanks minus 1) + number of thanks on last page = Poster Value which I would shorten to p / [15 x (n-1)] + m = δ where p is the number of posts by the user, n is the number of pages of thanks, m is equal to (n-1) + 1 and δ is the ultimate value of the poster.
Now we could get into a silly charade of knowing systematic number manipulation. I could for instance say that it is in fact your score that should be much much higher. Let us say in the time we both have been on the site shall determine our poster value. I have been on the site a little over a month and you have been on since september 2015. In that time I have gathered 67 thanks over 400 posts. The math has been done here in the second post of the thread so I will not relay it here. The important thing is that I have a poster value of 5.9 which is in fact less than 6.7 which makes me the superior poster even if we are using your *magical* solution.
In the same amount of time you have gathered 61 likes over more than 500 posts. I found that I could not find posts further back than 2-17-16 so your post number could potentially be as high as 800 since my join date 2-6-16. I will use 501 as a fair estimate since I assume you made posts between the time of 2-16 to 2-17 but I cannot ascertain the exact number. This means that you have a much higher community involvement by the way and are (as most low value posters) a highly codependent user.
Let me do my math jive
501/61
8.21.
[SIZE=72px]EIGHT
I
G
H
T
POINT
O
I
N
T
TWO
W
O
ONE
N
E
[SIZE=12px]Are you fucking kidding me sploo? Are you even trying? 8 point 2 fucking 1?! Thats fucking garbage value posting. You should feel luck to be on a forum with us 5.9 value posters. Oh shit did you hear that? Sounds like a bucket full of thanks mother fucker. In the time this thread has started my value fucking skyrocketed! [/SIZE][/SIZE]I now have 117 thanks. People fucking love me. How many posts did I make in that time? less than 12. I have a post count of 411 before this post. Lets do some math pal.
411/117
3.51
3.51 thats a new record fella. I dont even think anyone can come close to that! I may be on track to becoming the penultimate. The chosen one. The forseen unseen. You see in the days of old the wise spoke of a poster. A poster who would be abound in thanks and glory. This user is called the Valued One or more esoterically The One of High Value. It was said, long before the law of poster value has been convinced, that there would be a primordial user who surpasses all singularity. A user whose poster value runs negative. It was said that this user was so powerful that he was born of memes. He lived of memes. He died of memes. It was said that with this power he would restore the temple for the peasants among its ruins and return the Prince to his throne. This may just be another example of sociological implication but if we look at circumstance, out of all of the poster values calculated thus far, I am mathematically and objectively the closest. And I am inching closer post by post.