Record day compilation

[Greengoop]

What?

[The Jonster]

Let's refrain from using one-worded posts please, this isn't Discord or anything like that.
You know, Silver, lyndo, and I all discussed about doing all-nighters together. Actually I think you mentioned it too and I was surprised you were missing the first hours. You probably would have beaten me if you had made it but that was still a great job!

I dunno what happened to Dumbo yesterday. I kinda thought he would be much more active. Maybe if he hadn't gotten wound up dealing with Geigergast and his opposing belief he would have been around for a lot longer.

Certain old topics?

Some topics have been forgotten and buried over time that used to have more traffic when the activity was higher. The Riddles of the Glade is one of those topics.

[Greengoop]

Oh yeah! Can someone answer my riddle on there?

[DaveRattlehead]

It's a pity he didn't participate that much. I expected him to be more active, but I guess you're right, he was very angry with all that Rayman Legends discussion.

I didn't even plan to be an all-nighter this year, I definitely needed some rest, even if it was 5 hours. Maybe next year I'll try... But yeah, that was a massive effort what you did there.

[Greengoop]

Who are you talking about here?

[The Jonster]

He's talking about Dumbo. After his outburst with Geigergast he kinda just....dropped off. Even today I haven't seen him that much at all.

[Greengoop]

Oh yeah I remember! Last I saw of him was when he PMd me thanking me for sticking up for him

[DaveRattlehead]

That's weird, hopefully he'll be back.

Sticking to the statistics, I found interesting how "weird" is this year's data. If you look at the graph Plum did last year, the correlation was around 76%, but this year is around 71% (i.e., less relation between the people and the number of posts). This year is one of the years in which we have been furthest away from the trend line. We deviated as much as we did in 2012 and 2016. The year we deviated more from the trend line was in 2015. If we don't consider these 4 anomalies, the correlation between the participants and posts would be around 90%!

[CosmicStrider]

I suppose Rayman being in a game again, new RPC members joining and me finally posting again have something to do with it...Still, 90% is pretty darn high!

I actually managed to pull an all-nighter too, which surprised me. I didn't think I still had it in me! I don't work though, so maybe it really isn't all that surprising...

[Greengoop]

That's weird, hopefully he'll be back.

Sticking to the statistics, I found interesting how "weird" is this year's data. If you look at the graph Plum did last year, the correlation was around 76%, but this year is around 71% (i.e., less relation between the people and the number of posts). This year is one of the years in which we have been furthest away from the trend line. We deviated as much as we did in 2012 and 2016. The year we deviated more from the trend line was in 2015. If we don't consider these 4 anomalies, the correlation between the participants and posts would be around 90%!

Hmm, very interesting indeed

[PluMGMK]

I guess this speaks to all the preparation and energy put in by the people who did turn up?

Also that reminds me of the time I did a histogram of members' posts, but for the entire forum rather than just Record Day. Naturally it was a similar shape but even harder to make anything out beyond the zero bin! I wonder if we should log-log it to see if it follows the Pareto principle…

[DaveRattlehead]

That's a very interesting question. I wonder if you were suspicious about it, but... Yes, Record Day followed the Pareto principle!

For those who don't know what the Pareto principle is, it basically says that 80% of consequences come from the 20% of the causes. In our context, this means that 80% of the posts come from the 20% of the participants.

In RD there were 45 people participating (Ambidextroid posted with his secondary account). If you calculate the 20% of 45 people, that results in 9 people. According to the Pareto principle, these 9 users (Jonster, Greengoop, Plum, lyndo, Dave, SilverLum, Rayman Saturn, Steo and Hunchman) were responsible of, at least, 80% of the posts. So, as you can see in the graph, these 9 people were responsible of 83% of the total posts.

Thanks for the idea Plum

[Greengoop]

Wow, so that means most people barely stopped in? Maybe they didn’t even know it was RD?

[Mortamon Saturn]

It's crazy how much of a difference this year has made compared to the last ones!

You can even tell that just by my performance during the COVID years... I didn't even get to 100!
Though, I'm surprised my result during 2019 was so close to my original record, I don't remember being as active and I don't remember being spammy either!

Guess we were better prepared indeed as it seemed we weren't as ready during last time, as we discussed in that previous RD. We even suggested many ideas to make sure more people would participate.

Also nice graph there, definitely interesting!

[Greengoop]

Kinda odd how people had more free time during covid but still failed miserably on RD

[DaveRattlehead]

Wow, so that means most people barely stopped in? Maybe they didn’t even know it was RD?

No, it doesn't mean that. The Pareto principle comes to confirm that, in the end, there is also a certain implication factor in this event. Yes, the more people there are, the more posts there will be, but it also depends on how implicated the people are.

It's very common to see these kind of tendences. As an example, I'll show you an example with the most active Record Day. In 2015 you can see there were many people participating, resulting in lots of posts. Well, RD in 2015 followed the Pareto principle. 11 people were responsible of 82% of posts.

RD in 2022 also followed the Pareto principle. I could continue doing this with every year, but my guess is that we'll get very similar results.

[PluMGMK]

Excellent! I had a feeling this would show up here. I've heard it even shows up in linguistics, for word frequencies in a given corpus!

[Greengoop]

That's a very interesting question. I wonder if you were suspicious about it, but... Yes, Record Day followed the Pareto principle!

Pareto RD 2023.PNG

For those who don't know what the Pareto principle is, it basically says that 80% of consequences come from the 20% of the causes. In our context, this means that 80% of the posts come from the 20% of the participants.

In RD there were 45 people participating (Ambidextroid posted with his secondary account). If you calculate the 20% of 45 people, that results in 9 people. According to the Pareto principle, these 9 users (Jonster, Greengoop, Plum, lyndo, Dave, SilverLum, Rayman Saturn, Steo and Hunchman) were responsible of, at least, 80% of the posts. So, as you can see in the graph, these 9 people were responsible of 83% of the total posts.

Thanks for the idea Plum

Wait, why am I not on that graph?

[PluMGMK]

You are, don't worry! It's just that to make things less cluttered, only the name of every second participant is rendered! Notice that the first bar is labelled Jonster, the second one (yours) is unlabelled, the third one is labelled Plum, the fourth is unlabelled, etc.

[Greengoop]

Alright, that makes sense