A Proposal for Revamping the Stars

[CraigRat]

Okay, another idea...Display number of finds and ranking. Ranking could be of people who've logged a find in Aust, or of GCA members. I'm sure this could be derived from C@W stats!

Ouch!
That would certainly cause pain to the server (on a computational basis).
(There are sites that do rankings out there if that is your thing....)

I wouldn't be to keen on exact find numbers, coz we will inevitably end up with stacks of admin requestss aying 'I have x finds and it shows only y finds....' ... keeping it grouped to every 50 would be a nicer option... (there are only so many faeries looking after the stats!)

[Cached]

My suggestion for levels is:

50
100
150
200
250
500
750
1000
1500
2000
2500
then continue 500 increments.

I like the number idea though. But issued in the same way as stars.

Sam

[dak's Emu Mob]

My suggestion for levels is:
<p>
. . . stuff deleted . . .
<p>
I like the number idea though. But issued in the same way as stars.

<p>
Sounds good to me. I reckon digits is the way to go, if we are to persist with the system.
<p>
I never was suggesting live numbers. I think what Sam suggests is the way to go, or a variation of it.
<p>
So, gathering some of the suggestions into a single proposal, how about this:
<p>
White numbers for 0&#150;99 (which would be 00050 only)<br />
Red numbers for 100&#150;999<br />
Cyan numbers for 1000&#150;4999<br />
Green numbers for 5000&#150;9999<br />
Yellow numbers for 10000&#150;?
<p>
The colours could be changed to suit someone else's aesthetics. For example, make all numbers the same colour; I would suggest green on a black background.
<p>
Show increments of 50 for finds up to 1000.<br />
Show increments of 100 for finds up to 5000<br />
Show increments of 500 for finds greater than 5000
<p>
I'd be happy to make up the graphics, if someone would provide a full set of digits. Presumably, the stars code would need to be changed to show numbers above the current limit of 4000.
<p>
Cheers,
<p>
dak

[caughtatwork]

The stars code is phpbb software.
We're going to have to hack it to get it to work.

Please continue the discussion and we'll put it to the senate.
Then depending on the decision, try and determine a way forward.

[Geof]

Ouch!
That would certainly cause pain to the server (on a computational basis).
(There are sites that do rankings out there if that is your thing....)

I wouldn't be to keen on exact find numbers, coz we will inevitably end up with stacks of admin requestss aying 'I have x finds and it shows only y finds....' ... keeping it grouped to every 50 would be a nicer option..

Or we could just stick with what we have and let those who wish use a live feed from their server (aka avatar) with bannanas, digits, stars, smilies, cache icons, jeeps or what ever takes their fancy.

[zactyl]

Ouch!
That would certainly cause pain to the server (on a computational basis).
(There are sites that do rankings out there if that is your thing....)

I wouldn't be to keen on exact find numbers, coz we will inevitably end up with stacks of admin requestss aying 'I have x finds and it shows only y finds....' ... keeping it grouped to every 50 would be a nicer option..

Or we could just stick with what we have and let those who wish use a live feed from their server (aka avatar) with bannanas, digits, stars, smilies, cache icons, jeeps or what ever takes their fancy.

There's a good point. I'm sure there's people here with the knowledge who could point the way to a tutorial or write one up. Groundspeak provides something like that, although it's 200px wide. Has the right numbers too!

[caughtatwork]

Does not It doesn't know about these.

[Sunshine Toledo]

I would be happy with the colour coded digits as suggested and with the increments that Dak has suggested above.

[SecretSquirrel-BJC]

Usually I don't feel passionate about things but I think completely abandoning stars is crap.

I don't object to changes in increments, nor do I have a problem with digits for those who want digits.

If you remove stars and only go with digits, please provide me with a way to remove them for me - thanks.

And the validity of the argument should not receive extra weight because of the number of caches you have found - no offence intended.

[Damo.]

I vote for digits. It would be encouraging to see regular, small increases in our numbers.

<------ There's a bit over there that shows that!
But those ones don't count of course.

[listmaker]

Yeah, alright, details aren't my strong point - that's why I like the proposed bright numbers. And I like seeing all finds from all sites.

[dak's Emu Mob]

And the validity of the argument should not receive extra weight because of the number of caches you have found - no offence intended.

<p>
It's hard to imagine how such a comment could <i>not</i> cause offence!
<p>
Cheers,
<p>
dak

[caughtatwork]

As indicated by CraigRat, real time counts will never be implemented. Simply too hard a hit on the database to calculate the number of finds per cacher posting in the thread.

I'm not quite on the side of the numbers either.

A number showing 5000 seems to be quite precise, but is actually inaccurate.
A star is an indication of what "range" you are in rather than an imprecise number.

5 red stars would mean 500 or more.
The number 500 conveys a different meaning and would introduce the question of why isn't it showing 512 which is the actual number.

Interesting discussions though and one that has attracted a lot of attention in a short time. Maybe it is all about the numbers

[CraigRat]

It should also be noted that some of this discussion is moot, given that at this very instance none of the active development team have access to the code for the forum, so there should be no reason for people to stress about proposed changes....

Things may change over time of course, but as it stands we cannot mod a lot of the existing code on this particular part of the site.