It occurs to me that you don’t have to run scripts to abuse the system. For example, this thread
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=79439
is essentially a challenge to go on a massive scavenger hunt through the archives. And someone did just that. No wonder the board was running so slow that evening. And probably other people were doing bulk searches too, but never bothered to post once the big list of links was posted…
In response to the O.P.-
Does anyone know how Bill H culled those numbers?
I know that some time ago another poster (Bill maybe? I don’t know) did a similar rundown but did it by accessing a normally disabled function of the boards software.
Is it possible he somehow used that method instead of actually going through all the posters and/or using a script?
Because I, for one, have had that screen, or function, pop up periodically.
It seems that people are jumping the gun on what Bill did or didn’t do. (At least from what we can tell from what’s posted- God only knows what goes on in e-mail)
At any rate, is it possible Bill H got those numbers some other way than what’s being accused?
Wait a second! If we get rid of post counts then newbies will no longer automatically defer to my magnificence based on my high count and will, instead, need to pay attention to what I say!
I’m so screwed!
I think it was Bill H. who posted the stats once before (I could be wrong). My impression at the time was that he snagged 'em during the brief period following the transition to vB when the Members function was operating.
CnoteChris wrote
I do.
I’ve intentionally stayed out of this discussion because I’ve been talking to the good lady Tuba via email trying to convince her to change her mind.
I for one don’t believe that public forums are the place to make policy decisions and I don’t intend to make my case in this public forum. It’s the decision of SDMB of how they want their board run, and I’m merely one of the guests here.
But I will answer your question by saying: It’s my belief that the technique I used did not put any excessive load on the board.
beatle wrote
Correct on both counts. I used a different technique this time.
I guess those that aren’t interested in statistics will never understand why those of us who revel in them do so.
Statistics that say something about the community that we ‘live’ in are especially interesting and relevant for many of us.
Tuba, I can understand your objection to scripts being run that call up SDMB pages electronically rather than by hand, due to their potential for abuse. And I can understand that you don’t want ‘big nasty searches’ slowing down the board, even at 3am.
But kindly understand that the meaningfulness and interest of statistics frequently varies with the beholder.
Don’t get me wrong; I like statistics, too. If they’re collected by a method which is friendly to the server and the members, then go for it. However, knowing how many posts one has must necessarily come second to being able to post at all. There’s some suspicions that Bill H.'s research caused the server to slow down that night (it’s a fact that the board was unusually slow that night; the cause is what’s under suspicion), and the method that he seems to have used is one that we very actively discourage, for very good reasons. That’s the problem here, not the use to which he put the information. If he had done the same research, but dumped all the output into the bitbucket, we’d be just as upset.
I think sdimbert caught a lot of it in his post. While the main attraction to this board has been, for me, GQ, I’ll readily confess that my social unions abetted by MPSIMS are not a small consideration.
It is an e-community. I can send all sorts of cyber-hugs and good wishes and the like without bearing any of the consequences that making the same sort of commitments to my IRL neighbors entail. Perhaps some of those missives bearing goodwill for the recipient are helpful and would not have been sent in another environment.
Perhaps they’re not at all helpful.
Hmmm…, is that good?
Chas, m’dear, you mustn’t have read my reply there very carefully. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt, k?
That search I ran did not slow down the boards by tying up the server. I ran a Subject Only search and it literally took all of TEN SECONDS to show the results. So if the boards were tied up at all, it was for a whopping ten seconds.
Sheesh.
Gotta admit, I love the post counts (though not really the parties)(ask me again in a few dozen posts, though) and the stats and all.
But that doesn’t mean anyone else has to. I’m just geek-i-fied that way. I love data.
I know just what RTF means Tuba. After all, you wouldn’t appreciate it much if people started dissing tuba playing as being meaningless would you?
Not that I am for one minute suggesting that anyone should attempt to harvest any SDMB stats of course. I quite agree that to do such is selfish whilst we’re all clinging to bandwidth by our fingernails. But really - you could have made your statement without a swipe at those of us who enjoy playing with numbers.
pan
I’m not going one way or the other on this issue, but I did have a question.
A lot of us have shown interest in the database stats here and in the previous crunch that Bill did. Would it be possible to create the default report say, once a month, and have it available for download from the site? That way Bill or RT or one of these guys could run the numbers for us while we all oohed and awwwed and there wouldn’t be a strain on the DB.
Maybe?
I think the board administration has good reason for not wanting us members to write programs that request page views for any reason.
But my thought is that perhaps, in order to encourage the forbearance of those who might be so tempted, the techs could compile and post some basic board stats once overy few months.
I wouldn’t mind that, actually. Kind of like an occasional “census” of the SDMB. I often wonder what kind of people are posting here, and although it’s easy to determine info about SOME people, its a hassle to look at everyone’s stats, and even then, they don’t always provide details. And, it doesn’t really give me any idea about the total population of the SDMB community.
But then, it’s not really an important issue for me. REmove post counts or keep them, provide stats or don’t - as long as I an still get my fix, I’m fine 