The
Everything's Best Users list is a ranking that is solely based on
XP. Since
XP can be gained in several ways other than writing high-
reputation nodes, the
Everything's Best User list does not rank users
by their write-up contributions alone, but also by their voting habits,
blesses, curses and what not.
A ranking that evaluates E2 writers solely by the merits of their
write-ups should consist of two factors: quantity and
quality:
E2-Contribution = quantity × quality
This definition is analogous to the XP rating system, where
quality represents the simple Node-Fu, and quantity
represents the number of write-ups. In order to use this definition for
ranking write-up contributions, the quality should be a measure of
the "average" write-up reputation for a noder.
As I have outlined in a previous write-up (Node-Fu), the mean
(average) write-up reputation is a poor measure of central-tendency
when there is a wide distribution around the mean. This is the case
for most noders; some of their nodes skyrocket while others remain close to
zero. For these wide distributions write-up reputations, the median is
a better "average", and in the same write-up I described how
to calculate this parameter, the Median Node-Fu (MNF).
The Median Node-Fu can now be used to rank noders by the
quality and quantity of their write-ups. I will call this parameter the
Median Node-Fu Product (MNFP):
MNFP = NC × (MNF+1)
Where NC is the total number of write-ups of a given noder, and MNF
is the noder's Median Node-Fu (see here how to
calculate this for any noder on E2).
The MNF is increased by one, to correct for the fact that new write-ups enter the database at reputation=0. Without this correction, a noder
with a total of 10 "reputation-less" nodes would have the same MNFP as a
noder with zero write-ups. An alternative way to think of this is as
an implied vote on your own write-up (you do believe that your own
work is a worthy addition to the database, don't you?).
The Median Node-Fu Product has the following properties (see
also the properties of the Median Node-Fu):
- It ranks a noder only on gained
write-up reputation and number of write-ups. It is independent of XP gained or
lost in any other way.
- It ranks a noder only on his/her current set of write-ups in
the database. Write-ups that were deleted or nuked do not matter.
- Very high or very low reputation (e.g. disagreement-downvoting on
controversial issues) generally do not affect the MNF, and thus will not
change the MNFP.
- Node Quality and Quantity are directly proportional; four rep=0
write-ups equal two rep=1 write-ups equal one rep=3 write-up.
So how do our Best Users stack up? Following is a table of
Everything's Best Users, ranked by their MNFP. This data was
collected on February 16, 2001, 15:56 and is therefore only a static
snapshot. I did not include any data of users that are not on
Everything's Best Users, but have a higher MNFP than the users listed
here. This table is only for demonstration of the concept.
W/U Exp. SNF MNF MNFP EBU Rank MNFP Rank
Pseudo_Intellectual 5211 42820 8.2 2 15633 01 01
Deborah909 1843 12502 6.8 4 9215 37 02
pingouin 2241 27888 12.4 3 8964 04 03
Segnbora-t 1947 34361 17.6 3 7788 02 04
sensei 915 23035 25.2 7 7320 07 05
Jet-Poop 1439 15441 10.7 4 7195 23 06
dannye 1397 28745 20.6 4 6985 03 07
Saige 1700 19691 11.6 3 6800 09 08
tregoweth 2147 16188 7.5 2 6441 20 09
dem bones 1965 25775 13.1 2 5895 05 10
hamster bong 829 18821 22.7 6 5803 12 11
knifegirl 1158 23445 20.2 4 5790 06 12
templeton 788 18479 23.5 6 5516 13 13
ideath 874 16324 18.7 5 5244 19 14
ariels 1280 12233 9.6 3 5120 40 15
Sylvar 985 18849 19.1 4 4925 11 16
wharfinger 686 13779 20.1 6 4802 30 17
Uberfetus 784 10868 13.9 5 4704 50 18
Gamaliel 1157 13825 11.9 3 4628 29 19
stand/alone/bitch 661 11971 18.1 6 4627 42 20
mat catastrophe 916 11932 13.0 4 4580 44 21
Tem42 1045 19899 19.0 3 4180 08 22
yossarian 1387 16947 12.2 2 4161 17 23
Lometa 1381 18030 13.1 2 4143 15 24
JeffMagnus 4084 11959 2.9 0 4084 43 25
ophie 679 13145 19.4 5 4074 32 26
juliet 1343 16657 12.4 2 4029 18 27
The Custodian 1006 12026 12.0 3 4024 41 28
BelDion 1995 15866 8.0 1 3990 22 29
iain 780 13136 16.8 4 3900 33 30
themusic 1273 14905 11.7 2 3819 25 31
Dizzy 608 12742 21.0 5 3648 35 32
Rancid_Pickle 1215 12716 10.5 2 3645 36 33
pukesick 1806 11069 6.1 1 3612 49 34
moJoe 1646 11176 6.8 1 3292 46 35
alex.tan 821 11073 13.5 3 3284 48 36
BaronCarlos 1617 18225 11.3 1 3234 14 37
Fondue 1595 18918 11.9 1 3190 10 38
General Wesc 1029 13658 13.3 2 3087 31 39
yam 974 14316 14.7 2 2922 27 40
nine9 958 17581 18.4 2 2874 16 41
perdedor 713 12400 17.4 3 2852 38 42
LordOmar 1387 16012 11.5 1 2774 21 43
dann 2590 14535 5.6 0 2590 26 44
/dev/joe 1012 15432 15.2 1 2024 24 45
N-Wing 908 11147 12.3 1 1816 47 46
anotherone 1202 11876 9.9 0 1202 45 47
dmd 965 12332 12.8 0 965 39 48
Dis 256 12912 50.4 2 768 34 49
Electricsound 542 13982 25.8 0 542 28 50
Remarkable is the big difference in noding styles. The Median
Node-Fu in this list ranges from zero to seven (nobody nodes like
our sensei!). Some people rank on the list with a high number of nodes
at a low median, while others write less at a higher median. Some people
make quite a drastic jump up (or down) the list compared to the
traditional Everything's Best Users list. Deborah909 apparently has
a big number of high quality nodes, while this wouldn't be apparent from
the simple node-fu, or her XP. The same is true for Jet-Poop,
who ranks 6th by MNFP, and 23 by EBU.
This analysis was not in any way meant to be contemptuous about
anyone's noding style or ther quality of the write-ups (and I know I still have
a lot to learn). It is simply another way of stacking it all up,
just like the Everything's Best Users list. No single parameter will
tell you how funny, intelligent, insightful, crazy or
beautiful one noder is to you.