Activity Table - A New Gizmo for FM

[Chris Hammond ( RSPB ACA PAC}]

Just had a quick look at my details.

.... they're incorrect. /forum/smilies/sad_smiley.gif

 

[Sean Meeghan]

Phew! For a moment I thought I was under John Conway, but I'm actually under Peter Jacobs. I suppose its better than being under the doctor.

If an article is worth 500 posts and a photo is worth 8 reviews is my opinion worth more than Deanos?

/forum/smilies/confused_smiley.gif

 

[Steve Spiller]

That cant be right Sean, I've only done 3 articles, but I've got loads of pics.

And myopinion aint worth Jack S......................................

/forum/smilies/disappointed_smiley.gif

 

[Peter Jacobs]

"I suppose its better than being under the doctor"

I'd guess that would depend on the nature of said doctor's specialities, as long as he is not a proctologist I guess you'd be okay.



[insert smiling thing = = = > HERE]

 

[Sean Meeghan]

Good job I did my Greek homework! Isn't procto greek for bottom?

/forum/smilies/sick_smiley.gif

 

[Gary Dolman]

Graham is there any way that the tech bods can install a counter on the articles themselves, as I think it would be good for the writers to see how popular the articles really are. The forums are generally appreciative, but tend to be less than representative of the total readership of the site.

Before anyone takes this as a slight, it is not mean't as a criticism of all our regular posters, long may they continue, but I am sure that there are many more like me who follow the threads with interest, but rarely post.

 

[Richard Farrow]

Before anyone takes this as a slight, it is not mean't as a criticism of all our regular posters, long may they continue, but I am sure that there are many more like me who follow the threads with interest, but rarely post.

Gary could I ask why it is that you read but do not post. It is in no way a criticism I just wonder why you take that stance.

 

[michael weedon]

Richard, I too read with a lot of interest, but very often can't think of any way to contribute either because it's all been said, or I feel I don't have the necessary knowledge to further the discussion without making myself sound like a pratt!!!

 

[Paul H]

Make yourself sound like a pratt Michael, I often do /forum/smilies/smile_smiley.gif

 

[Specihunter]

same here . I like the idea as it's like a ranking chart.

 

[Bryan Baron 2]

Just talk about the knowledge you have gained and the reasons why in your opinion. will always get a good response from the readers.

 

[Sean Meeghan]

Or you could just make it all up. I do that and people don't seem to notice!

 

[michael weedon]

Ok then. Thank you!

 

[Fred Bonney]

I think Gary's idea is a good one.

I seem to remember Kevingot to the point ,where he wondered if it was worth the effort.

IMHO, it would be good for those who regularly post an articleto seeviewing figures.

 

[Neil Maidment]

<blockquote class=quoteheader>Fred Bonney(ACA/BS/BTO) wrote (see)</blockquote><blockquote class=quote>

IMHO, it would be good for those who regularly post an articleto seeviewing figures.</blockquote>


Or perhaps not! /forum/smilies/wink_smiley.gif

Good idea tho.

 

[Fred Bonney]

..../forum/smilies/wink_smiley.gifand that/forum/smilies/big_smile_smiley.gif

 

[Wolfman Woody]

I can't work the damned thing out.

Now I'm no.8. Last week I was no. 30 in the 30 day chart and no.2 in the overall chart.

I seem to be up and down like a bride's nighty.

People with a couple of postings, a picture and 1 review are ahead of me. Ed is down at no. 89 or somewhere and he posts superb (if you like em) jokes every day. Where's the logic.

I've always wanted a viewing counter for the articles. Perhaps Graham thinks if the writers see they get enouth views they'll demand money. That would be wrong.

A pie or two might help though.

 

[GrahamM]

<blockquote class=quoteheader>Graham Marsden wrote (see)</blockquote><blockquote class=quote>The trekkies are still working on it so for the time being the table is not functioning correctly. I'll post on here when the problem has been resolved.</blockquote>
<blockquote class=quoteheader>Graham Marsden wrote (see)</blockquote><blockquote class=quote>The trekkies are still working on it so for the time being the table is not functioning correctly. I'll post on here when the problem has been resolved.</blockquote>
<blockquote class=quoteheader>Graham Marsden wrote (see)</blockquote><blockquote class=quote>The trekkies are still working on it so for the time being the table is not functioning correctly. I'll post on here when the problem has been resolved.</blockquote>


Hopefully, that should do the trick. I really will post on here when the trekkies have resolved the problem.

Where publishing the viewing figures of articles is concerned, that's great for those who would appear at the top of it, but not very encouraging for those at the bottom.

And someone has to be at the bottom no matter how good their article is.

 

[carl pepper]

<blockquote class=quoteheader>jeff, i'm not sure but i think graham means,</blockquote><blockquote class=quote><blockquote class=quoteheader>Graham Marsden wrote (see)</blockquote><blockquote class=quote>The trekkies are still working on it so for the time being the table is not functioning correctly. I'll post on here when the problem has been resolved.</blockquote></blockquote>

 

[Sean Meeghan]

Ah - that'll be the old tell them what you're going to tell them, tell them, then tell them what you told them, technique!