Re: London.pm posting stats

2001-06-10 Thread Jonathan Stowe

On Sat, 9 Jun 2001, Richard Clamp wrote:

 On Sat, Jun 09, 2001 at 09:57:52PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
  On Sat, Jun 09, 2001 at 09:10:53PM +0100, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
   And how about a signal/noise bias? ;-)
 
  The noise *is* signal.

 I'll have what he's drinking.


Drinking ?  SEE PATTERNS IN NORMALLY AMBIGUOUS [ VISUAL ] MATERIAL and
MORE TOLERANT OF CONTRADICTIONS are described in
http://www.druglibrary.org/special/tart/tart24.htm

:)

/J\






Re: London.pm posting stats

2001-06-09 Thread Greg McCarroll

* David H. Adler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
 On Fri, Jun 08, 2001 at 03:13:19PM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
  
  here is the results from a partial mbox of ny.pm messages, it is not
  that complete an mbox, but it does indicate that we are simply not
  doing or best to take over NY.pm
 
 You know, I've been meaning to ask...
 
 Why in the world would you *want* to take over NY.pm???
 

Because you've lost your way, there was a time that no one would ever
have to ask questions such as ...

Hmmm, is talking about beer off-topic or on-topic here?
- John Kominetz, 8/6/2001

Where did you go wrong? It used to be that London.pm could regard
NY.pm as its sister group (i would say brother, but you could never
handle your booze) shining brightly in the dark sky of Perl Monger
groups that talked about Perl. Whats next, NY.pm the educational 
cooperative? *shudder*

;-)


-- 
Greg McCarrollhttp://217.34.97.146/~gem/



Re: London.pm posting stats

2001-06-09 Thread David H. Adler

On Sat, Jun 09, 2001 at 10:03:29AM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
 * David H. Adler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
  
  You know, I've been meaning to ask...
  
  Why in the world would you *want* to take over NY.pm???
  
 
 Because you've lost your way, there was a time that no one would ever
 have to ask questions such as ...
 
   Hmmm, is talking about beer off-topic or on-topic here?
   - John Kominetz, 8/6/2001

He's new.  :-)

 Where did you go wrong? It used to be that London.pm could regard
 NY.pm as its sister group (i would say brother, but you could never
 handle your booze) shining brightly in the dark sky of Perl Monger
 groups that talked about Perl. Whats next, NY.pm the educational 
 cooperative? *shudder*

Well, that certainly won't happen while *I'm* in charge.  I'm *much* too
lazy to organize something like that...

:-)
-- 
David H. Adler - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.panix.com/~dha/
_Day of Wrath_ is probably Dreyer's most popular film, which already
indicates something of the problems it poses.
- David Bordwell, The Films of Carl-Theodor Dreyer



Re: London.pm posting stats

2001-06-09 Thread Jonathan Stowe

On Fri, 8 Jun 2001, Philip Newton wrote:

 Paul Makepeace wrote on Donnerstag, 7. Juni 2001 13:27:
Greg McCarroll: 1546
 **
Dave Cross:  762 
Jonathan Stowe:  729 ***
 Robin Szemeti:  586 **
David Cantrell:  563 **
Paul Makepeace:  504 
  Leon Brocard:  459 **
  Piers Cawley:  378 
David H. Adler:  365 ***
  Simon Wistow:  355 ***
 Philip Newton:  331 **

 Well, I just barely missed being in the Top 10... I didn't think I wrote
 *that* much. Horrors.


Well based on another totally unscientific sample you did :)

Greg McCarroll (426) **
Dave Cross (247) 
Robin Szemeti  (237) ***
David Cantrell (235) ***
Paul Makepeace (197) ***
Jonathan Stowe (192) ***
Dave Hodgkinson(170) *
Philip Newton  (162) 
Piers Cawley   (148) **
Dominic Mitchell   (134) *

/J\




Re: London.pm posting stats

2001-06-09 Thread Dave Hodgkinson

Jonathan Stowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 Well based on another totally unscientific sample you did :)

And how about a signal/noise bias? ;-)

-- 
Dave Hodgkinson, http://www.hodgkinson.org
Editor-in-chief, The Highway Star   http://www.deep-purple.com
  Interim CTO, web server farms, technical strategy
   



Re: London.pm posting stats

2001-06-09 Thread Simon Cozens

On Sat, Jun 09, 2001 at 09:10:53PM +0100, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
 And how about a signal/noise bias? ;-)

The noise *is* signal.

-- 
I cannot and will not cut my conscience to fit this year's fashions.
-- Lillian Hellman



Re: London.pm posting stats

2001-06-09 Thread Richard Clamp

On Sat, Jun 09, 2001 at 09:57:52PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
 On Sat, Jun 09, 2001 at 09:10:53PM +0100, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
  And how about a signal/noise bias? ;-)
 
 The noise *is* signal.

I'll have what he's drinking.

-- 
Richard Clamp [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: London.pm posting stats

2001-06-09 Thread Paul Makepeace

On Sat, Jun 09, 2001 at 09:57:52PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
 On Sat, Jun 09, 2001 at 09:10:53PM +0100, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
  And how about a signal/noise bias? ;-)
 
 The noise *is* signal.

It's signal, Jim, but not as we know it.

Paul

-- 
Destroy nothing; Destroy the most important thing



Re: London.pm posting stats

2001-06-08 Thread David H. Adler

On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 04:26:44AM -0700, Paul Makepeace wrote:
 This is dated from beginning of last year, and mutt is saying that's
 about 13,700 messages (gasp!). Note that some people
 (cough/dcrosscough/) appear more than once. Not that a) they
 necessarily need it b) have any hope, ever, of catching Greg...
 
   Greg McCarroll: 1546 **
   Dave Cross:  762 
   Jonathan Stowe:  729 ***
Robin Szemeti:  586 **
   David Cantrell:  563 **
   Paul Makepeace:  504 
 Leon Brocard:  459 **
 Piers Cawley:  378 
   David H. Adler:  365 ***

I... I'm so proud to have made it this far... *sniff*

dha, gettin' all emotional...

-- 
David H. Adler - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.panix.com/~dha/
Freedom ain't nothing but a word, ain't nothing but a word.  Let me
see your ID.  - Gil Scott-Heron, Johannesburg



Re: London.pm posting stats

2001-06-08 Thread Greg McCarroll

* Struan Donald ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:

 snip type=pretty pitures/
 
 this is almost as bad as those games that make a point of letting you
 know exactly how long you've played it. 
 

yip, all that time and i still haven't ascended ;-)

-- 
Greg McCarrollhttp://217.34.97.146/~gem/



Re: London.pm posting stats

2001-06-08 Thread Greg McCarroll


here is the results from a partial mbox of ny.pm messages, it is not
that complete an mbox, but it does indicate that we are simply not
doing or best to take over NY.pm

does anyone have a larger set of NY.pm messages we could analyse?

  David H. Adler:  137 **
   Michael G Schwern:   77 
 Jeff Pinyan:   42 ***
 John van V.:   28 **
Brooklyn Linux Solutions CEO:   28 **
   guinevere liberty:   25 *
 David Combs:   24 
  Greg McCarroll:   21 ***
 Adam Turoff:   20 ***
Brooklyn Linux Solutions:   20 ***
Chris Nandor:   18 **
  Jordan Coleman:   17 **
 Abigail:   16 *
  David Cantrell:   16 *
   Joshua Kronengold:   16 *
  Walt Mankowski:   15 *
  Jay Sulzberger:   13 
Ruben I Safir - Brooklyn Linux Solutions CEO:   13 
  James E Keenan:   12 
  Gidon Wise:   11 
Martin Heinsdorf:   11 
  Dave Cross:   10 ***



-- 
Greg McCarrollhttp://217.34.97.146/~gem/



Re: London.pm posting stats

2001-06-08 Thread Philip Newton

Paul Makepeace wrote on Donnerstag, 7. Juni 2001 13:27:
   Greg McCarroll: 1546
**
   Dave Cross:  762 
   Jonathan Stowe:  729 ***
Robin Szemeti:  586 **
   David Cantrell:  563 **
   Paul Makepeace:  504 
 Leon Brocard:  459 **
 Piers Cawley:  378 
   David H. Adler:  365 ***
 Simon Wistow:  355 ***
Philip Newton:  331 **

Well, I just barely missed being in the Top 10... I didn't think I wrote
*that* much. Horrors.

Oh well, life goes on. And sometimes life includes coming into work on my
last day of holidays because I just *know* london-list will have tons of
messages waiting for me and I don't want to talk half a day on my first day
back to work to sort through them. Well, it was only 683 IIRC (after 2.5
weeks), but still.

 PS The ratty bit of code, should anyone wish to automate this, that
produces this is:
 
 cat $* | formail +1 -x From: -ds | perl -lne 
 's-\\?--g;s/(\w+), ([\w\s]+\w)/$2 $1/;/^ (\w.*) / and 
 $p{$1}++; END {printf %20s: %4d\n,$p,$n while ($p,$n) = 
 each %p}' | sort -t : -k 2,2rn | head -40 | perl -lpe 
 's-(\d+)$-$1 .*x($1*($s||=50/$1))-e'

Any chance of arm-wrestling Greg Bacon's News::Scan into producing stats
from an mbox?

Cheers,
Philip
-- 
Philip Newton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
All opinions are my own, not my employer's.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.



Re: London.pm posting stats

2001-06-08 Thread David H. Adler

On Fri, Jun 08, 2001 at 03:13:19PM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
 
 here is the results from a partial mbox of ny.pm messages, it is not
 that complete an mbox, but it does indicate that we are simply not
 doing or best to take over NY.pm

You know, I've been meaning to ask...

Why in the world would you *want* to take over NY.pm???

dha, rabid weasel herder

-- 
David H. Adler - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.panix.com/~dha/
This is Mace's planet.  We Just Live here.



London.pm posting stats

2001-06-07 Thread Paul Makepeace

This is dated from beginning of last year, and mutt is saying that's
about 13,700 messages (gasp!). Note that some people
(cough/dcrosscough/) appear more than once. Not that a) they
necessarily need it b) have any hope, ever, of catching Greg...

  Greg McCarroll: 1546 **
  Dave Cross:  762 
  Jonathan Stowe:  729 ***
   Robin Szemeti:  586 **
  David Cantrell:  563 **
  Paul Makepeace:  504 
Leon Brocard:  459 **
Piers Cawley:  378 
  David H. Adler:  365 ***
Simon Wistow:  355 ***
   Philip Newton:  331 **
   Jonathan Peterson:  316 **
 Michael Stevens:  258 
 Mark Fowler:  250 
David Hodgkinson:  223 ***
 Dave Hodgkinson:  198 **
   Aaron Trevena:  192 **
   Robert Shiels:  176 *
  Redvers Davies:  176 *
   Roger Burton West:  156 *
Dominic Mitchell:  152 
Steve Mynott:  147 
   Neil Ford:  144 
Dean:  139 
Simon Cozens:  134 
   Robin Houston:  128 
   Richard Clamp:  122 ***
 Elaine -HFB- Ashton:  120 ***
James Powell:  118 ***
   Peter Corlett:  117 ***
   Nathan Torkington:  109 ***
   Struan Donald:  108 ***
dcross - David Cross:  106 ***
Matthew Byng-Maddick:  100 ***
 Tony Bowden:   97 ***
 Marcel Grunauer:   96 ***
  Paul Mison:   95 ***
Cross David - dcross:   86 **
Andy Wardley:   83 **
   Dean S Wilson:   82 **

Paul, *finally* not anywhere near the top.

PS The ratty bit of code, should anyone wish to automate this, that
   produces this is:

cat $* | formail +1 -x From: -ds | perl -lne 's-\\?--g;s/(\w+), ([\w\s]+\w)/$2 $1/;/^ 
(\w.*) / and $p{$1}++; END {printf %20s: %4d\n,$p,$n while ($p,$n) = each %p}' | 
sort -t : -k 2,2rn | head -40 | perl -lpe 's-(\d+)$-$1 .*x($1*($s||=50/$1))-e'



Re: London.pm posting stats

2001-06-07 Thread Struan Donald

* at 07/06 04:26 -0700 Paul Makepeace said:
 This is dated from beginning of last year, and mutt is saying that's
 about 13,700 messages (gasp!). Note that some people
 (cough/dcrosscough/) appear more than once. Not that a) they
 necessarily need it b) have any hope, ever, of catching Greg...

snip type=pretty pitures/

this is almost as bad as those games that make a point of letting you
know exactly how long you've played it. 

struan



Re: London.pm posting stats

2001-06-07 Thread Dominic Mitchell

On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 04:26:44AM -0700, Paul Makepeace wrote:
 Dominic Mitchell:  152 

Oh dear.  And I haven't even been subscribed since the beginning of the
year...

-Dom

-- 
| Semantico: creators of major online resources  |
|   URL: http://www.semantico.com/   |
|   Tel: +44 (1273) 72   |
|   Address: 33 Bond St., Brighton, Sussex, BN1 1RD, UK. |