Jim Charter wrote:
> A think an overview of the statistics is a great idea, and an 
> interesting challenge.  But it is not very clear to me what your site is 
> telling me.  The tracking of individuals, images, and of topics all 
> seems to be vying for attention.  Maybe some sort of graphs or charts 
> showing the profile of the data would help with understanding the 
> meaning of the display.  Or maybe just more detailed description of what 
> you intend to show.  Again I think it's a great idea but needs to be 
> taken a further.  The display of data in a meaningful way is not a 
> trivial task.  I have a pretty good understanding of the contest and who 
> the players are and I have a great deal of difficulty understanding what 
> is shown there.  I would definitely hesitate to refer the page to 
> someone unfamiliar with the contest.  Again, great idea, great 
> potential, needs further refinement imho.
Thanks for sharing this, I think I was not aware enough of that, 
probably because I made the site so I know what everything is.
In a way the spaghetti structure of the site is on purpose, because it 
is intended to let you browse the competition at will going from 
artist's pages to theme then another artist, etc.
But obviously I have been too fast in the explanation, trying to make it
short because people usually don't bother reading too much on the net.
I need to seperate what is equivalent to what's on the IRTC site, like 
theme's and rounds, and this yearly championship that I added and that
probably messes things up.
I'll work on clearing that up when I have time,

> The actual scores themselves, 
> as a comparative thing seem the least interesting to me.  I am more 
> interested in the people.
I had other people telling me that they were interested in more scores 
statistics, my position is more intermediate, so I'll see.

> Who are the main players, win percentage, who 
> were the early leaders, who are the later ones.  What you are touching 
> on is the history of the contest itself.  I think you need to address 
> how the numbers show that history.
The championship from start page is supposed to point out who the main 
players are.

> On a further note:
> 
> We have a distinct trend in fewer and fewer entrants it seems.  Yet 
> these newsgroups seem to be as lively as ever.  I can't keep up with all 
> the threads.  I wonder, can you analyte the data and see if there is any 
> trend in the number or percentage of new participants versus returning?
> Say if you pick some threshold, for an individual's degree of 
> participation, does it peak and then wane?  Have regulars moved on?  Is 
> this a constant process or was there a bulge?  Does the data reveal 
> anything more about this trend?
Interesting idea, I could have statistics about the number of new 
entrants for each round or the average number of previous entries among 
all entrants of a round.

JC
-- 
http://exether.free.fr/irtc (more IRTC stats !)

Post a reply to this message