 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
John VanSickle wrote:
> JC (Exether) wrote:
>
>>Here we go, it's ready :
>>http://exether.free.fr/irtc/
>
>
> I note that the rankings sum all of the scores over the course of the
> time frame. Consequently, my 24 animation entries put me at the top of
> the list for all four categories, even though I've only placed about
> half of the time,
>
> Regards,
> John
Yes, I had to think quite a lot about this, because obvisouly you can
imagine some one sending lots of entries and becoming first even with
average scores. But the fact is that this is not so easy to do, in
addition of doing a lot of entries this entrant would have to be quite
good too to get correct scores.
The fact that you submited a lot of entries and that they were of good
quality makes you first, this points you as the major contributor of the
competition, I don't see why and how I would penalize you. The
championship from start might look a bit strange, and newcomers might
have troubles getting in but it is what it is : from start.
In the stills competition there is examples of people having sent a huge
amount images and because they got only average score they're not first.
> and have never gotten the HM for Concept.
You have (Slow Motion), and you ranked once first (Adventure) and four
times second. You have to see that awards don't add any points, only
ranks do.
Don't be too humble you deserve you rank I think,
If you think that it is unfair, I'm listening suggestion.
JC
--
http://exether.free.fr/irtc (more IRTC stats !)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
JC (Exether) wrote:
>
> > and have never gotten the HM for Concept.
> You have (Slow Motion),
Now I see how your rankings work; they're sort of different from the
main site. No problem.
Regards,
John
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
John VanSickle wrote:
> JC (Exether) wrote:
>
>> > and have never gotten the HM for Concept.
>>You have (Slow Motion),
>
>
> Now I see how your rankings work; they're sort of different from the
> main site. No problem.
It seems that I need to add some more information. Thank you for
pointing that out.
JC
--
http://exether.free.fr/irtc (more IRTC stats !)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
news:4042e1b1$1@news.povray.org...
> It seems that I need to add some more information. Thank you for
> pointing that out.
By the way I won a Technical merit medal in "Worlds within Worlds" round
(2/2002 Stills) not Tom Melly, who won the Artistic Merit medal (in your
site the artistic merit appears as won by Marjorie Graterol).
See you
Txemi Jendrix
http://www.txemijendrix.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
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. The actual scores themselves,
as a comparative thing seem the least interesting to me. I am more
interested in the people. 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.
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?
-Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Txemi Jendrix wrote:
> news:4042e1b1$1@news.povray.org...
>
>>It seems that I need to add some more information. Thank you for
>>pointing that out.
>
>
> By the way I won a Technical merit medal in "Worlds within Worlds" round
> (2/2002 Stills) not Tom Melly, who won the Artistic Merit medal (in your
> site the artistic merit appears as won by Marjorie Graterol).
> See you
>
> Txemi Jendrix
> http://www.txemijendrix.com
Thanks for pointing that out, the error is due to the fact I was wrong
in the award assignation order, it seems to be Concept award first them
Artistic and then Technical. It looks a bit weird, and I hope they used
the same order in every round, otherwise I'll have similar problems.
I correct it next update.
JC
--
http://exether.free.fr/irtc (more IRTC stats !)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
JC (Exether) wrote:
> 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
Really I was just trying to encourage you to push it. I think it could
be a showcase site, more than just an aside. Give you more "permission"
to indulge the idea if that's what jazzes you. The championship points
idea is quite brilliant I think. I could image other spin off contests
too. Your site could be a place to retrospect leading participants or
certain entries too.
It was Nathan's entry for "School" that first galvanized my interest in POV.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jim Charter" <jrc### [at] msn com> wrote in message
news:4044000e$1@news.povray.org...
|
| 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?
|
The statistic in which I would be interested, although I doubt the
discovery of it could be automated, would be the percentage of entries
per round made with commercial software. This seems to be less a free
software competition and more an amateur commercial software competition
every round. This is just a feeling. I haven't taken the time to
actually count.
-Shay
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Shay wrote:
> "Jim Charter" <jrc### [at] msncom> wrote in message
> news:4044000e$1@news.povray.org...
> |
> | 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?
> |
>
> The statistic in which I would be interested, although I doubt the
> discovery of it could be automated, would be the percentage of entries
> per round made with commercial software. This seems to be less a free
> software competition and more an amateur commercial software competition
> every round. This is just a feeling. I haven't taken the time to
> actually count.
I thought about this, but as you say it is not possible to automate
(parsing just the basic stuff was tough enough :-).
JC
--
http://exether.free.fr/irtc (more IRTC stats !)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
