Page 2 of 3
Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 6:25 pm
by Blitzaholic
DaGip wrote:timmytuttut88 wrote:here it is so far:
1.pyro55
2.benjij
3.solidwolf34
4.simtom
5.corman
6.unclesampresley
7.xtratabasco
7.hugeandmanly
9.alex_white101
You should include their feedback totals and the percentages as well...
For example:
simtom 48-61
127%xtratabasco 254-43
17%You see...not even close!
warsteiner has 19 with about 800 games or so, that is quite a bit, had no idea he had that much
Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 10:50 pm
by DaGip
xxtig12683xx wrote:DaGip wrote:volfan wrote:DaGip wrote:timmytuttut88 wrote:here it is so far:
1.pyro55
2.benjij
3.solidwolf34
4.simtom
5.corman
6.unclesampresley
7.xtratabasco
7.hugeandmanly
9.alex_white101
You should include their feedback totals and the percentages as well...
For example:
simtom 48-61
127%xtratabasco 254-43
17%You see...not even close!
pyro55 : 15-112
747%!!
Exactly! Just because you have neg feed doesn't mean your a bad player, right?
LOL the percentage is not 747%, its 88% LOL
Okay, let's place the math. 112 negative feeds + 15 positive feeds = 127 total feeds.
Out of a total of 127 feeds, 15 feeds are negative.
What's the percentage of negative feed compared to total feeds?
127 total must be divided by the number of negative feeds, right?
So your equation would be 127/15, which gives us an even higher percentage than previously mentioned!
847%
So our equation is
t divided by
n equals
P.
t/n=P
Now, to reverse this equation to find the total number of feeds, all we have to do is some simple algebra:
(n/1)(t/n)=(P/1)(n/1)
t=Pn or Pn=t
Now, just plug your percentage and your neg feeds into the equation:
(846%)(15)=t
(8.46)(15)=t
(126.9)=t
round your answer up, and you get 127=t.
So, 847% is the correct number. Try it! This number is not being exaggerated.
Basically this percentage is telling us that pyro55's negative feedback is 8.46 times greater than his overall feedback. If it was 88% your equation would work out as follows:
t=Pn
t=(88%)n
t=(88%)(112)
98.56=(.88 )(112)
round your total feed to 99.
So what you are trying to say is that pyro55's feedback total is 99?
Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 11:02 pm
by richardgarr
detoorteg 59 negs
Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 11:16 pm
by wrestler1ump
wicked wrote:Just a reminder that fishing for feedback, whether it's positive or negative, isn't allowed. We'll be keeping an eye out for everyone on this "list".
All I know is that wicked deleted one of my feedbacks as not factual despite not reading my part of the game dialogue.
Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 12:18 am
by DaGip
Jamie wrote:DaGip wrote:timmytuttut88 wrote:here it is so far:
1.pyro55
2.benjij
3.solidwolf34
4.simtom
5.corman
6.unclesampresley
7.xtratabasco
7.hugeandmanly
9.alex_white101
You should include their feedback totals and the percentages as well...
For example:
simtom 48-61
127%xtratabasco 254-43
17%You see...not even close!
your math leaves something to be desired. These would be the correct percentages
simtom 48-61
56%xtratabasco 254-43
14%
Okay, I was in a hurry that day. Let me correct it using the following formula:
As stated in my other post
t=total number of feeds
n=total number of neg feeds
P=% of Neg feeds to total number of feeds
so, therefore
P=tn
or
tn=P
simtom's total feed is 109
his total neg feed is 61
109X61=
6649%
I took algebra, ya know! geez...
Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 2:53 am
by Jamie
DaGip wrote:Jamie wrote:DaGip wrote:timmytuttut88 wrote:here it is so far:
1.pyro55
2.benjij
3.solidwolf34
4.simtom
5.corman
6.unclesampresley
7.xtratabasco
7.hugeandmanly
9.alex_white101
You should include their feedback totals and the percentages as well...
For example:
simtom 48-61
127%xtratabasco 254-43
17%You see...not even close!
your math leaves something to be desired. These would be the correct percentages
simtom 48-61
56%xtratabasco 254-43
14%
Okay, I was in a hurry that day. Let me correct it using the following formula:
As stated in my other post
t=total number of feeds
n=total number of neg feeds
P=% of Neg feeds to total number of feeds
so, therefore
P=tn
or
tn=P
simtom's total feed is 109
his total neg feed is 61
109X61=
6649%I took algebra, ya know! geez...
Holy crap you suck at math, how can more than 100% of his feedbacks be negative. He has 109 feedbacks, 61 one of which are negative. 61 is 55.963302752% of 61 to be exact. That rounds off to 56%.
Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 3:34 am
by DaGip
Jamie wrote:DaGip wrote:Jamie wrote:DaGip wrote:timmytuttut88 wrote:here it is so far:
1.pyro55
2.benjij
3.solidwolf34
4.simtom
5.corman
6.unclesampresley
7.xtratabasco
7.hugeandmanly
9.alex_white101
You should include their feedback totals and the percentages as well...
For example:
simtom 48-61
127%xtratabasco 254-43
17%You see...not even close!
your math leaves something to be desired. These would be the correct percentages
simtom 48-61
56%xtratabasco 254-43
14%
Okay, I was in a hurry that day. Let me correct it using the following formula:
As stated in my other post
t=total number of feeds
n=total number of neg feeds
P=% of Neg feeds to total number of feeds
so, therefore
P=tn
or
tn=P
simtom's total feed is 109
his total neg feed is 61
109X61=
6649%I took algebra, ya know! geez...
Holy crap you suck at math, how can more than 100% of his feedbacks be negative. He has 109 feedbacks, 61 one of which are negative. 61 is 55.963302752% of 61 to be exact. That rounds off to 56%.
You didn't provide a scientific formula like me...so I am right!
PLUS MY NUMBERS ARE BIG AND RED!!!!
Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 3:37 pm
by glynch19
percentages can be greater than 100%... so depending on how you want to look at it, it could be either. Positive feedbacks to negatives or negatives to positives.
Jamie your an idiot.
Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 4:46 pm
by jimboston
Why is this thread still around?
1) This guy apologized for cheating and was looking for people to take him off their Ignore list. I'm assuming that he's also no longer going to be fishing for Negative Feedback. So shouldn't this thing be left to die and/or deleted???
(BTW... I know that's a big assumption.)
2) Does anyone who has tried to calculate percetage of negative feedbacks understand math at all? Maybe people are joking... and I'm just missing the joke.
If you do need some basic math lessons I can help. You have your numerator and denominator backwards. You can't have a Negative Feedback percentage greater than 100%.
Let me state that again in another way. The highest possible Negative Feedback percentage would be 100%. It can't possibly be any higher than that. Period.
Also... to answer some earlier posts... yes... SOME percentages can be greater than 100%. Depending on what you are calculating and/or studying. However... in regards to CC and Negative Feedback percentage.... the highest possible number is 100%. If anyone disagrees with me they need to go back to high school.
As a side note... I would think any percentage higher than like 5-10% is too high anyway.
Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 4:49 pm
by jimboston
glynch19 wrote:percentages can be greater than 100%... so depending on how you want to look at it, it could be either. Positive feedbacks to negatives or negatives to positives.
Jamie your an idiot.
Glynch19....
You can compare ratios... Postive/Negative or vice-versa. Yes.
If you are calculating "Percentage of Negative Feedback".... this by definition would be "the percentage of Negative Feedback as compared to Total Feedback"... and hence this number CAN NOT be higher than 100%.
Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 5:27 pm
by volfan
xxtig12683xx wrote:DaGip wrote:volfan wrote:DaGip wrote:timmytuttut88 wrote:here it is so far:
1.pyro55
2.benjij
3.solidwolf34
4.simtom
5.corman
6.unclesampresley
7.xtratabasco
7.hugeandmanly
9.alex_white101
You should include their feedback totals and the percentages as well...
For example:
simtom 48-61
127%xtratabasco 254-43
17%You see...not even close!
pyro55 : 15-112
747%!!
Exactly! Just because you have neg feed doesn't mean your a bad player, right?
LOL the percentage is not 747%, its 88% LOL
We mean percentage comparing the positives with negatives. pyro's negative is 747% as much as his positives.
Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 5:33 pm
by jimboston
volfan wrote:We mean percentage comparing the positives with negatives. pyro's negative is 747% as much as his positives.
That is NOT "percentage of negative feedback".
That is a ratio of Negative-to-Positive.
You're defining what you are looking to calculate inaccurately.
I think you just like big numbers.
Compensating for something?
Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 10:26 pm
by glynch19
if your trying to prove a point, which looks better? a huge number or a small one.
the fact is, if you are displaying data it makes more impact to say that he has 747% more negatives than positives.
But yes you could say that 88% of his total feedbacks are negative
Jamie is still an idiot.
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 2:36 am
by DaGip
glynch19 wrote:if your trying to prove a point, which looks better? a huge number or a small one.
the fact is, if you are displaying data it makes more impact to say that he has 747% more negatives than positives.
But yes you could say that 88% of his total feedbacks are negative
Jamie is still an idiot.
Look at my scientific math equations! How can you argue with my evidence! Big percentages RULE! So go away, Jamie...we don't like your little stinkin' percentages around here!
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 12:09 pm
by tryagain
Who was the guy who used to watch games, yet not play his moves and make up truly foul abuse? I seem to remember his username was 'shit' but can't find him now. Think he was Norwegian or some other Scandinavian nation.
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 12:31 pm
by jimboston
I give up.
Logic and facts mean nothing on this board.
Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 9:37 pm
by volfan
glynch19 wrote:
Jamie is still an idiot.
Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 10:06 pm
by iamkoolerthanu
jimboston wrote:I give up.
Logic and facts mean nothing on this board.
I hear ya.
Posted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 12:04 am
by prisonbreak
wrestler1ump has 50 negs
Posted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 3:17 am
by owenshooter
i have what may amount to a very stupid question (as are most of
my questions...). however, it must be asked. if this is an attempt
at a TOP TEN list, shouldn't there be 10 and not 9, people? just
wondering...-0
Posted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 1:43 pm
by alex_white101
JOHNNYROCKET24 wrote:alex white has 39
LIES
Posted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 9:38 pm
by pimphawks70
owenshooter wrote:i have what may amount to a very stupid question (as are most of
my questions...). however, it must be asked. if this is an attempt
at a TOP TEN list, shouldn't there be 10 and not 9, people? just
wondering...-0
Re: Top 10 Most Negative Feedback List!
Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 7:04 am
by saaimen
Is it only about percentages? "Most negative feedback" can also be absolute numbers, I figured. In that case
HELLS ANGEL ( 181-61 )
shouldn't be forgotten... (Though his percentage is only 25,2%)
Re: Top 10 Most Negative Feedback List!
Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 4:29 pm
by Top Dog
simtom has alot of negs but I don't know why...... he's a good friendly player I think he may fish for negs however.......
Re: Top 10 Most Negative Feedback List!
Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 8:07 pm
by SlayerQC
there's this dummy, DOMQUEBEC that has 53-53.
I wish the "shower" wouldnt have quebec in his nick, he's shaming a whole nation with his FB and even more with his replies.
If I was webmaster/lack I would change his nick to DUMQUEBEC, specially considering that lackattack is from quebec too.