Discussion So I crunched the numbers …. again

[ClarkeM]

Tbf I picked the Royals arbitrarily. You could use any team in my example and I'd be asking the same questions. Were the Furies 113 or so from 3 posters or from an even contribution of 10? Which is a better experience for all involved? What is the balance between lots from a few or a few from lots?

Just some extra thinking that's worth considering.

To use the Bears as the test case simply because I have those numbers easily available. They had on average, 406.79 poster per week from an average of 18.29 players. So against the Bears you would expect around 18 different players to face and each will contribute around 22 posts each.

Is that good? Is that what we'd want from the league from each team? Do we want variety where you have 1822 sides, 0590 sides and 2510 sides?

Or do we not count the sub 5 posters? For the Bears this would be 14 players for 380 posts, average of 27 poster per "active" player. Is this what we want?

Interesting discussion to have with numbers.

 

[DemurePrincess]

 

[ClarkeM]

Why?

 

[Millky95]

I have no idea what you are referencing, sorry

 

[Pugsley]

Only struggle US Bombers have is….should we have ‘pants off’ everyday or eat cake?

Both sounds good.

 

[DemurePrincess]

Why?

Just NO!

 

[Pugsley]

Why?

Why not?

 

[Robertio]

Tbf I picked the Royals arbitrarily. You could use any team in my example and I'd be asking the same questions. Were the Furies 113 or so from 3 posters or from an even contribution of 10? Which is a better experience for all involved? What is the balance between lots from a few or a few from lots?

Just some extra thinking that's worth considering.

To use the Bears as the test case simply because I have those numbers easily available. They had on average, 406.79 poster per week from an average of 18.29 players. So against the Bears you would expect around 18 different players to face and each will contribute around 22 posts each.

Is that good? Is that what we'd want from the league from each team? Do we want variety where you have 1822 sides, 0590 sides and 2510 sides?

Or do we not count the sub 5 posters? For the Bears this would be 14 players for 380 posts, average of 27 poster per "active" player. Is this what we want?

Interesting discussion to have with numbers.

First you'd have to come up with what's a worthwhile number to pinpoint as beig a contribution. Would it be 10 or 15 posts or even back to 6 or 7 lets say one a day.

 

[ClarkeM]

First you'd have to come up with what's a worthwhile number to pinpoint as beig a contribution. Would it be 10 or 15 posts or even back to 6 or 7 lets say one a day.

I would argue either 6, maybe 7 is suitable.

 

[ClarkeM]

I have no idea what you are referencing, sorry

They're numbers

 

[Robertio]

I would argue either 6, maybe 7 is suitable.

Yep if you can convert the bottom few from 0 to 6 or 7 you'd be laughing.

 

[Kilroy]

First you'd have to come up with what's a worthwhile number to pinpoint as beig a contribution. Would it be 10 or 15 posts or even back to 6 or 7 lets say one a day.

If you count how many posted each week there’s up to 14 per poster included for the season … and that’s all!

Whether you posted or not is more relevant than the number of posts IMO.

 

[Hydatina Physis]

Thanks mate.

Glad someone else can appreciate the productivity without getting bitter.

No worries Kilroy. While I could never hit those numbers and not burn out, I do admire how the Bombers seem to all get on the same page. Playing the Bombers does feel like playing a team as opposed to some other clubs.

And wait till the Gumbies choke…

I come here as a shit talker not a Gumbie. Don't wish ill onto those beautiful blue freaks just because of me.

 

[DemurePrincess]

No worries Kilroy. While I could never hit those numbers and not burn out, I do admire how the Bombers seem to all get on the same page. Playing the Bombers does feel like playing a team as opposed to some other clubs.


I come here as a shit talker not a Gumbie. Don't wish ill onto those beautiful blue freaks just because of me.

Make up your mind… insult then a compliment! Sheesh!

Go Gumbies

 

[Hydatina Physis]

Make up your mind… insult then a compliment! Sheesh!

Go Gumbies

Not insult DP, just stated a fact. I might’ve stated it like a campaigner but that's irrelevant.

 

[Millky95]

First you'd have to come up with what's a worthwhile number to pinpoint as beig a contribution. Would it be 10 or 15 posts or even back to 6 or 7 lets say one a day.

Oh agreed and that's an interesting first place to start: what's a contribution in a match thread? I believe the committee are discussing All SFA selections at the moment so will be interesting to see what they define the best of the best for the season's posting requirements to be at then we could work backwards

 

[Robertio]

Oh agreed and that's an interesting first place to start: what's a contribution in a match thread? I believe the committee are discussing All SFA selections at the moment so will be interesting to see what they define the best of the best for the season's posting requirements to be at then we could work backwards

Last time i was on the committee All SFA posting was set at 15ppw, yeah we'll work back from that

 

[Hydatina Physis]

Last time i was on the committee All SFA posting was set at 15ppw, yeah we'll work back from that

That's crazy. Should be 1pps for All-SFA.

 

[Robertio]

That's crazy. Should be 1pps for All-SFA.

Nah make them earn it mate.

 

[Jabba73]

Last time i was on the committee All SFA posting was set at 15ppw, yeah we'll work back from that

It was 20 for as long as I have been in there … until someone needed it to be 15 to make the team.

If you want all-SFA to celebrate the elite, then 20 or should be the absolute minimum.

 

[Robertio]

It was 20 for as long as I have been in there … until someone needed it to be 15 to make the team.

If you want all-SFA to celebrate the elite, then 20 or should be the absolute minimum.

I'm sorry Jab but i agree with you.

 

[Jabba73]

I'm sorry Jab but i agree with you.

I'm sorry too mate, agreeing with me tends to get people hurt.

 

[Millky95]

Last time i was on the committee All SFA posting was set at 15ppw, yeah we'll work back from that

It was 20 for as long as I have been in there … until someone needed it to be 15 to make the team.

If you want all-SFA to celebrate the elite, then 20 or should be the absolute minimum.

I'm sorry Jab but i agree with you.

I like 20, it's a sexy round number that's very divisible. And this is all assuming an average post per round

20+ is All-SFA tier
15-19 is great
11-14 is engaged
6-10 is active
1-5 is hardly active
0 is inactive

What minimums of that list would we consider a "healthy" team to have?

 

[Jabba73]

I like 20, it's a sexy round number that's very divisible. And this is all assuming an average post per round

20+ is All-SFA tier
15-19 is great
11-14 is engaged
6-10 is active
1-5 is hardly active
0 is inactive

What minimums of that list would we consider a "healthy" team to have?

Minimum of 5 in each category except the inactive one would be ideal.

You need 5 elite to nominate for all-SFA and there are varying stages of engaged that are perfectly acceptable, so an even spread across the other rankings would be a healthily active club.

 

[Jabba73]

Oh well, looks like we are aiming for mediocre again this season, the minimum has been set at 15pw.

Only 4 teams voted for it.