What is this K on my mini profile thing????

reply to post by FlyersFan


Well see they had to get rid of the bars because people kept getting judged that their bar just wasn't big enough.. I was fine, my bar was medium, it was average. Then some had looonnggg bars.. and that made folks with wee wittle bars a bit jealous, so they sought a remedy to hide their tiny bars by complaining to get rid of bars all together. Some people perhaps put to much into the size of their bar.. it's not the size that counts of course..

They changed the Wats calculation as well it seems..

I never took calculus so I can't say how it's done.

Originally posted by OrionHunterX
Here's how you calculate 'K'....
K = (S/P + S ∑3 + ∞ * X ⅞ /W*F√46 ≠ 9 ∞√X÷P)

Close, but you forgot to factor in the logarithmic progression of stars-per-day as a function of the current sun spot cycle when overlaid against new moons.

K = Kinetic energy?

Something to do with energy and works perhaps?

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by OrionHunterX
Here's how you calculate 'K'....
K = (S/P + S ∑3 + ∞ * X ⅞ /W*F√46 ≠ 9 ∞√X÷P)

Close, but you forgot to factor in the logarithmic progression of stars-per-day as a function of the current sun spot cycle when overlaid against new moons.

Darn! Now how the dickens did I forget this? Heck! It's back to the drawing board! Jeeeez!

Edit to add:

Blistering barnacles! My computer just crashed!!

I thought I understood this system (sort of) but am now confused as I just saw a new poster with 1 post, no stars and 20 karma

Ehh???

reply to post by destination now

It's all a mystery; but perhaps the formula involves adding 20 at an early stage and then dividing by number of posts at a later stage,besides bringing in the stars. Then a first-time poster's Karma could be 20 divided by 1, ie 20, which would then come down rapidly once he made more posts. Just a theory.

reply to post by DISRAELI


Is a high K better or is a Low K better?

All this talk about k makes me want to kill a moose.
Metaphorically and philosophically speaking of course.

reply to post by In nothing we trust

As far as I know, high K is supposed to be better. Which is why the other poster was surprised that a new user could be as high as 20. There was talk about it on the "ATS 2010 update" thread, which is where I'm getting my information from.

First... the "WATS" score. I know many believe there to be some controversy or at the least, unfairness, in the method of calculation for the "Way Above Top Secret" ranking. The concerns/comments/ideas have not been ignored, but since the intent is to apply a heavy statistical weight to those who start threads, I believe the oft-discussed formula serves that purpose well, but may be refined as a result of the KARMA rank in order to place a much higher value on flags.

However, there are lots of members who contribute well, but may not start many threads; the KARMA score is for them. The karma calculation places a high weight on stars, a secondary weight on staff applause, and a tertiary lesser-weight on Flags; then compares all that against the number of posts. So that it is indeed possible for a new member with few threads, but great ideas in lots of replies, to achieve a higher "KARMA" than long-time high-WATS members.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Quoted from Skeptic Overlord from another thread.

I've been wondering about this for a long time. DontTreadOnMe's link above to Skeptic Overloard's explanation made a lot of sense to me, so thanks.

I thought for a while that Karma might have something to do with "interactivity," i.e., how often you respond to and engage with other posters, how often you star or flag others, etc. But I guess not.