LG G4 winner

ichigo said:
Hemi also has 9k posts?
Click to expand...

Lol, I hadn't done an exhaustive poll, but that just makes it three-for-three then.

Personally my wager is that the threshold that rpm uses is quite a bit lower, like 3000 posts, and all the posters who qualify end up having a lot more than that (e.g. 9000, 13000 etc) because it means they've been around for long enough, and stayed active enough, so they've naturally racked up mammoth post counts. The majority of MyBB's users by comparison dip in and out, and maybe engage for a short period of time and then leave for a few years again, all without racking up large post counts. They're just never even in the running.
 
Foxhound5366 said:
Lol, I hadn't done an exhaustive poll, but that just makes it three-for-three then.

Personally my wager is that the threshold that rpm uses is quite a bit lower, like 3000 posts, and all the posters who qualify end up having a lot more than that (e.g. 9000, 13000 etc) because it means they've been around for long enough, and stayed active enough, so they've naturally racked up mammoth post counts. The majority of MyBB's users by comparison dip in and out, and maybe engage for a short period of time and then leave for a few years again, all without racking up large post counts. They're just never even in the running.
Click to expand...

Zero evidence to back that up. As usual.
 
Crowly has won a ton of thinks, his post count ain't that high iirc. And I never win anything :mad:
 
Hamster said:
Crowly has won a ton of thinks, his post count ain't that high iirc. And I never win anything :mad:
Click to expand...

You never know Hamster, I suspect rpm has disqualification criteria exactly like he's got weighting criteria ... you've got the postcount, but you might be kicked out due to some other factor that's not being disclosed. Or you could just be severely unluckier than most, lol.
 
Foxhound5366 said:
Right, apart from this week's winners' post-counts, or is three-for-three a standard coincidence for you, given the average postcount of all people who entered those competitions?
Click to expand...

So that would be ZERO evidence then.
 
Foxhound5366 said:
You never know Hamster, I suspect rpm has disqualification criteria exactly like he's got weighting criteria ... you've got the postcount, but you might be kicked out due to some other factor that's not being disclosed. Or you could just be severely unluckier than most, lol.
Click to expand...
You know, you guys haven't tried hard enough to reverse engineer his formula. It is an "easy" one so that it can be easily verified, so with a bit of effort a pattern should be evident.
 
Foxhound5366 said:
Right, apart from this week's winners' post-counts, or is three-for-three a standard coincidence for you, given the average postcount of all people who entered those competitions?
Click to expand...
You should google the difference between correlation and causation sometime.
 
Foxhound5366 said:
I wouldn't call a poster with 9300 posts to his name 'truly random', would you? Or the fact that Polish has 13000+ posts either. Two big wins, two high-post winners ... do we really still need to be debating whether post count influences winning or not?
Click to expand...

Didn't remember his name. My bad.
 
Hamster said:
Crowly has won a ton of thinks, his post count ain't that high iirc. And I never win anything :mad:
Click to expand...

Cause it is not about post counts, it is about how long you have been a member where accounts before 2010 have a higher chance of winning big prizes :D.
 
Last edited:
ichigo said:
Cause it is not about post counts, it is about how long you have been a member where accounts before 2010 have a higher chance of winning big prizes.
Click to expand...

Not quite the same as the Fox theory.
 
Foxhound5366 said:
You never know Hamster, I suspect rpm has disqualification criteria exactly like he's got weighting criteria ... you've got the postcount, but you might be kicked out due to some other factor that's not being disclosed. Or you could just be severely unluckier than most, lol.
Click to expand...

Or you're just a sour puss for not winning.
 
biometrics said:
Not quite the same as the Fox theory.
Click to expand...

His theory never held water as the post count was close to a 50% chance of being high or low so no distinct pattern :D.

Age of account on the other hand has a 79.6% chance of being older than 2010 from the lasts 2 years for the first prize.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X