Apparently your complaints worked, all of your negatives have disappeared.
So the reputation system is here to stay, but making a fuss makes negatives disappear.
Not a real endorsement of “self policing” or “system”…
Bob, I am disappointed… ALL removed? How about me and my 8 negatives? I know some of them are much older than Ralphs.
Instead of “manning up”, should I whine?
I realize this will piss you off… but I don’t need to work under an unfair system.
Greg
I havent removed anyones negatives or positives.
EDIT: all I see for Ralph in the system is what displays next to his profile. Same for me, HJ, Greg, and Bob C. There dont appear to be any missing records in the table.
Mista B said:
. . . .
But since you said it was here to stay, I just thought I should point out that something wasn’t quite right.
. . . .
Deleted - an unnecessary comment that was not in the spirit of friendly harmony.
Sorry Greg.
No ulterior motive here.
No negatives.
No whining.
Just pointed out something that didn’t look right.
Ralph
OK, I must have altzheimers… my apologies… to Bob and you and the forum.
Repeat: please accept my apology.
Regards, Greg
No problem, Greg. I wasnt sure if Ralph had had any negatives, and started digging, but couldnt find any. Then I was totaly confused too. I suppose we can give him some if he feels left out…
I noticed something interesting, that the “ratio” line will not necessarily display, depending on the length of the post.
the post above by bob does not show the ratio, but my post here shows the ratio.
I also noticed how any ratios with an infinitely repeating number as a result show a lot of digits, apparently a ratio as a result of a division that is NOT an infinitely repeating number have the trailing zeros stripped and don’t show all this “precision”
Note: NOT a complaint, or even irritation, just an observation.
Greg
There is no ratio because he has no negatives.
I only have 2 because of you, giving them re-enforced my thinking…
Be Blessed.
John
Greg Elmassian said:
I noticed something interesting, that the “ratio” line will not necessarily display, depending on the length of the post.
the post above by bob does not show the ratio, but my post here shows the ratio.
Note: NOT a complaint, or even irritation, just an observation.
Greg
Are you suggesting a division by zero? (http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-wink.gif)
Todd Brody said:
Greg Elmassian said:
I noticed something interesting, that the “ratio” line will not necessarily display, depending on the length of the post.
the post above by bob does not show the ratio, but my post here shows the ratio.
Note: NOT a complaint, or even irritation, just an observation.
Greg
Are you suggesting a division by zero? (http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-wink.gif)
To infinity, and beyond! (http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-laughing.gif)(http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-surprised.gif)(http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-innocent.gif)
Think you are right about ratio not showing if no negatives.
I did not test a short post with a ratio… yes, no ratio shows if no negatives. I made this post one line and my ratio still showed.
Anyway, the think I notice the most is the sometimes long, sometimes short formatting of the ratio.
Greg
Steve Featherkile said:
Are you suggesting a division by zero? (http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-wink.gif)
To infinity, and beyond! (http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-laughing.gif)(http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-surprised.gif)(http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-innocent.gif)
Actually, must be the “beyond” because division by zero is not “infinity,” it’s “undefined.” (http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-wink.gif)
Todd Brody said:
Steve Featherkile said:
Are you suggesting a division by zero? (http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-wink.gif)
To infinity, and beyond! (http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-laughing.gif)(http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-surprised.gif)(http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-innocent.gif)
Actually, must be the “beyond” because division by zero is not “infinity,” it’s “undefined.” (http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-wink.gif)
So is “Infinity.” 
No…, not really the same.
A number can be divided by infinity and is infintesimally small. A number cannot be divided by zero.
Even Wikipedia notes that division by zero is “undefined” but division by infinity is just infinitly small.
But not really the place to argue semantics. (http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-innocent.gif)
I think my infinitely small brain is to undefined to think about this.
Devon Sinsley said:
I think my infinitely small brain is to undefined to think about this.
Q. E. D. I rest my case.(http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-laughing.gif) (http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-surprised.gif)(http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-innocent.gif)
I got a fat one… brain cell.
Ratio; is a comparison of 2, if 1 is none, then you ain’t got but one.
Clear enuf?
Oh, boy, this could go on forever. Mathematicians have been arguing about this for centuries.
Reading over this thread to get re-acquianted with LSC, I took notice of Ggreg’s posts about the ratio line not showing occassionally. I had noticed this before, but not made the connection, but you can be certain I’ll be looking for a case where a post doesn’t follow that rule. (Not to cause problems, but in the same spirit as what happens when you tell a person “just don’t look down”).
Looking back and confirming for myself that no neg’s resulted in no ratio line, I noticed that Greg pointed out that Bob’s post above fit that rule, and like the person told not to look down, my first thought was “Ya, I would like to know WHOM would be the idiot to try giving Bob his first negative”. No offense intended there, just an idle thought. (About as idle as teh hirail gear on a pickup doing 70mph down I-99)
Here is to old friends who have left us to early, and to those who despite themselves can’t figure out why they still run a forum with all us wacky nuts around.
