|
There might be more, but one thing I am sure Chris must be looking into must be CP MVP 2013 list! Running more than a week late now...
|
|
|
|
|
For future reference - the MVP list typically comes out somewhere between the 7th and 9th of January, so it's not running late.
|
|
|
|
|
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: the MVP list typically comes out somewhere between the 7th and 9th of January, so it's not running late.
Is so? My bad then! 
I was under the assumption that it got late last time because of some reason and this year because of other.
Thanks for sharing the info.
|
|
|
|
|
Part of what Chris and team does is check the validity of the awards. This takes time. A few years ago, there were complaints about some of the MVP awards, so Chris (as is his wont) bends over backwards to make sure that things are kosher, and that the community is happy.
|
|
|
|
|
Got that! 
|
|
|
|
|
My points got down two times. I am not sure what is happening. There is no negative ranking then also there is sudden drop of 2000 points before few days and now again drop of 250 points. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the message by Chris answers the question in some way, but in fact the rep points are different from what they should be. For example the author rep points are lower than the number of downloads in some cases, wich is hardly possible, because you also get points for publishing articles/bookmarks/upvoting and you don´t lose so many points due to downvoting. So if the raw data is correct, as Chris says, there´s still a bug in the system!
|
|
|
|
|
My points were upped since last night, not as much as I lost the last time. But seeing Chris's post makes it reassuring.
The first step in the acquisition of wisdom is SILENCE, the second is LISTENING, the third MEMORY, the forth, PRACTICE and the fifth is TEACHING others!
|
|
|
|
|
Hey Chris,
I know that there was a lot of discussion about rep points and stuff already, and I really don´t want to complain  but your message sounds like everything is okay with the rep points now, so I´ve got a little question:
When you look at my articles you can see that one of them has been downloaded over 11,000 times .. together with the points for bookmarks and other stuff and to points from the other article, this should add up to at least more than 15,000 points or so .. But when I look my profile I can only see 8,000 points. I know that you can loose points due to downvoting and so on, but I don´t think that I lost so many
So my question is, if both the raw data and the points are accurate, how can you explain this huge gap between the two values? Any ideas?
|
|
|
|
|
I am also facing the same issue.Total downloads are more than 7K but my points for article section is less than 6K.
I understand there are some things are going on to fix this, but we will be glad if we should have come up with different strategy for reputation points
|
|
|
|
|
I will admit you had me a bit concerned for a moment. I dug into the data and found that, of your downloads, a good number were repeated downloads.
Rep points for downloads represent unique downloads, so you get the points the first time a given member downloads a file, but not for subsequent times they download that file.
I'll update the notes on reputation events to make this clear.
Thanks for pointing this out - it gave me an excuse to dive in again and double check a few things.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
My reputation points still continues to fall.
“Milletler birleşince refaha, ayrılınca da fakru zarurete düçar olurlar”
Nuri Demirağ, 1954
|
|
|
|
|
Read Chris' post above...
Soren Madsen
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly" - Jase #DuckDynasty
|
|
|
|
|
I've tracked my statistics for some time and it looks like values just dropped.
I always saw a respective entry in details for any stats change, so the answer is that events in details are wrong too? Or there're so much bugz? 
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah it seems like a whole bunch of the raw data is accidentally excluded from the rep point calculation ..
|
|
|
|
|
As promised a while ago I've spent a bit of time working through the labyrinth that is our rep points system. We have an on-going issue whereby our rep point summary by rep type is out of sync with the raw data, meaning I need to resync these occasionally which results in a change in your reported rep points.
As I mentioned before, the raw data is accurate, but the rep point total you saw at the right of your name at the top of each was not accurate. It was, in some cases, high. The resyncs set your rep points to what they should be, and no points have been "lost". It's a correction, not a losing of points.
I know that this still sucks and a technical explanation of a bug doesn't really help. What I do hope will help, though, is a reworking of the way we sync points in an effort to ensure we stay synced all the time, while also ensuring a minimal load on the system.
I'll be keeping my eye on things, but for now we're back in sync and I can get cracking on those MVP certificates.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
modified 12-Jan-13 20:27pm.
|
|
|
|
|
I just happen to notice that a vote of 3 shows a -2 authority points in Rep History. Is it OK or a Bug?
5 Jan 2013 9:02 AM -2 Authority Answer Downvoted Answer 1 How to Change marque in page which is hosted online
Refer: How to Change marque in page which is hosted online[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Where does it say it's a vote of 3?
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Vote graph of the answer.
I see two votes for it currently. 1 3-vote and 1 5-vote.
|
|
|
|
|
One of the other instance where I see same thing:
-2 for a vote of 3.
12 Jan 2013 10:58 AM -2 Authority Answer Downvoted Answer 1 how to fetch emailid
Here: how to fetch emailid[^]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Happy New Year,
I find it passing strange to see a Lounge thread with first post removed, with, as I write this, now, 96 responses [^].
What's the point? Why not kill the whole thread if the top-level post is removed?
thanks, Bill
"So long as … social condemnation, which, in the face of civilization, artificially creates hells on earth, and complicates divine destiny, with human fatality … so long as three problems of the age: degradation of man by poverty; ruin of women by starvation; dwarfing of childhood by physical and spiritual night: are not solved: so long as social asphyxia shall be possible … so long as ignorance and misery remain on earth, books like this cannot be useless." Victor Hugo, "Les Misérables," 1862
|
|
|
|
|
BillWoodruff wrote: Why not kill the whole thread if the top-level post is removed
Because discussions take on a life of their own, regardless of the initial seed.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
