3 ms·

These look just as geeky as any other to me.

dman 16y ago
The current code definitely exhibits a phenomena where non technical comments can routinely get a score of ~50. This was cooked up over a couple of days so we havent spent too much time scaling the final scores to have 0 correspond to horridly non-technical and 100 as completely technical.
Natsu 16y ago
Just out of curiousity, I compared myself to the most notable HNN names I could think of. My highest is 83.79. Compare that to patio11 at 77.89 or Chromatic at 80.90, or pg at 81.91. RiderOfGiraffes manages to top us all, though, with a comment saying "This is a thin veneer on the slide-show already discussed here. [link]" which scores 91.44. The next one after that falls clear down to 76.97, which is itself rather typical (it seems that many of us have a steep drop after one "geekiest" comment). I'm not convinced that this is a useful metric. It's an interesting experiment, perhaps, but one problem is that "geekiness" isn't necessarily what we want in comments (or perhaps it is necessary, but not sufficient). I can't believe that short link was RoG's best comment this month, for example. And the top few comments from pg are certainly not his best (the more interesting ones seem to start a bit below the 50s). YMMV.
- silentbicycle 16y ago
  I got a 98.77 for this one: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1604552 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1604552 It looks like jibber-jabbering about continuations and call/cc rates highly. I agree that it's probably not a useful metric, but my inner stats nerd is fascinated all the same.
- wwortiz 16y ago
  My comment: They took it down because people were defacing it actually scored 100 without even being more than slightly technical.
  - riffer 16y ago
    Yeah, this is an interesting case. It's all coming from 'defacing', your comment is actually the only one in this corpus of 25k comments that uses that term; probably not a coincidence. Taking a deeper look now, thanks for your help.

dman 16y ago

The current code definitely exhibits a phenomena where non technical comments can routinely get a score of ~50. This was cooked up over a couple of days so we havent spent too much time scaling the final scores to have 0 correspond to horridly non-technical and 100 as completely technical.

Natsu 16y ago

Just out of curiousity, I compared myself to the most notable HNN names I could think of. My highest is 83.79. Compare that to patio11 at 77.89 or Chromatic at 80.90, or pg at 81.91. RiderOfGiraffes manages to top us all, though, with a comment saying "This is a thin veneer on the slide-show already discussed here. [link]" which scores 91.44. The next one after that falls clear down to 76.97, which is itself rather typical (it seems that many of us have a steep drop after one "geekiest" comment). I'm not convinced that this is a useful metric. It's an interesting experiment, perhaps, but one problem is that "geekiness" isn't necessarily what we want in comments (or perhaps it is necessary, but not sufficient). I can't believe that short link was RoG's best comment this month, for example. And the top few comments from pg are certainly not his best (the more interesting ones seem to start a bit below the 50s). YMMV.

silentbicycle 16y ago
I got a 98.77 for this one: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1604552 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1604552 It looks like jibber-jabbering about continuations and call/cc rates highly. I agree that it's probably not a useful metric, but my inner stats nerd is fascinated all the same.
wwortiz 16y ago
My comment: They took it down because people were defacing it actually scored 100 without even being more than slightly technical.
- riffer 16y ago
  Yeah, this is an interesting case. It's all coming from 'defacing', your comment is actually the only one in this corpus of 25k comments that uses that term; probably not a coincidence. Taking a deeper look now, thanks for your help.