Timeline for Is "Reputation Top 0.90%" accurate?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 8, 2019 at 15:40 | comment | added | Martin Sleziak | This question seems a bit related: An error in calculations of percents in reputations? | |
| Nov 13, 2015 at 20:46 | comment | added | Joe Silverman | Okay, thanks to all, I was mis-interpreting. For some reason, I was taking "top 90%" to mean "better than 90% of the users", instead of meaning "better than 10%" of the users. Since the question reflects my total lack of understanding, maybe I should just delete it. | |
| Nov 13, 2015 at 20:29 | comment | added | user9072 | The way this is intended to read is that if that if number of users is $X$ this particular user is among the $0.009 X$ best users, or is the $0.009 X$ best user, up to rounding. Thus the smaller the number the better. JDH is top 0.03% overall, while I am only top 2%. (The same for year.) I am not clear on what the perceived bug is. Could you please clarify this more. | |
| Nov 13, 2015 at 20:29 | history | edited | Stefan KohlMod |
Removed bug tag, as this does not appear to be a bug report.
|
|
| Nov 13, 2015 at 20:27 | comment | added | Stefan Kohl Mod | Only users with at least 200 points are counted here. -- You are presently ranked 28th among 3108 ranked users, and $28/3108 = 0.0090 \dots$. This is where the "top 0.90% this year" come from, as far as I understand. | |
| Nov 13, 2015 at 19:51 | comment | added | Ben Barber | Alternative comment: top 0.9% is in fact quite a good lower bound, unlike 0.9th percentile. | |
| Nov 13, 2015 at 19:43 | comment | added | Ben Barber | I think you're just really that good: the corresponding number in my profile is a plain 8%. Perhaps on some of the larger sites most of the active users are in the top few percent, so they find the added precision useful. | |
| Nov 13, 2015 at 19:30 | history | asked | Joe Silverman | CC BY-SA 3.0 |