Maybe you think there is alraedy enough stats in PSC, or you like that little geeky stuff - like me - und would welcome a new statistic-number called "VOTES PER DAY".
This number shows how successful AND how continuous a member is. It is expressed by the simple formula Number of Votes divided by Days of Membership.
This number finds a good place in the "All time leaders", in the Member-Profile and in the monthly stats.
I think this numbers can tell a new kind of quality, but hard to create for a simple member.

What do you mean?

TOP-SCORERS (estimated):

Marcoballistic 35,37
Yello_Piggy 16,83
BroChris 5,30
volkswes 3,20
mason4300 2,41
aliased 0,50 (but doesn't care)

Sounds Cool

nice idea Yello, think mine would be 35.37 currently

Great! Just another stat where I can score LOW.

Hmm.........mine would be around 3.2

errr.......hmmm

that's no good

16,83 on my first psc-birthday!

I love stats. More stats the better.

ack...mine would be what...around 2.41? You could call this the "how obsessed and how much free time?" stat.

Mine would be around 5.3

Probably not very good compared to a lot of other users, but I like the idea of more stats.

Please.....no......stop.
Figures glory hound would be all for it.

No, thanks.

It would stimulate posting mediocre chops, just to collect as many votes as possible for the stats.

I also think the cumulative votes stats on the front page (which is also the default on the 'standings' page) are misleading. In my opinion, the best chopper is the one who creates the best chops and not the one who has enough spare time to post every day.

(By the way, this has nothing to do with the fact that my 'votes per day' score would be around 0.5, because I don't care about my stats that much.)

[quote="aliased"]No, thanks. It would stimulate posting mediocre chops, just to collect as many votes as possible for the stats. [\quote]

I dont think that anyone would try to hunt for this number - what would become pretty difficult. No, it was just meant as an additional information, for those who like it. the others can of corse ignore it and never look at

[my opinion...]

Useless. I voted no.
Sure I say that cuz Ive been here forever and have only entered 60 something entries and my votes per day would require the stat to be listed with 4 decimal places...

...but its a dumb stat. new users would jump to the top if they are any good at all, old users that are great choppers but dont post much anymore would go unnoticed and somewhere in the middle would be the really active users that get an average number of votes per day.

We have enough stats. More than any one needs, actually. If someone is interested to see who is good and who isnt, there must be at least a dozen ways you can find out.

Perhaps a better stat might just be the ones that we already have but a link that would show those stats for say, the last 100, or 50, or even the last 20 contests or so. That would show you "active" users and how they stack up against the "current" competition.

...or dont change a thing.

In conclusion, YP, thanks for your creative thinking on this and keep it up! You'll come across something sooner or later.

[/my opinion...]

and I said "ADDITIONAL NUMBER" what means, that PSC will not concentrate on this new number, so old members need not to be afraid of being beaten by the newbies

by the way do I like your suggestion of "votes for the last X contests", that comes close to my idea and would not be such dramatic like a look at the votes of your lifetime.

HA! I dont think its a matter of anyone being afraid of anything. A votes per day stat would be useless and mean nothing once a member has been here for a month (unless you're a Marco or Mikey and post EVERY DAY, sometimes twice a day). The twice a day post brings up a new reason why it would be useless. One decent member posting two images a day will get more "votes per day" than (almost) any member that posts just one.

It really would have no meaning what so ever regarding the "standings" which is meant to show how you stack up against your competition.