Personal Fossil Forum Goal Attained

[DPS Ammonite]

I have just attained a goal of mine here at The Fossil Forum; my number of community reputation points has equaled 50% of my total content points: 440 out of 878 content points. So far currently, I know of only two other people with a moderate number of total points who have achieved that honor: phylloceras and painshill. They both beat me by a mile, congratulations. Painshill has a ratio of content points to community reputation  of 62.5% while phylloceras has an amazing ratio of 71.2%. 

 

If you want to earn more community points do what works best for me. Help a poster to ID their fossil finds or answer questions by researching on the internet or in your personal library. I like to find a picture or some literature to give to them. If you do find some good paleontology literature that is legally posted on the internet, consider helping to build Fruitbat's library of paleontological documents. Fruitbat has accumulated the best paleontological library on the internet. See: http://www.thefossilforum.com/index.php?/topic/14728-fruitbats-pdf-library-table-of-contents/

 

Thank you to everyone on The Fossil Forum for making this such an awesome website.

 

John

 

[Cris]

Congrats, John!  Thanks for setting an example by researching to make your posts informative to other members. That is absolutely a win-win. Not only do you help teach, but you expand your own knowledge in doing so.

[doushantuo]

like the Brits say: well done,guv'

I'd like to qualify DPS's statement :Nobody can deny that Fruitbat's library is anglosaxophonocentric.

Or,to put in less multisyllabic terms:Fruitbat's library contains only English language documents

[ynot]

Congratulations!

Thanks for all the information that You disseminate.

 

Tony

[Wrangellian]

2 hours ago, doushantuo said:

like the Brits say: well done,guv'

I'd like to qualify DPS's statement :Nobody can deny that Fruitbat's library is anglosaxophonocentric.

Or,to put in less multisyllabic terms:Fruitbat's library contains only English language documents

Do you imply that there is someone else out there on the Net who has an even greater library of non-English language fossil documents?

[doushantuo]

Place your bets,everybody.

 

[PFOOLEY]

That is impressive, @DPS Ammonite!  Thank you for your informative contributions. 

[Auspex]

Your efforts here are a vein solid gold that can be mined by anyone in the world; we, and avocational science, are in your debt.

Thank You!

[jcbshark]

Quite the accomplishment indeed, congrats and thank you

[snolly50]

I miss Painshill. 

 

This is a very disturbing post. Some fast arithmetic reveals only 1/4 of snolly's excellent posts are marked, "Informative" by others. This suggests that DPS Ammonite is twice as informative as snolly! It is a burdensome revelation for snolly to bear.

[doushantuo]

I wonder if DPS knows his reeds

 

 

[Darktooth]

Another Over Achiever! Hhmmmff!

Congratulations! 

[Fossildude19]

John, 

 

Congratulations, and well done.

Thanks for all of your meaningful and informative contributions.  

Regards,

[FossilDudeCO]

Congratulations, quite an accomplishment indeed!

I guess insetad of saying hello to new faces I should just answer questions from now on!

[piranha]

The ratio of informative posts to number of posts does not apply to all members because it does not account for previous post totals before the feature was added to TFF.  Also, a lot of posts are marked 'informative' as a substitute for a 'like' button.  Sorry, I'm not a fan of this so-called metric.

 

 

 

  

[Kane]

Congratulations, @DPS Ammonite and many thanks for all that you contribute here

 

[Fossildude19]

44 minutes ago, piranha said:

The ratio of informative posts to number of posts does not apply to all members because it does not account for previous post totals before the feature was added to TFF.  Also, a lot of posts are marked 'informative' as a substitute for a 'like' button.  Sorry, I'm not a fan of this so-called metric.  

 

To each his own.  

[JohnBrewer]

Well done gov'!

[Wrangellian]

A 'like' may not be an 'informative', but I guess it's better than silence or blank stares (which I'm quite familiar with, and not just here on TFF). But I'm not a fan of popularity contests in general. That makes it easy for me to congratulate others on their goals without being jealous.

Congrats, DPS!

[EMP]

20 hours ago, DPS Ammonite said:

I have just attained a goal of mine here at The Fossil Forum; my number of community reputation points has equaled 50% of my total content points: 440 out of 878 content points. So far currently, I know of only two other people with a moderate number of total points who have achieved that honor: phylloceras and painshill. They both beat me by a mile, congratulations. Painshill has a ratio of content points to community reputation  of 62.5% while phylloceras has an amazing ratio of 71.2%. 

 

If you want to earn more community points do what works best for me. Help a poster to ID their fossil finds or answer questions by researching on the internet or in your personal library. I like to find a picture or some literature to give to them. If you do find some good paleontology literature that is legally posted on the internet, consider helping to build Fruitbat's library of paleontological documents. Fruitbat has accumulated the best paleontological library on the internet. See: http://www.thefossilforum.com/index.php?/topic/14728-fruitbats-pdf-library-table-of-contents/

 

Thank you to everyone on The Fossil Forum for making this such an awesome website.

 

John

 

 

Hate to break it to you , but with this post you're ratio is quickly catching up to Painshill .

[RJB]

Congrats John. 

 

RB

[siteseer]

On 5/23/2017 at 10:40 AM, Fossildude19 said:

 

To each his own.  

 

Just a minute, Tim.  I've thought about this.  He does have a point.  It's relatively easy now to maintain a high "batting average," called your "community reputation" especially if you have just hundreds of posts .  I mean that as no offense to DPS Ammonite because making the extra effort to go to a library, whether across town or in your spare room, and try to answer a question with a cited reference is worthy of recognition.  First, you might have to think about it a minute to recall the relevant literature and then you have to open some boxes to find the actual article (or scan the web or your collection of PDF's).  The answer you're thinking about is almost never in a publication within quick reach.  And if it's DPS Ammonite's goal on the FF to go out of his way to be helpful as often as possible, that's great.  Maybe seeing this thread will inspire other people to do the same.

 

However, I have gone all the way back to the first post (hundreds of pages in) in a couple of the categories - way back to those early iPhone days of 2007 before the forum gave out brownie points (whenever that was).  Harry Pristis was answering questions with photos and references in those single-digit pages of Fossil ID.  He was already challenging the few members who had joined with tooth and bone ID contests just for fun.  I would guess that Harry must be owed hundreds to a couple of thousand informative post clicks.  Years ago, he provided a gallery of informative fossil photos, a guide to identifying teeth and bones of various mammals and other vertebrates.  He could have made money binding that into a book but he uploaded it all for the rest of us to consult for free.  His agent must be furious.

 

I have also been here long enough to see Pirahna answer numerous questions about trilobites or plant fossils as well as provide pdfs for people without access to technical journals long before the implementation of the informative button.  He must owed a tanker load of "informative" clicks as well.  In addition he is correct about the informative button being used as a "like" button.  I have seen clearly uninformative posts marked as informative.   

 

I wonder what Al Dente's, Boesse's, Auspex', or Uncle Siphuncle's community reputation would be if someone reviewed all their posts and clicked appropriately.  These days, whenever I dig down into the forum's past, I mark posts that are informative to salute those that went the extra mile back then.  There must be hundreds of pages I haven't seen yet.  I know those people don't really care what their batting average is.  Maybe they're old enough to remember The Lone Ranger and Tonto - two people who didn't wait around for a reward or a thank you either.

 

Jess 

[doushantuo]

Informative should mean/imply,(in this context): recognition that a post is well communicated,in reasonably spelled English,with reference to (a) peer-reviewed publication(s)

for systematical/taxonomical,ecological,stratigraphical, biogeographical,taphonomic,petrographical or geochemical information. 

If that's not the case ,the hermeneutics ought to be sound,at least.

My remark does NOT cover collecting information,legalities,maps,economical value assessments..

edit:while modernity is not IMMEDIATELY synonymous with scientific worth,a more recent citation is preferable over an older one.

AND: yours truly is a proponent of posting dissenting views(if heuristically interesting and logically argued).

Particulary in some areas of taxonomy,the typological approach leads to ,paleobiologically speaking, nonsensical results

An experiment:if the following is informative,why?

possible responses

a: without his forum I wouldn't have known a complete well-preserved Mesozoic shark existed

b: "I just love sharks,period"

c: offers new insights into the paleoneurology of sharks

d: where 's the rest of the article?

e) it's paywalled,so I'm glad to have at least these images

f) everything coming out of Morocco is intrinsically interesting,especially if it's from a lagerstatt

g it's a welcome change form the ususal goings-on about sharks

h) I'll check Fruitbat's/Coco's /Abyssunder's libray on this very forum

h) some or all of the above

 

NB:mediocre and even bad science CAN be found in peer-reviewed publications.

I kinda depends on who does the reviewing

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Fossildude19]

2 hours ago, siteseer said:

 

Just a minute, Tim.  I've thought about this.  He does have a point.  It's relatively easy now to maintain a high "batting average," called your "community reputation" especially if you have just hundreds of posts .

 

Jess 

Jess,

I actually  agree.

Many people on here probably don't have all of the reputation points they deserve.

The numbers are not accurate due to that features' late arrival into the Forum software. 

It is an entire!y valid point.

 

My comment was more directed at Scott's dislike of the feature. 

 

When I happen to review older posts, I make sure to mark posts that I find informative as such.

Not everyone does, in all likelihood.

[Sagebrush Steve]

Well, I will add my 3 cents in, too.  When I add posts that welcome new members or support someone’s previous identification of a fossil I know they probably won’t be marked “informative” but I post them because I really do want to encourage people on this forum.  Should I not post them because I know they will drag down my reputation ratio?  I think not.  If the only posts you make are ones you want to see marked “informative” then I think you are missing out on one of the values of this forum, which is to encourage interaction among its members.