Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 15:20:18 +0000
Reply-To: toby dunn <tobydunn@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From: toby dunn <tobydunn@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject: Re: Unofficial 2006 Year-End Review
In-Reply-To: <OF35CFB8BD.F99123D9-ON8525725D.0053D3A1-8525725D.0053DC97@dom.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
LOL,,,,, I did tell my girlfriend what yall are saying, and all she did was
laugh and say she always did have a thing for Data on Star Trek.....
And nat while I may be slowly going bald on top of my head I have a little
more hair than Kryton...
Toby Dunn
To sensible men, every day is a day of reckoning. ~John W. Gardner
The important thing is this: To be able at any moment to sacrifice that
which we are for what we could become. ~Charles DuBois
Don't get your knickers in a knot. Nothing is solved and it just makes you
walk funny. ~Kathryn Carpenter
From: Nat Wooding <Nathaniel_Wooding@DOM.COM>
Reply-To: Nathaniel_Wooding@DOM.COM
To: SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: Unofficial 2006 Year-End Review
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 10:16:20 -0500
Toby
Now I know where I've seen your picture:
(Embedded image moved to file: pic15281.jpg)
Your alias wouldn't be "Kryton", would it?
Nat
toby dunn
<tobydunn@HOTMAIL
.COM> To
Sent by: "SAS(r) SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Discussion" cc
<SAS-L@LISTSERV.U
GA.EDU> Subject
Re: Unofficial 2006 Year-End Review
01/08/2007 10:07
AM
Please respond to
toby dunn
<tobydunn@HOTMAIL
.COM>
Hmmmm .... well lets see, my gender was switched in one post last year, and
so far in this thread I have been a 'Bot' and now I am upgraded to a
'really
complex AI', who is surfing for kinky pics of mainframes. Definitly
getting inerested in seeing what I become next.
P.S. David is did see some pics the other day of a IBM mainframe, ooolala
...... love those sexy I/O controlers....lmao
Toby Dunn
To sensible men, every day is a day of reckoning. ~John W. Gardner
The important thing is this: To be able at any moment to sacrifice that
which we are for what we could become. ~Charles DuBois
Don't get your knickers in a knot. Nothing is solved and it just makes you
walk funny. ~Kathryn Carpenter
From: David L Cassell <davidlcassell@MSN.COM>
Reply-To: David L Cassell <davidlcassell@MSN.COM>
To: SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: Unofficial 2006 Year-End Review
Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 22:49:41 -0800
art297@NETSCAPE.NET wrote:
>
>Hari,
>
>While I had indicated that the list's unrepresentative date-time stamps
>precluded their use for the kind of analysis you suggested, I did observe
>that both Toby's and David's posts had consistent date-time stamps (albeit
>Toby's had to be adjusted because he really isn't from England), and
>wondered if an analysis of their posts might answer your question.
>
>Result: we definitely can't use David's posts, at least as far as times
>are concerned. Interestingly, he either really does sleep, or at least
>elects not to respond to posts between 1 and 7 am, and seldom before 10
>am! However, most of David's posts are between 10 pm and midnight, which
>I don't think reflects the majority of the list's activities.
>
>Both Toby's and David's posting activity results do concur with Tuesday
>being the day when most people post, and Friday being the day that the
>fewest posts are recorded, followed by Saturday. Sunday, interestingly,
>has far more mosts than I would have thought.
>
>Toby may well be a 'bot', as David has suggested sometime ago, as the only
>hours he doesn't post are between 4 am and 6 am. However, it is also
>possible that he is doing something other than sleeping then, there is
>also the possibility that there simply isn't anything requiring a response
>at those times. If Toby really does reflect a microcosm of the list's
>posts, then the majority of posts occur between 8 am and 11 am, and then
>taper off during the day and are virtually non-existent during the time
>when most of us sleep.
The reason Toby doesn't post during those hours, is that we have to
have a set time to upload new data and do housekeeping. He's a
really complex AI, and he keeps trying to go offline to surf the web for
pictures of mainframes with their covers off.
:-) :-) :-)
>In an off-line conversation (I did get David's and Toby's permission to
>post this level of detail), David suggested that his daily counts might
>not reflect the entire lists' behavior. As such, I did a day-of-week
>analysis for all of the list's 2006 posts. As you can see, Friday really
>does appear to be the day with the fewest posts, followed by Saturday.
>For some reason, things already start to pick up on Sunday and Tuesday is
>THE day with the most posts.
>
>If this still doesn't answer your question, let me know what might.
>
>Art
>
>Results
>-------
>Name Day Count Percent Hour Count Percent
>---- --- ----- ------- ---- ----- -------
>David
> Sat 278 11.01 0 62 2.45
> Sun 363 14.37 1 5 0.20
> Mon 459 18.17 8 3 0.12
> Tue 551 21.81 9 1 0.04
> Wed 451 17.85 10 52 2.06
> Thu 351 13.90 11 209 8.27
> Fri 73 2.89 12 171 6.77
> 13 222 8.79
> 14 210 8.31
> 15 161 6.37
> 16 127 5.03
> 17 113 4.47
> 18 24 0.95
> 19 28 1.11
> 20 51 2.02
> 21 203 8.04
> 22 571 22.60
> 23 313 12.39
>
>Toby
> Sat 96 4.80 0 22 1.10
> Sun 364 18.20 1 9 0.45
> Mon 362 18.10 2 3 0.15
> Tue 397 19.85 3 3 0.15
> Wed 370 18.50 7 4 0.20
> Thu 377 18.85 8 222 11.10
> Fri 34 1.70 9 249 12.45
> 10 200 10.00
> 11 182 9.10
> 12 140 7.00
> 13 147 7.35
> 14 159 7.95
> 15 143 7.15
> 16 170 8.50
> 17 40 2.00
> 18 42 2.10
> 19 42 2.10
> 20 72 3.60
> 21 69 3.45
> 22 54 2.70
> 23 28 1.40
>
>Summary for the entire list
> Sat 1756 5.17
> Sun 5252 15.46
> Mon 6221 18.32
> Tue 6784 19.97
> Wed 6538 19.25
> Thu 5978 17.60
> Fri 1435 4.23
>
>On Tue, 2 Jan 2007 05:27:27 -0800, Hari <excel_hari@YAHOO.COM> wrote:
>
> >Art,
> >
> >Just for fun.. I was wondering as to whether the posts fluctuate a lot
> >by day of the week (more on Monday/Tuesday than rest etc?). Also,
> >whether it changes much by time of the day whether more during working
> >hours than outside of it. But yes, it might be difficult to do this
> >accurately as folks post from different time-zones or can that be taken
> >care of?
> >
> >Regards,
> >HP
> >India
> >
> >Arthur Tabachneck wrote:
> >> First of all, happy new year to all.
> >>
> >> I couldn't resist. During 2006 the list increased its number of posts
>by
> >> 26%, from 26,992 in 2005, to 33,963.
> >>
> >> And, not all due to David, as his posts only increased by 18.4%, from
> >> 2,133 to 2,526. However, that was enough to keep him, again, as the
> >> list's most frequent poster.
> >>
> >> Thus, until Howard gets a chance to verify the numbers, here are the
> >> unofficial stats.
> >>
> >> 50 Most frequent posters (actually 51 as there was a 3-way tie for
49th
> >> place):
> >>
> >> rank name COUNT
> >> 1 David Cassell 2526
> >> 2 Toby Dunn 2000
> >> 3 Howard Schreier 1519
> >> 4 Arthur Tabachneck 618
> >> 5 Jim Groeneveld 604
> >> 6 Gerhard Hellriegel 587
> >> 7 datanull@gmail.com 558
> >> 8 Joe Whitehurst 536
> >> 9 Alan Churchill 490
> >> 10 Richard DeVenezia 487
> >> 11 Paul Choate 470
> >> 12 Jiann-Shiun Huang 448
> >> 13 Mark Terjeson 422
> >> 14 Sig Hermansen 397
> >> 15 Ya Huang 389
> >> 16 Ron Fehd 378
> >> 17 Peter Flom 371
> >> 18 Ian Whitlock 326
> >> 19 Peter Crawford 301
> >> 20 Roland Berry 299
> >> 21 Venky Chakravarthy 276
> >> 22 Kevin Viel 264
> >> 23 WenSui Liu 226
> >> 24 Nathaniel Wooding 224
> >> 25 Michael Raithel 221
> >> 26 Sté°¨ane Colas 218
> >> 27 Clinton Rickards 194
> >> 28 Jack Hamilton 189
> >> 29 Yu Zhang 188
> >> 30 Roy Pardee 176
> >> 31 Shiling Zhang 171
> >> 32 Hari Prasadh 169
> >> 33 Ben Powell 168
> >> 34 Paul Dorfman 167
> >> 35 proccontents@gmail.com 153
> >> 36 Harry Droogendyk 152
> >> 37 Eric Hoogenboom 146
> >> 38 Dale McLerran 144
> >> 38 Mehdi Soleymani 144
> >> 40 Rune Runnestoe 136
> >> 41 Ken Borowiak 134
> >> 42 Daniel Nordlund 132
> >> 43 Ken Lin 131
> >> 44 John Gerstle 116
> >> 44 Monal Kohli 116
> >> 46 Hari Nath 113
> >> 47 Madan Kundu 112
> >> 48 Chang Chung 99
> >> 49 Irin Figvam 97
> >> 49 Muthia Kachirayan 97
> >> 49 Robert Bardos 97
> >>
> >> While number of lines (as calculated by the listserv) may not be the
>most
> >> accurate definition of post length, using it as a measure the
following
> >> either had a lot to say or .. The envelope please (note: only
>considered
> >> those who had at least 50 posts):
> >>
> >> rank name Average # of lines
> >> 1 Randy Herbison 167
> >> 2 Bora Yavuz 161
> >> 3 Joe Whitehurst 143
> >> 4 Jake Bee 122
> >> 5 Mark Terjeson 122
> >> 6 Jiann-Shiun Huang 120
> >> 7 Paul Dorfman 119
> >> 8 Nathaniel Wooding 118
> >> 9 Jack Clark 115
> >> 10 Irin Figvam 114
> >>
> >> So, who was either extremely succint, didn't paste the entire thread,
>or ..
> >> The following are the 10 (who had at least 50 posts) who had the
lowest
> >> average number of lines:
> >>
> >> rank name Average # of lines
> >> 1 Tanwan Zang 27
> >> 2 Dianne Rhodes 31
> >> 3 Mehdi Soleymani 32
> >> 4 Eric Hoogenboom 33
> >> 5 slhappyls@gmail.com 36
> >> 6 Dimitri Shvorob 41
> >> 7 Roland Berry 42
> >> 8 A.Benedictus 42
> >> 9 Byron Kirby 43
> >> 10 Mkrogh@dsr.kvl.dk 45
> >>
> >> Which words showed up most frequently in the subject line? Excuding
> >> commonly used words like a, the, I, etc., the 20 words which showed up
> >> most frequently were:
> >>
> >> rank word count
> >> 1 HOW 2447
> >> 2 MACRO 2373
> >> 3 QUESTION 1690
> >> 4 VARIABLE 1621
> >> 5 HELP 1284
> >> 6 SQL 1204
> >> 7 PROBLEM 1040
> >> 8 VARIABLES 1025
> >> 9 FILE 1012
> >> 10 USING 979
> >> 11 DATASET 888
> >> 12 VALUES 713
> >> 13 VALUE 640
> >> 14 DATE 627
> >> 15 OUTPUT 614
> >> 16 EXCEL 593
> >> 17 FORMAT 566
> >> 18 INTO 544
> >> 19 ABOUT 537
> >> 20 BY 515
> >>
> >> When did we post the most? March!
> >> When did we post the least? December!
> >>
> >> month count
> >> March 3182
> >> May 3136
> >> October 2979
> >> August 2909
> >> July 2893
> >> January 2842
> >> November 2837
> >> April 2811
> >> June 2745
> >> September 2720
> >> February 2526
> >> December 2383
> >>
> >> Further, we seem to be middle-of-the-week people:
> >>
> >> week count
> >> 3 8199
> >> 2 7931
> >> 1 7716
> >> 4 7547
> >> 5 2570
> >>
> >> Again, these results are unofficial but, in the chance you were
curious
> >> too, I thought I'd share them.
> >>
> >> Art
I think it's safe to assume that I'm too weird - even for this group -
to be representative of anything.
:-)
David
--
David L. Cassell
mathematical statistician
Design Pathways
3115 NW Norwood Pl.
Corvallis OR 97330
_________________________________________________________________
The MSN Entertainment Guide to Golden Globes is here. Get all the scoop.
http://tv.msn.com/tv/globes2007/?icid=nctagline2
_________________________________________________________________
The MSN Entertainment Guide to Golden Globes is here. Get all the scoop.
http://tv.msn.com/tv/globes2007/?icid=nctagline2
-----------------------------------------
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic message contains
information which may be legally confidential and/or privileged and
does not in any case represent a firm ENERGY COMMODITY bid or offer
relating thereto which binds the sender without an additional
express written confirmation to that effect. The information is
intended solely for the individual or entity named above and access
by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended
recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the
contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful. If
you have received this electronic transmission in error, please
reply immediately to the sender that you have received the message
in error, and delete it. Thank you.
_________________________________________________________________
Get FREE Web site and company branded e-mail from Microsoft Office Live
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/mcrssaub0050001411mrt/direct/01/
| 
