-->
@Castin
It was good for sure because it boosted activity
It is the time to again raise the Virtuoso replacement of Bsh1 idea.
Posts
Total:
49
-->
@Vader
Every cloud has its silver lining.
-->
@David
If I had to choose between dealing with the whole site and having to deal with only part of the site that the main mod doesnt have time to deal with, I would admittedly lean towards the latter myselfVirtuoso: "Vote bsh1"
-->
@Imabench
If I had to choose between dealing with the whole site and having to deal with only part of the site that the main mod doesnt have time to deal with, I would admittedly lean towards the latter myself
I feel you there.
-->
@David
Thats the reason I only want to be the 'Grand Dictator of the Political Trench-Fuck' rather than President or Vice President of the whole site.... There's even an equation I developed to help determine this
Power
------------------------- > Fun ?
Responsibility x Size
If yes, accept. If no, fuck it.
What is 'size' as opposed to responsibility?
-->
@Imabench
Power------------------------- > Fun ?Responsibility x Size
A good equation to live by. Unfortunately, I am a glutton for punishment apparently.
-->
@RationalMadman
Oh size is just a general term relating to how many things you have to keep an eye on and possibly handle under your watch.
A single forum you spend almost all of your time in already = Thumbs up Emoji
All forums featuring loads of idiots arguing over stuff you couldnt give any shits about = Poo Emoji
-->
@bsh1
Thanks for coming to my TedTalk!
-->
@Imabench
*applause*Thanks for coming to my TedTalk!
-->
@Vader
Our milkshake brings all the boys to the yardIt was good for sure because it boosted activity
-->
@Vader
Ha. Seth MacFarlane's comedy always skates the line between funny and disturbing to me.
-->
@Castin
His comedy from 1999-2009 was genius, now it is sadly annoying and irrelevant...
-->
@Imabench
I think it is severely anti-Sun-Tzu-esque if I were to reveal my own equation that openly but I do have one.
I will say this, the place where you have 'fun' is where I have the 'power' and the thing I divide by is more like fun - what you call 'size' but it's not really a division equation or as simple as 'this vs that' because often the bad comes with partial benefits and vice versa.
You can think of my equation like this:
Stage 1
Energy level in units of power capacity inside me * life priorities right now being met (in %)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- = ?Pwrefficiency
Net gain from putting in effort required for this project in units of power/influence/agency
Stage 2
==========
CLASSIFIED } OUTPUT IN UNITS OF 'FUN AND/OR NET SATISFACTION'
==========
Stage 3
Size of project and thus cost in Energy * Stage 1's result
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- = True Power Optimisation Score
Stage 2's result
Once you work out Stage 2 and truly decipher the rest of it too, you will be on your way to successfully manipulating and/or controlling me but note that when/if I notice what you are doing, the stage 2 evolves because it includes more than just fun.
Once you work out Stage 2 and truly decipher the rest of it too, you will be on your way to successfully manipulating and/or controlling me
Yeah thats well outside my 'fun' equation I dont really care about that
-->
@Imabench
What is your verdict on this thread?
ebuc equation!
If it seems to make little sense to have the fun be the denominator, as opposed to numerator, in the True Power Efficiency score, note that Equation 1 measures energy against net gain in power/agency. What this means is that if it's really high, even if you're not very satisfied with the outcome, it's worth putting effort into.
If something takes very little energy to do, is very satisfying emotionally but gains you very little in net power/agency, it is what I call an energy leakage. It's not worth continually doing. This is what makes my equation fundamentally different to Bench's.