Should Fluther display LPC (Lurve Per Capita)?

No.

I’m going to have to go with no on this also. If it isn’t broken, don’t fix it.

Actually, that’s not true. It is how often you participate coupled with how much your answers appeal to people.

There are many people who have been here a long time with relatively low lurve scores and some who have had meteoric rises.

What about foul balls and hit by pitches?
No, it sounds like an effective way to measure your contribution.

You cannot “divide lurve”. Lurve is a whole and it should stay a whole. Keep it simple.

No, and your assumption about lurve is incorrect. Marina is right, I’ve only been active for six months. Some people have far less and have been active longer, some people have far more.

Nope. The fact that you can max out lurve for specific users once you’ve GA’d them a certain number of times compensates for the time difference. For example, I get more GAs that I don’t get lurve for than I do GAs that earn me lurve on a daily basis. It’s also listed on your profile how many questions you’ve asked and how many responses you’ve written. If you’re that interested, do the math yourself. I’ll keep my lurve score like it is. I’ve only been active for 3.5 months.

Paulc used to have a fancy little application that you could input usernames and it would give you all those stats you referred to and more. But sadly fluther changed something with the lurve and it no longer works.

@uberbatman I miss that. I am hoping his work will let up and he will fix it.

I hadn’t tried it out in a while, when did it stop working?

Oh, the ever present ego always fascinates me!

why are there always questions about changing the site? Especially the lurve? I think the site runs extremely smoothly, even with the lurve system.

@Marina yea me too. I was kinda sad when i went on there one day and it was no longer working =’{

No. I think that’s taking this whole Lurve thing too far, but that’s just my opinion.

@peedub maybe… but im a whore for stats of any kind…

@uberbatman The Paulc thing was pretty cool.

Marina hit the nail on the head with her first post.

@uberbatman: I’m a whore for stats too, which is why I liked the paulc thing…. I just liked proving to shockvalue that I’m better :)

a lurve divided against itself cannot stand.

Why are so many people so gung ho on changing a system that doesn’t need fixing? Do we really need a LPC or overall GA or GQ counter?
Lurve is nice but it really isn’t anything.

@AstroChuck Lurve to you for that, although I am sure I can’t really give you lurve anymore.

I can’t see any way this would be used legitimately and not used in some backhanded way (ie, “shut up you low LPC noob”).

If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!

Nope. Lurve for lurve’s sake! The more statistics or whatever you do to it, the more importance and social standing you give it. You run the risk of making it more than it is—it’s just lurve—freely given, freely received.

Plus, this way the people who want to game lurve are few and far between. The more attention you draw to it…

If I wanted to analyze and compete over lurve I would go back to assville.

Aw, Judi I love it when you break out the potty mouth.

@Judi- It’s language like that that’s kept me from allowing my daughter the pleasure of fluther.
Thanks for ruining that for her.

Sheesh!

Ha!

Wait. Isn’t your daughter like, 8?

waiting to be sensored!

@augustlan: Isn’t that impossible, I mean he’s only six.

it seems no one agreed with you on this one but i think you are right. lurve is just a function of how long someone has been here and how often they answer. but that said i don’t really see a reason to actually put up a “per capita” score

~ I think it is a great idea.
I made a mock up of how it would look to add in breakdowns for GA, GQ, and LPC

Too small, too crowded.

@fireside Ha. I certainly don’t want to see that.

@fireside: I agree with @asmonet; too small and crowded, and I don’t think we need all that info. If I’m really invested in knowing something like that about a user, I’ll figure it out.

Fireside was being sarcastic, guys. Note the ~.

Geez, maybe you guys should get your eyes checked. I can read it : P

And this is why I don’t use sarcasm on the internet – no matter what symbol you put, no matter how hard you try, you cannot 100% guarantee that your sarcasm will hit the mark and be interpreted correctly by everyone.

As long as ben and andrew don’t take the comment seriously and implement that design, then I am okay with being misunderstood.

:P

I’m used to seeing the tilde on the end. Like so.~
It being in the beginning seriously threw me.

lol, that makes sense.
I did sort of re appropriate the positioning of the tilda.

I read it as sarcasm the first time. Note the “ha” in my answer.

Well, fine. Continue to be special and perfect Pete.