• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.


State of the forum 2024

Page 20 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Reactions were only added to the forum a few years ago - the ratio of reactions to posts reflects this. Maybe it was just before you became a member?

If you want to rank members you can't use reactions as many members were here before reactions started.

There is also the points system which recognizes longevity - e.g. "Ancient" :)

A power ranking based upon recent history would work though.

I'm well aware of that, which was also why I've suggested I shouldn't do it, as I was visited the forum occasionally in the years before I joined.
It's actually not that surprising that some (newer) members might have higher reaction-score than posts.
If a completely new member makes a post that quickly has two people reacting, then that new poster has twice as many reactions as posts.
It is simple math. If two posters have similar post counts, then the poster who joined after reactions started will have the most reactions and the higher ratio of reactions to posts. As someone who first posted in 2010, I am surprised you didn't mention this? How many of your 39,000+ posts were made before reactions were added to this forum?

But I am also wondering why this discussion is occurring in the Clinic? :confused_old: