<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Project-GC Q&amp;A - Recent questions tagged top-hider</title>
<link>https://project-gc.com/qa/?qa=tag/top-hider</link>
<description>Powered by Question2Answer</description>
<item>
<title>Feature Request: &quot;Relative&quot; Favorite Points Over Time (Wilson score)</title>
<link>https://project-gc.com/qa/?qa=54/feature-request-relative-favorite-points-over-wilson-score</link>
<description>In &amp;quot;Top-Hiders/Favorite Points Over Time&amp;quot; we can compare owners by their absolute number of favorite points received. That's fine, but if you want to compare the &amp;quot;quality&amp;quot; of the work of two or more owners a better way would be to compare a relative value.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
How about a &amp;quot;Relative Favorite Points Over Time (Wilson score)&amp;quot; feature? Favorite points received in relation to hidden caches of this owner and the time it took to collect this much fav-points. That would make owners more comparable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Example:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Owner1: 1000 FP from 100 caches over a period of 10 years.&lt;br /&gt;
Owner2: 500 FP from 20 caches over a period of 2 years.&lt;br /&gt;
Owner3: 800 FP from 80 caches over a period of 5 years.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Who is the &amp;quot;better&amp;quot; one? Maybe a Wilson-score like statistical analysis can give us an answer.</description>
<category>Feature requests</category>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://project-gc.com/qa/?qa=54/feature-request-relative-favorite-points-over-wilson-score</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 01 Sep 2014 09:34:26 +0000</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>