Sigh ... since many people tend to believe in such "science", here some background:

• Going into deeper discussions, like foolishly replying at level 13 (sic) destroys the XP/Post ratio.
• Coming late to the party too, since the voting average is deflating over the years°

Here some "alternative" facts: ²

• Your top 5% posts (98) range between 56 and 31
• Bod's top 5% posts (23) range between 28 and 15
• My top 5% posts (506) range between 70 and 28

Let's put this into relation with your alleged "top-monk" (which I respect nevertheless)

• FunkyMonk's top 5% posts (54) range between 108 and 38 ³

But well ... this doesn't prove that I'm not saying foolish things from time to time ...

So please show me those threads where I stated anything like ...

> "That really shouldn't be allowed"

... without giving plenty of evidence, links and even example code?

I think I also tend to reply to every new argument without resorting to a cheap "you know I'm kidding"

According to your "statistic" this should be an easy game ...

°) eyepopslikeamosquito can tell you more about it. Ask yourself, how comes 30% of the top 20 saints haven't been here for years without loosing rank?

update

And one also gets XP for voting, which makes it even more complicated.

²) NB: this isn't adjusted to the deflation over the years, because that's not easily done. But it was always consensus that "XP is only a game" anyway.

³) he barely passed your 1000 posts minimum, because he has only 10% of my volume. But if you look at my 54th best post you'll see a reputation of 40 and his 506th only at 16.

For more How to Lie with Statistics