RE: (brainpan) RE: RE: RE: Chatterbox stats

brainpan
Well, all in all, the script ran as long as it could on jcwren's computer. At times it would fail, and it would take a bit for jcwren to realize and get it started up. So it's not really a pure extraction of data. I don't really want to run it again, because I feel I will get an even less pure extraction. I think, if people knew it was running it would effect the chatterbox. Either people will talk too much or they will feel they shouldn't talk. I ran this under radar so it wouldn't effect anyone.
Macphisto

Everyone has their demons....

Comment on RE: (brainpan) RE: RE: RE: Chatterbox stats

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
(brainpan) RE: RE: (brainpan) RE: RE: RE: Chatterbox stats by brainpan (Monk) on Nov 11, 2000 at 12:51 UTC
As I stated before, I agree that if you let people know that data is being collected about their use of the chatterbox it will impact their behavior; your method of running this "under radar" was the best way to go. My intent in requesting another run at collecting these stats was to try to secure in my own mind why I turned up as the most talkative monk in your sample. Before I saw your reply I figured out why this was the case (to the curious: phase wrapping). Since I have absolved my curiosity I won't have to try to duplicate your experiment. :) And no, I don't own 2 7 pairs of sweatpants.	[reply]
RE: (brainpan) RE: RE: (brainpan) RE: RE: RE: Chatterbox stats by Macphisto (Hermit) on Nov 11, 2000 at 13:21 UTC
I'd run the script for 7 or 8 hours straight and usually AgentM had 30 - 45% of the pie to himself! :) You're an anomoly. It probably just caught you in some deep conversations! Everyone has their demons....	[reply]