There is no reward for doing well in SubProjects

[MarkRBright]

It seems to me that there is not enough recognition for doing well in SubProjects aside from the badges.
Would it be a relatively simple matter to add Top10 sRanks and Top100 sRanks?
I think getting Top1000 sRanks may prove too simple to get but then newcomers might just love them for that very reason, and keep them coming back.
By all means give them a weird name so people don't guess what they are if you feel that you need to. I'd go as far as to suggest the Fonk, the TeraFonk and the ZetaFonk?

I suppose that while I am on, I might as well remind you of our old discussions of Team and Country related MiRBs and TeraMiRBs. I think tMiRbs and cMiRBs and possibly their corresponding Tera's are screaming to be heard ;-) With 10's and 100's as their thresholds instead of 100's and 1000's

[Bok]

Ask and ye shall (sometimes) receive :)

Remember my argument against the team ones though. Anyone can form a new team and be the only member to skew those stats. Country to a lesser extent

[Dirk Broer]

It seems to me that there is not enough recognition for doing well in SubProjects aside from the badges.
Would it be a relatively simple matter to add Top10 sRanks and Top100 sRanks?

Thanks for yet two extra items to score. I do think however that there is more than just badges to show you're doing well in SubProjects.
e.g. number of SubProjects and SubClanks (the number of SubProjects you are actively working on in the last forty days), but also all other SubProject MM's.

[MarkRBright]

Thanks for that Bok - excellent work as always.

I get what you are saying Dirk, but those don't really tell you how you are doing in comparison to others. I am a strong believer that sites like this one give a whole extra level of motivation to some people, and if a bit of competition motivates people then the projects (and in this case the sub-projects) benefit.

Mind you, I completely forgot that introducing new MM's would mess up my spreadsheet - So I have had to spend some time this morning sorting that out!
I do get frustrated by the sequence of MMs on the Userbycpidmilestones page changing depending on whether you do or don't get some MMs. For example, if one day you get the MM for Clanks or Sub-Clanks, and the next day you don't get one of those (cos you do or don't hit the trigger number required), the MM list's sequence changes - albeit consistently, but it makes a mess of copying that table to a spreadsheet. A fixed sequence would be much more friendly to people like me. Especially if Clanks and Subclanks were at the bottom, as they are probably the most fluid ones to get or not get day to day. I think I kind of like the idea of putting all the value ones in sequence but with all sub's together and the non-subs together. If anyone is remotely interested I would happily produce a list of what I mean, but I suspect most of you are asleep now or muttering "Wierdo!" ;-)

[Dirk Broer]

I get what you are saying Dirk, but those don't really tell you how you are doing in comparison to others.
I wonder if you really get what I am saying. I have scores in 99 SubProjects, making me #5 all-time SubProject cruncher world-wide on that score. You will need 20 extra SubProject scores to get even with me.
I have presently 40 SubClanks, making me the most active SubProject cruncher, world-wide, over the last 40 days -and if you follow the SubClank scores over the last years you will see me constantly in the top-3. But you only need nine more active SubProject scores over the last forty days to get even with me there...

[MarkRBright]

LOL, I think you have a fairly unique perspective up there Dirk, and keep up the fantastic work that got you there. I totally admire your dedication to Boinc.:yourock:
I am coming from a little more 'normal' perspective and I have no aim (never mind the computing power!) to attempt to oust anyone from anywhere. Nor to even try to make it look like I am in your league however temporarily I could possibly do that for. I am not one of the aforementioned ones who does this to compete as such, I just find that attempting to maximise my MM's while I crunch adds a little bit of fun into the mix and that's good.

I do actually happen to be on a bit of a mission regarding projects with sub-projects at the moment which is why this change occurred to me, but my purpose is to get a TeraMiRB for Sub750's. Hardly a lofty aim but it keeps me amused and Boincing! :rotfl:

[Bok]

Let me know the order you would prefer and I'll see what I can do as I kind of have a mechanism for it, just need to adjust some values here and there, it's basically a bigint I assign to each row to get the credit based ones in the right order but a bunch of the special category's all get assigned 0 so the order by is semi random.

[MarkRBright]

If it were down to me I would probably choose something like this.

Projects
1B's
500M's
250M's
100M's
50M's
25M's
10M's
5M's
2.5M's
1M's
750k's
500k's
250k's
100k's
50k's
25k's
10k's
1k's
Bozos
Gibsons
TeraBoks
Boks
Trigggls
#1 Ranks
Top10 Ranks
Top100 Ranks
Top1000 Ranks
Subprojects
sub1B's
sub500M's
sub250M's
sub100M's
sub50M's
sub25M's
sub10M's
sub5M's
sub2.5M's
sub1M's
sub750k's
sub500k's
sub250k's
sub100k's
sub50k's
sub25k's
sub10k's
sub1k's
SubBozos
subGibsons
subTeraBoks
subBoks
subTrigggls
SubTop10's
SubTop100's
SquarePants
Vaios
Maxwells
TeraMiRB's
MiRB's
Clanks
subClanks

I certainly don't have all of these, and there may even be some I am not yet aware of, but that sequence is probably better and easier for spreadsheeters like me.
BTW I noticed when doing this that there is an inconsistency with the M's in the subprojects some are upper case and others are lower case.
It just occurred to me that if you really wanted to be spreadsheet friendly then having a nice hidden button/link to press which showed a definitive full list of MM's regardless of whether or not you have any, but also showing the users totals where he/she has them would be bliss. I know you like to keep them a secret till they have earned at least one, so the button could be as subtle as a comma or full stop somewhere on the page.
Personally though, I am not convinced the secrecy thing actually works in Boinc's favour though, as I think seeing, for example, a Clank and maybe 1 or 2 SubClanks is a great pat on the back when you first start. Just a thought.
Let me know if I can be of any further help.
Cheers
PS Don't forget about pMiRBs, cMiRBs, SuperDuperBoks, Sub Projects being included in Maxwells, MiRBs and TeraMiRBs, not to mention Prank and Rankem - Just for when you get a minute ;):hair::hair:

[Bok]

I've done some work on this so it should be close now.

Here is the list of MM's in the database


MariaDB [static]> select * from boinc_most_projects;
+-------------+---------+---------------+------------------------------------------+
| type | subtype | short_desc | long_desc |
+-------------+---------+---------------+------------------------------------------+
| 100k | I | 100k's | This many projects with 100K |
| 10k | I | 10k's | This many projects with 10K |
| 25k | I | 25k's | This many projects with 25K |
| 50k | I | 50k's | This many projects with 50K |
| 75k | I | 75k's | This many projects with 75K |
| 250k | I | 250k's | This many projects with 250K |
| 500k | I | 500k's | This many projects with 500K |
| 750k | I | 750k's | This many projects with 750K |
| 1m | I | 1M's | This many projects with 1M |
| 2.5m | I | 2.5M's | This many projects with 2.5M |
| 5m | I | 5M's | This many projects with 5M |
| 10m | I | 10M's | This many projects with 10M |
| p1 | O | #1 Ranks | This many projects with the #1 Rank |
| p10 | I | Top10 Ranks | This many projects with a top 10 Rank |
| t5 | T | Team 5M's | This many projects with team 5m |
| tt10 | T | Team top 10's | This many project with a top 10 rank |
| t1 | T | Team 1M's | This many projects with team 1m |
| t10 | T | Team 10M's | This many projects with team 10m |
| t25 | T | Team 25M's | This many projects with team 25m |
| t50 | T | Team 50M's | This many projects with team 50m |
| t100 | T | Team 100M's | This many projects with team 100m |
| tt1 | T | Team #1's | This many project with a #1 rank |
| 25m | I | 25M's | This many projects with 25M |
| 50m | I | 50M's | This many projects with 50M |
| 100m | I | 100M's | This many projects with 100M |
| 250m | I | 250M's | This many projects with 250M |
| 500m | I | 500M's | This many projects with 500M |
| t250 | T | Team 250M's | This many projects with team 250m |
| t500 | T | Team 500M's | This many projects with team 500m |
| p100 | I | Top100 Ranks | This many projects with a top100 rank |
| t1b | T | Team 1B's | This many projects with team 1B |
| 1k | I | 1k's | This many projects with 1k |
| boks | O | Boks | Boks special category! |
| proj | I | Projects | This many projects with a score |
| trigggls | O | Trigggls | Trigggls Special Category! |
| t2.5 | T | Team 2.5M's | This many projects with team 2.5M |
| teraboks | O | TeraBoks | Teratomas sepcial category! |
| maxwells | O | Maxwells | Maxwells Special Category |
| clanks | O | Clanks | Clanks Special Category |
| tclanks | T | TClanks | Clanks Team Category |
| vaios | O | Vaios | Vaios Special Category |
| p1000 | I | Top1000 Ranks | This many projects with a top1000 rank |
| 1000m | I | 1B's | This many projects with 1billion |
| mirbs | O | MiRB's | Marks Special Category |
| t5b | T | Team 5B's | This many projects with team 5B |
| t10b | T | Team 10B's | This many projects with team 10B |
| t2.5b | T | Team 2.5B's | This many projects with team 2.5B |
| teramirb | O | TeraMiRB's | Marks Special Category on acid |
| gibsons | O | Gibsons | Gibsons special category! |
| bozos | O | Bozos | Bozos special category! |
| s100k | S | sub100k's | This many subprojects with 100k |
| s10k | S | sub10k's | This many subprojects with 10k |
| s1m | S | sub1M's | This many subprojects with 1M |
| s1k | S | sub1k's | This many subprojects with 1k |
| s250k | S | sub250k's | This many subprojects with 250k |
| s500k | S | sub500k's | This many subprojects with 500k |
| s25k | S | sub25k's | This many subprojects with 25k |
| s50k | S | sub50k's | This many subprojects with 50k |
| s5m | S | sub5m's | This many subprojects with 5M |
| s10m | S | sub10m's | This many subprojects with 10M |
| s50m | S | sub50m's | This many subprojects with 50M |
| s25m | S | sub25m's | This many subprojects with 25M |
| s750k | S | sub750k's | This many subprojects with 750k |
| sboks | S | subBoks | subprojects - Boks special category! |
| steraboks | S | subTeraBoks | subprojects - TeraBoks special category! |
| strigggls | S | subTrigggls | subprojects - Trigggls special category! |
| sbozos | S | subBozos | subprojects - Bozos special category! |
| sgibsons | S | subGibsons | subprojects - Gibsons special category! |
| sclanks | S | subClanks | Clanks Special Category subprojects |
| squarepants | O | SquarePants | SquarePants |
| s2.5m | S | sub2.5M's | This many subprojects with 2.5M |
| sproj | S | Subprojects | This many subprojects with a score |
| s10 | S | SubTop10's | subprojects Top 10s |
| s100 | S | SubTop100's | subprojects Top 100s |
+-------------+---------+---------------+------------------------------------------+
74 rows in set (0.00 sec)

[MarkRBright]

Excellent - I look forward to seeing what it looks like in the morning.

[MarkRBright]

Actually is it worth changing the 'subtype' to 2 characters to allow you to ORDER BY subtype - you could then have T0-TZ, I0-IZ, S0-SZ etc. Or alternatively add a new integer 'sequence' which would then let you ORDER BY sequence. Just a thought, as it looks like it might not necessarily come out in a logical numerical order as it stands, with 100k coming out out of sequence for example.
Maybe I should have just waited till morning ;-) Sorry.

[Bok]

It does have a Bigint column sequence that it orders on so I can control the sequence and I already ran it manually. May need a little tweaking potentially.

[MarkRBright]

OK that's not quite what I was expecting but it's a lot better and a lot less random. If you are going to mix up the Projects with the Sub-projects though could you easily force it so that the Projects values always came before the Sub Projects?
e.g. Always make the 50k's come before the Sub50k's etc. It would just be a lot neater.

[Bok]

Not sure what you mean? I didn't think there was anywhere where I display project mm's and subproj mm's together?? I break them down into 4 categories

I - Individual
O - Other (I could now lump these with the I's easily enough)
S - Subproj
T - Team

[Bok]

Not sure what you mean? I didn't think there was anywhere where I display project mm's and subproj mm's together?? I break them down into 4 categories

I - Individual
O - Other (I could now lump these with the I's easily enough)
S - Subproj
T - Team

[MarkRBright]

Sorry for not being clearer, and I am now worried that we have been talking at cross purposes.
I was referring to the display on Userbycpidmilestones.
You tend to mix up the Subproject level MMs with the Project level ones (e.g. 100ks, then sub100ks, then 50ks then sub50ks - though not always that way round).
I would favour showing all the Project ones, then all the Subproject ones. Preferably in descending order as now.
The list I provided earlier goes slightly further by listing all the Project related Level MMs first, followed by the Bok type ones, then the Top ranks, this is then followed by all the Subproject related MMs, Subbok related level MMs, SubBok type ones, then SubTops, and all of that is then followed by general ones and then finally the sometimes-you-have-them-sometimes-you-don't Clanks and SubClanks. Och! It's easier to show you the list again. Note that I have put in some blank lines for clarity only.

Projects
1B's
500M's
250M's
100M's
50M's
25M's
10M's
5M's
2.5M's
1M's
750k's
500k's
250k's
100k's
50k's
25k's
10k's
1k's

Bozos
Gibsons
TeraBoks
Boks
Trigggls

#1 Ranks
Top10 Ranks
Top100 Ranks
Top1000 Ranks

Subprojects
sub1B's
sub500M's
sub250M's
sub100M's
sub50M's
sub25M's
sub10M's
sub5M's
sub2.5M's
sub1M's
sub750k's
sub500k's
sub250k's
sub100k's
sub50k's
sub25k's
sub10k's
sub1k's

SubBozos
subGibsons
subTeraBoks
subBoks
subTrigggls

SubTop10's
SubTop100's

SquarePants
Vaios
Maxwells
TeraMiRB's
MiRB's
Clanks
subClanks

That seems most logical to me but it's only one opinion amongst many, and I'll happily deal with whatever appears.

[MarkRBright]

Sorry for not being clearer, and I am now worried that we have been talking at cross purposes.
I was referring to the display on Userbycpidmilestones.
You tend to mix up the Subproject level MMs with the Project level ones (e.g. 100ks, then sub100ks, then 50ks then sub50ks - though not always that way round).
I would favour showing all the Project ones, then all the Subproject ones. Preferably in descending order as now.
The list I provided earlier goes slightly further by listing all the Project related Level MMs first, followed by the Bok type ones, then the Top ranks, this is then followed by all the Subproject related MMs, Subbok related level MMs, SubBok type ones, then SubTops, and all of that is then followed by general ones and then finally the sometimes-you-have-them-sometimes-you-don't Clanks and SubClanks. Och! It's easier to show you the list again. Note that I have put in some blank lines for clarity only.

Projects
1B's
500M's
250M's
100M's
50M's
25M's
10M's
5M's
2.5M's
1M's
750k's
500k's
250k's
100k's
50k's
25k's
10k's
1k's

Bozos
Gibsons
TeraBoks
Boks
Trigggls

#1 Ranks
Top10 Ranks
Top100 Ranks
Top1000 Ranks

Subprojects
sub1B's
sub500M's
sub250M's
sub100M's
sub50M's
sub25M's
sub10M's
sub5M's
sub2.5M's
sub1M's
sub750k's
sub500k's
sub250k's
sub100k's
sub50k's
sub25k's
sub10k's
sub1k's

SubBozos
subGibsons
subTeraBoks
subBoks
subTrigggls

SubTop10's
SubTop100's

SquarePants
Vaios
Maxwells
TeraMiRB's
MiRB's
Clanks
subClanks

That seems most logical to me but it's only one opinion amongst many, and I'll happily deal with whatever appears.

[Bok]

ah, it's wrong on that page. I'll look into fixing that.

Each project mm basically has the weighting in that bigint as the same as the mm # it needs to be greater than. i.e. 99999 for the 100k's and the subprojects are the same.

But I never meant to mix them up on any one page

[MarkRBright]

That page is probably the most important for MM spreadsheeters as it's the only place where you can easily extract them all. I don't really mind as I said, as I can work with whatever with a bit of sorting, as long as that page remains! But if you ever get round to updating it, please bear this conversation in mind.
Thanks again.

[Bok]

How about I create a new page just for the full list of MM's ?

[Bok]

see what you think. I will probably hide the typenum column and then I'll add a link from the userbycpid page

I've also reran the mm's with their updated typenum numbers which is what they are sorted on.

https://stats6.free-dc.org/mms/c843714b32e467b97d2571d1af9971f8

change to your own cpid to check

[MarkRBright]

I could work with that! It's nearly perfect.
I could happily live without the #, the TypeNum and the Mtype (if you moved the hyperlink to the more meaningful Short Description), and stick the Short Description at the start of the line. OH and believe it or not I would really like a count of Maxwells, as otherwise I need to calculate them every day - but again I could live with that.
Oh and of course the Number required for a TeraMiRB and a MiRB would be the icing on the cake ;-)
Well it would be boring if I only ever said "Thanks. That is brilliant you are a star!:thumbs::cheers:" Wouldn't it?
Thanks. That is brilliant you are a star!:thumbs::cheers:

[Bok]

I'll see what I can do. I've overseeing a production database upgrade tonight between midnight and 5am so I'll need something to do :)

[MarkRBright]

LOL. Glad to be of some use then ;-)
BTW You have used a TypeNum of 3998 for both Top1000 Ranks and Top100 Ranks. I'm guessing Top1000 should be 3999 (or I suppose Top100 Ranks could be 3997.
Thanks. That is brilliant. You are a star! (Are you getting bored with that yet? ;-)

[Bok]

Take a look now. I added the extra column for the Maxwell Max#. the #Maxwell is basically just a floor(maxwell/2).

Not sure what you mean for the # for a Mirb and TeraMirb. It's just using projectRank < 101 and projrank < 1001 ??

Oh and if I hide the counter column datatables goes haywire for some reason, so I have to leave that one there. I did switch out the other columns as you suggested and make the hyperlink on the description.

[MarkRBright]

Great stuff thank you. I still wonder if we have been at cross purposes again though as that new screen is now beginning to look remarkably like the existing (but now updated nicely with regard to sequence) Userbycpidmilestones screen.

On the Userbycpidmilestone screen the only "fault" I can now see is that the Top100 an Top 1000 Ranks are the wrong way round, but I suspect that depends on when you look, as I suspect they may still share the same TypeNum at the moment of 3998 as previously mentioned. But it doesn't have the "No. required for a Maxwell" column which would be nice - for me :-)

On the new MMs Stats screen (https://stats6.free-dc.org/mms/fa1a611d7c2bb42d13617eb6b8903f8c) The only problems for me are that the RankT and Rank P column titles are the wrong way round (or the columns are, but I think P/T/C makes more sense than T/P/C), and secondly, that it doesn't have a row for Maxwells. Both of these I can happily live with but the first probably should be corrected.

What I meant re the # for a MiRB and TeraMiRB was a cheeky reference to my old request that it would be great to have two additional columns like the "#for Maxwell" column but "#for TeraMiRB" and "#for MiRB" This is information that would, like the Maxwell column, be the same for every BOINCer on any day, and would therefore only need to be calculated once per day, and perhaps held on the same table/array as the "#for Maxwell" data, and could even be calculated at the same time, and it would be a breeze to do so. The "# for Maxwell" is calculated as half of the number held by the person in rank 1 for each MM. The additional columns I am after are simply the number held by the person in rank 100 and rank 1000. They don't even need to be halved! I don't care about pretty pictures showing if you have it or not, just the numbers.

Glad you had a productive database upgrade supervising session.
Thanks again for all your work. Your site is important to me and many others.

[Bok]

Great stuff thank you. I still wonder if we have been at cross purposes again though as that new screen is now beginning to look remarkably like the existing (but now updated nicely with regard to sequence) Userbycpidmilestones screen.

On the Userbycpidmilestone screen the only "fault" I can now see is that the Top100 an Top 1000 Ranks are the wrong way round, but I suspect that depends on when you look, as I suspect they may still share the same TypeNum at the moment of 3998 as previously mentioned. But it doesn't have the "No. required for a Maxwell" column which would be nice - for me :-)

They shouldn't be the wrong way around. P100 has 3998 for me and p1000 has 3997



On the new MMs Stats screen (https://stats6.free-dc.org/mms/fa1a611d7c2bb42d13617eb6b8903f8c) The only problems for me are that the RankT and Rank P column titles are the wrong way round (or the columns are, but I think P/T/C makes more sense than T/P/C), and secondly, that it doesn't have a row for Maxwells. Both of these I can happily live with but the first probably should be corrected.

Fixed the titles. And change the SQL to use a LEFT JOIN which was causing the missing Maxwell row :)



What I meant re the # for a MiRB and TeraMiRB was a cheeky reference to my old request that it would be great to have two additional columns like the "#for Maxwell" column but "#for TeraMiRB" and "#for MiRB" This is information that would, like the Maxwell column, be the same for every BOINCer on any day, and would therefore only need to be calculated once per day, and perhaps held on the same table/array as the "#for Maxwell" data, and could even be calculated at the same time, and it would be a breeze to do so. The "# for Maxwell" is calculated as half of the number held by the person in rank 1 for each MM. The additional columns I am after are simply the number held by the person in rank 100 and rank 1000. They don't even need to be halved! I don't care about pretty pictures showing if you have it or not, just the numbers.


Still don't understand this. It doesn't use any number from the user in rank 100 ?? This is the main piece of sql

$sql = "replace into static.boinc_milestone_makers select a.cpid,'$mtype',a.nick,0,0,0,count(*),' ',' ',0,$ranknum from static.boinc_milestone_makers a join static.boinc_most_projects b on a.mtype = b.type where a.projrank < $min and b.subtype in ('I','O','S') group by a.cpid having count(*) > $number";

$min being sent in is 100, then 1000. Am I missing something ????



Glad you had a productive database upgrade supervising session.
Thanks again for all your work. Your site is important to me and many others.

It was uneventful, which is always good :)

[MarkRBright]

Still don't understand this. It doesn't use any number from the user in rank 100 ?? Am I missing something ????

All I meant was that 2 new additional columns on any/all of the screens showing MM stats, to sit next to the "Number required for a Maxwell" column - "Number required for MiRB" and "Number required for TeraMiRB" - would be as easy to calculate as the current "Number required for a Maxwell",
The Maxwell one that you do currently display shows half of the number currently held by the person ranked 1st, for each MM.
The new columns would do pretty much the same but would show the number currently held by the person ranked 100th for each MM for the TeraMiRB column, and the number currently held by the person ranked 1000th for the MiRB column.
They would be simpler to calculate because you don't even need to half them!
Thanks again.

[Bok]

But why would you want those numbers, I guess that's what I'm struggling to understand as they aren't used in any of my calculations??

So from This page (https://stats6.free-dc.org/userbycpidmilestones/stats.php?page=mmakers&subproj=mirbs) you'd want the number 43 ? Which is how many the user at Rank 100 has ?

[Bok]

But why would you want those numbers, I guess that's what I'm struggling to understand as they aren't used in any of my calculations??

So from This page (https://stats6.free-dc.org/userbycpidmilestones/stats.php?page=mmakers&subproj=mirbs) you'd want the number 43 ? Which is how many the user at Rank 100 has ?

[MarkRBright]

Sorry, I am clearly failing to be clear here. Maybe this will help. What I am after is the last two columns shown in the picture I have attached, obviously no colours are required.

1394

Funnily enough the example that you gave is actually only one of two that isn't worth giving as it would represent the number of MiRB's you would need to get a MiRB for MiRBs which you can't get, nor can you get a TeraMiRB for TeraMiRBs in the same way you can't get a Maxwell for Maxwells.

Hopefully what I said now makes sense.
Cheers
Mark

[MarkRBright]

Sorry, you asked for the reason why.

I am ranked at around 2000th for stones earned, but I get a kick out of doing much better with the MMs, so I am ranked 38th for Maxwells, 48th for TeraMiRB's and a massive 16th for MiRBs. It's just one of these things that help me keep plugging away at BOINC and getting a little bit more fun out of it as well as hopefully doing some good. So if I can easily see that, for example I have 24 Sub750ks and I would get another TeraMiRB if I could get another 2, then that is what I will probably do the next time I find myself mulling over what to do. Then I might say Oooh! If I can take 7 of those 750's up to Sub1M's then I would get another TeraMiRB, not to mention the corresponding Squarepants, Badges and possible Teraboks for some of them.

Like I have said before, whatever reason people have for doing this is OK, as long as they do it, and any way to make it more interesting and fun is cool with me. I recently got a buzz out of bringing all of my MM Ranks down to below 500 - though I now need another Sub10M to get that back at the moment - and then another 100M to keep it a while longer.

Whatever floats your boat! Free-DC makes it much more fun than just collecting Cobblestones and badges, though there is nothing wrong with that.

[Bok]

Ok, I get it now. I'll have to create a new table to put this data into in order to join to it.

Something like this? Please check the numbers as I'm just doing an insert ignore using projrank < 101 to get the first available score for a rank < 101. Sometimes there is no exact 100 if multiple scores are the same as I group them together

[Bok]

Ok, I get it now. I'll have to create a new table to put this data into in order to join to it.

Something like this? Please check the numbers as I'm just doing an insert ignore using projrank < 101 to get the first available score for a rank < 101. Sometimes there is no exact 100 if multiple scores are the same as I group them together

[MarkRBright]

You are a fonking genius! That is just brilliant.
It probably wants a # in the column header for consistency so others might not get confused, but that is brilliant.
I'm going to back off now from my other suggestions to give you a well earned rest.
Well other than suggesting you put that whole section into the Userbycpidmilestones screen replacing what's there as it only adds to the stats, so why not?
Thanks. That is brilliant you are a star! :thumbs:

[MarkRBright]

Not quite sure what happened to it this morning, but there are only about half of the numbers showing today in the two new columns.
And I just noticed that they appear to be wrong, mostly getting bigger as you go down the list.

[Bok]

The bigger question is how did it actually work yesterday!! And i'm not sure why as I had a glaring problem in one of my sql statements that populates the data. Think it must have worked by accident the first time.

Anyway, all fixed.

[MarkRBright]

It is indeed thank you.
BTW I have no need of the Maxwell column. I just delete it after copying/pasting. Unless you feel it is important then feel free to remove it next time you are looking at that screen if you can be bothered.
Edit: Just to be crystal clear here - I mean that I don't need the Maxwell Column, and not the #Maxwell column.

[MarkRBright]

Many, many thanks - that is really great.

I do maintain though that this screen - made nice and neat and narrow - would be a huge improvement if it were to be a replacement for the similar MegaMilestones table on the Userbycpidmilestones page. Especially if you dropped the majority of the Summary (as per the Usersubprojects page) so it could take a more prominent position on the page.
And in the worlds of Forrest Gump, "That's all I have to day about that" - for a while at least. ;-)