Travis Worthington
United States California
2010 Releases ........................................ The Resistance, Haggis & Triumvirate ..................................... Now accepting submissions for 2011 releases ........................................ www.IndieBoardsandCards.com

I just noticed that the rating graphs have much nore of a geekdo look and feel to them, and they took out the number of ratings in each group that the old chart had.
Any reason for this and might we get the number of ratings back in the graphs?


Andrew Tullsen
United States VANCOUVER WA
48 hour turnaround time for Prototypes!

+1
At least bring back the # for each rating!




It looks much better, though.


Yours Truly,
United States Raleigh North Carolina
There must have been a moment at the beginning, where we could have said no. Somehow we missed it. Well, we'll know better next time.

I miss the exact numbers for each category as well.
On the plus side, the new one seems to load faster.


Royce Hix
United States Mequon Wisconsin

In my opinion it can look as pretty/elegant/etc. as can be but I too miss the number of ratings.


Diane Close
United States Twin Cities Minnesota

Yeah, the numbers were very useful. This approximationlook, not so useful.


Chris
United States Huntington Station New York

This one below still looks crass to me.
Ratings Breakdown: Catan Dice Game


Steve Duff
Canada Ottawa Ontario

Woah, that is a bad change. Hopefully it was just an oversight.


Andrew Tullsen
United States VANCOUVER WA
48 hour turnaround time for Prototypes!

And the weight graphs are the same too.


Daniel Karp
United States Rockville Maryland
Developin' Developin" Developin!!
100 geekgold for OverText, and all I got was this stupid sentence.

Numbers are back.


Steve Duff
Canada Ottawa Ontario

Yay Daniel!


Diane Close
United States Twin Cities Minnesota

Yes! Much nicer! Thank you!


Travis Worthington
United States California
2010 Releases ........................................ The Resistance, Haggis & Triumvirate ..................................... Now accepting submissions for 2011 releases ........................................ www.IndieBoardsandCards.com

thanks for being so responsive!


Mark Goadrich
United States Conway Arkansas

I like the new graphs, especially since they're images and can be seen from my phone unlike the older graphs. I suspect they are cached and the change was to save bandwidth?


Daniel Karp
United States Rockville Maryland
Developin' Developin" Developin!!
100 geekgold for OverText, and all I got was this stupid sentence.

Better than thatthey are generated by Google Charts. Not only don't we have to worry about bandwidth, we don't have to spend any processing power generating the images.


Carsten ◄► Wesel
Germany PinnebergQuellental Germany

Can we have a backgroundcolor  the white is much to light for me.


Tony Nardo
United States Ellicott City Maryland

Still waiting for the round off error on the graph to be fixed  the one where N.5 rounds up if N is odd but DOWN if N is even.


Omar Germino
United States Schaumburg Illinois

dakarp wrote: Better than thatthey are generated by Google Charts. Not only don't we have to worry about bandwidth, we don't have to spend any processing power generating the images. I've been a fan of the Google Chart API for quite some time now. I don't know why it had never occurred to me to suggest its use on the Geek.
Thanks for making the change, though. The ratings graph finishes loading a bit faster now because of it.


Susan F.
Canada Lethbridge Alberta

trnardo wrote: Still waiting for the round off error on the graph to be fixed  the one where N.5 rounds up if N is odd but DOWN if N is even.
That's not an error; it's just a different rounding convention ('rounding even' rather than 'rounding up'). It introduces less cumulative errors when dealing with statistics so I imagine that's why Google Charts is using it.


Yours Truly,
United States Raleigh North Carolina
There must have been a moment at the beginning, where we could have said no. Somehow we missed it. Well, we'll know better next time.

trnardo wrote: Still waiting for the round off error on the graph to be fixed  the one where N.5 rounds up if N is odd but DOWN if N is even.
That's the rounding convention I was always taught to use, as it rounds up half the time and rounds down the other half, so everything evens out.
I'm curious how you handle N.5 when rounding?


Omar Germino
United States Schaumburg Illinois

JohnnyDollar wrote: trnardo wrote: Still waiting for the round off error on the graph to be fixed  the one where N.5 rounds up if N is odd but DOWN if N is even. That's the rounding convention I was always taught to use, as it rounds up half the time and rounds down the other half, so everything evens out. I'm curious how you handle N.5 when rounding? This convention is new to me also, though it does make sense in the merits of its use. IIRC, my elementary education taught me to round N.5 to N+1.
For those interested, I found a list of some ways of dealing with N.5: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rounding#Tiebreaking.
The roundup convention I was taught is also prevalent in my field of computer science: the default behavior of the rounding function in most of the languages I've worked with is to use the roundup convention.


Tony Nardo
United States Ellicott City Maryland

JohnnyDollar wrote: trnardo wrote: Still waiting for the round off error on the graph to be fixed  the one where N.5 rounds up if N is odd but DOWN if N is even. That's the rounding convention I was always taught to use, as it rounds up half the time and rounds down the other half, so everything evens out. I'm curious how you handle N.5 when rounding? I'd been taught to regard N.5 (or N.50) to N+1 regardless of the value of N. Especially on taxes.
On every computer I've worked with, in every programming language, the rounding function provided in the standard libraries always rounds N.5 to N+1.
Rounding to the nearest even integer make make "everything even out" in a truly random and widespread distribution, and may make sense when the intent is to create a sum from the rounded values. However, when the purpose is simply to create a visual graph of ten integers, "round to even" creates a false appearance of extra weight for the five even number values. The effect on the presentation is thus much greater than the 0.0005 cumulative effect on each individual value that "round half to even" compensates for  straining at gnats to swallow camels, as it were....



