Tree Formula Discussion

General discussion and socializing.
User avatar
novaalpha
Posts: 1490
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 11:42 pm
Location: Sparta

Re: Tree Formula Discussion

Post by novaalpha »

burgingham wrote:Once again alpha made himself the laughing stock of the forums. Not that I am a big fan of Leksar, but thanks for this one :D
Lately every post of yours shows how little you know.

Plus that gibberish leksar posted is incorrect so :D
User avatar
Leksar
Posts: 191
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2010 6:43 pm

Re: Tree Formula Discussion

Post by Leksar »

novaalpha wrote:Plus that gibberish leksar posted is incorrect so :D
u can deny it.. but, wait a minute, u can't
User avatar
novaalpha
Posts: 1490
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 11:42 pm
Location: Sparta

Re: Tree Formula Discussion

Post by novaalpha »

Leksar wrote:
novaalpha wrote:Plus that gibberish leksar posted is incorrect so :D
u can deny it.. but, wait a minute, u can't
Ok :D Please, continue using your great, correct formula, and tell all your friends about it so they use it too :D :D :D
User avatar
DatOneGuy
Posts: 5553
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 7:50 am
Location: I'm in Miami, trick.

Re: Tree Formula Discussion

Post by DatOneGuy »

I've had three listed trees so far break that formula Leksar, but givne that it is an Anonymous entry, it's hard to say. I guess I'll have to reconsider using public data, as I've already had 6-7 lines of blatant trolling.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Hi. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
User avatar
Mashadar
Posts: 379
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 9:34 am

Re: Tree Formula Discussion

Post by Mashadar »

Well, Leksar's formula works for my (very limited) data from W4 and it also works for the values from W3 posted here.
The average deviation is 2.6, which is close to what it should be (2.7), assuming the deviation range is ±5.

But yeah, accepting public data is problematic, as there'll be always some wrong values, even if they were all submitted in good faith.
Better stick to using values from a few people who do their bookkeeping diligently.
User avatar
Leksar
Posts: 191
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2010 6:43 pm

Re: Tree Formula Discussion

Post by Leksar »

how is it going ?
User avatar
burgingham
Posts: 8486
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 10:58 pm

Re: Tree Formula Discussion

Post by burgingham »

Everyone quit.
User avatar
screwbag
Posts: 303
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 8:41 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Tree Formula Discussion

Post by screwbag »

I didn't quit... Still taking notes... Will report in when I have done my experiments on another dozen or so trees...
User avatar
ElGato
Posts: 1945
Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:10 am

Re: Tree Formula Discussion

Post by ElGato »

screwbag wrote:I didn't quit... Still taking notes... Will report in when I have done my experiments on another dozen or so trees...
dumbass...
he meant DoG quit.
burgingham wrote:We are all Gato, and Gato is Delamore of course. Goons blablabla...
Caradon wrote:Gato, the anti-ghandi
Sabinati wrote:yeah we're gonna kill you gato!!!

Return to “The Inn of Brodgar”