site algorithms

[aestrivex]

Your caustic remarks add very little to the purpose of this forum, so if you're going to continue posting, I'd prefer you stick with more constructive commentary.

the substantive content of this site and, yes, the "purpose" of this forum are in my opinion hardly worth taking seriously, yet i'm essentially doing so anyway. the point of my last comments to this thread were also serious, yet you seem perfectly happy to disregard them and my other comments on the project (on the workshop) as essentially wrong-minded and unworthy of even the slightest effort at substantively responding -- i am merely showing you the same respect.

[RSV3]

Your caustic remarks add very little to the purpose of this forum, so if you're going to continue posting, I'd prefer you stick with more constructive commentary.

the substantive content of this site and, yes, the "purpose" of this forum are in my opinion hardly worth taking seriously, yet i'm essentially doing so anyway. the point of my last comments to this thread were also serious, yet you seem perfectly happy to disregard them and my other comments on the project (on the workshop) as essentially wrong-minded and unworthy of even the slightest effort at substantively responding -- i am merely showing you the same respect.

Well I'm sorry if I've appeared otherwise, but I do generally appreciate your input and actually take it seriously. With respect to your last suggestion, I agree that having more search options is never a bad thing, it's just a matter of determining a way to implement it, which I have not figured out yet.

[aestrivex]

Well I'm sorry if I've appeared otherwise, but I do generally appreciate your input and actually take it seriously. With respect to your last suggestion, I agree that having more search options is never a bad thing, it's just a matter of determining a way to implement it, which I have not figured out yet.

i'm confused -- the suggestion had nothing to do with search options and would be easy to implement. rather, i was suggesting to put on the profiles a sort of "conjugate typing conclusion" without taking the test data into account. all this requires is another profile field and all the math you already have minus one component.

[RSV3]

Yes, I have something in mind that will work; hopefully I can get to it in a week or two. Site development is on hold right now.