User Rating

[Dr. Eddies Wingman]

... actually it's suicidehUmmer...

*SH gets a kick for being a grammar nazi*

Getting a letter wrong is not a grammar issue, it is a spelling issue.

regards

The Language Police

 

[Suicidehummer]

Touche.

 

[JackKnife]

Wow, you are new. Back in the old days we were much harsher about grammar. In fact Mr. DICKtionary is but a legend now. Though there was a time, a few years back when he was VERY active.

That's true ha ha! Will-I-Am (who used another pseudo at the time) even tried to reach the "absolute zero user rating value" during months. And nearly succeeded 
Beware however because Mr. DICKtionary is still alive...

 

[Wästed The Great]

Interesting choice of words!  I'd like to see the Kelvin scale of user rating!

 

[____no5]

[...] I'd like to see the Kelvin scale of user rating!

Well, the lowest user rating ever, achieved on 12 December 2006 and it was -65,384.

 

[Onhell]

What? Where do you get that number from? Do you know it, because it was you?

 

[____no5]

No, it was no5 

 

[Onhell]

[facepalm] lol

 

[SinisterMinisterX]

The lowest possible user rating is probably -65,536. That's negative (2 to the 16th power). In other words, the system uses a 2-byte integer to store the rating - and another byte somewhere for the sign.

Which is really odd. A 2-byte signed integer gives a range of -32,767 to 32,767. Which ought to be plenty. But you need 16 bits to reach 65k territory, so the sign can't be stored in the same bytes.

Maybe Wasted's observation about separate praise and kick counters is the key. Perhaps in our configuration, one of those is always zero, and the non-zero counter indicates which sign to use.