certain posting goals, ie 20k,30k etc. for me, as a non technical person, i stayed clear of many threads outside my limited knowledge base. i dont even know how to spell equwivalance, let alone get into a discussion regarding the finer points of exposure settings from one format to another.however, im wondering, as things are winding down here, who has the fewest posts in relation to time as member. i joined aug of 2002 and to date have 452 posts. for some, thats an average week here on dpreview. anybody else on par with my achievement?

Nacha wrote:certain posting goals, ie 20k,30k etc. for me, as a non technical person, i stayed clear of many threads outside my limited knowledge base. i dont even know how to spell equwivalance, let alone get into a discussion regarding the finer points of exposure settings from one format to another.however, im wondering, as things are winding down here, who has the fewest posts in relation to time as member. i joined aug of 2002 and to date have 452 posts. for some, thats an average week here on dpreview. anybody else on par with my achievement?I joined in either 2000 or 2001, and this should be number 439.  Before the announcement of sundown on April 10, I was thinking I might make it to “contributing member” status this year or next.  Not going to happen how.Al

ABCMO wrote:Nacha wrote:certain posting goals, ie 20k,30k etc. for me, as a non technical person, i stayed clear of many threads outside my limited knowledge base. i dont even know how to spell equwivalance, let alone get into a discussion regarding the finer points of exposure settings from one format to another.however, im wondering, as things are winding down here, who has the fewest posts in relation to time as member. i joined aug of 2002 and to date have 452 posts. for some, thats an average week here on dpreview. anybody else on par with my achievement?I joined in either 2000 or 2001, and this should be number 439. Before the announcement of sundown on April 10, I was thinking I might make it to “contributing member” status this year or next. Not going to happen how.Alactually, your profile states you joined in 2011, so thats the official documentation i am going with in this "contest". therefor , i think you are well out of the running here:ABCMOLives inUnited StatesJoined on May 7, 2011Send private message

Nacha wrote:ABCMO wrote:Nacha wrote:certain posting goals, ie 20k,30k etc. for me, as a non technical person, i stayed clear of many threads outside my limited knowledge base. i dont even know how to spell equwivalance, let alone get into a discussion regarding the finer points of exposure settings from one format to another.however, im wondering, as things are winding down here, who has the fewest posts in relation to time as member. i joined aug of 2002 and to date have 452 posts. for some, thats an average week here on dpreview. anybody else on par with my achievement?I joined in either 2000 or 2001, and this should be number 439. Before the announcement of sundown on April 10, I was thinking I might make it to “contributing member” status this year or next. Not going to happen how.Alactually, your profile states you joined in 2011, so thats the official documentation i am going with in this "contest". therefor , i think you are well out of the running here:ABCMOLives inUnited StatesJoined on May 7, 2011Send private messageYes, that’s the “official” date, but I had joined before, when Phil Askey still owned and ran the site.  Something seemed to happen when Amazon bought the site and the contribution count restarted, or something like that.  Obviously, this doesn’t matter for anything, just a point of clarification.Al

ABCMO wrote:Nacha wrote:ABCMO wrote:Nacha wrote:certain posting goals, ie 20k,30k etc. for me, as a non technical person, i stayed clear of many threads outside my limited knowledge base. i dont even know how to spell equwivalance, let alone get into a discussion regarding the finer points of exposure settings from one format to another.however, im wondering, as things are winding down here, who has the fewest posts in relation to time as member. i joined aug of 2002 and to date have 452 posts. for some, thats an average week here on dpreview. anybody else on par with my achievement?I joined in either 2000 or 2001, and this should be number 439. Before the announcement of sundown on April 10, I was thinking I might make it to “contributing member” status this year or next. Not going to happen how.Alactually, your profile states you joined in 2011, so thats the official documentation i am going with in this "contest". therefor , i think you are well out of the running here:ABCMOLives inUnited StatesJoined on May 7, 2011Send private messageYes, that’s the “official” date, but I had joined before, when Phil Askey still owned and ran the site. Something seemed to happen when Amazon bought the site and the contribution count restarted, or something like that. Obviously, this doesn’t matter for anything, just a point of clarification.Ali see. im going to have to turn your official protest of this ruling over to the commissioner's office for final adjudication.since i too joined in those early years, and since no issue with my data seemed to have occurred during the amazon transition as you can see in my profile,NachaLives insilicon valley, United StatesWorks as a dentistJoined on Aug 24, 2002and since i am the commissioner for this contest (coincidentally), i must state categorically that your petition is denied.furthermore, a fine will be levied to your account on april 11th for wasting the commissioners time.

Joined 12/2001 and have a whopping 545 posts and proud of how little I wasted others time reading nonsense.

That's a new one... having contributed the least for the longest time contest! Isn't that like saying who cared the least wins? That's a new perspective on pride of low achievement!

Bruce M. wrote:Joined 12/2001 and have a whopping 545 posts and proud of how little I wasted others time reading nonsense.Well done sir!

RSTP14 wrote:That's a new one... having contributed the least for the longest time contest! Isn't that like saying who cared the least wins? That's a new perspective on pride of low achievement!I prefer Bruce M's interpretation.

RSTP14 wrote:That's a new one... having contributed the least for the longest time contest! Isn't that like saying who cared the least wins? That's a new perspective on pride of low achievement!Isn't that all the rage in child rearing now, boost their self esteem by rewarding them for doing nothing?  This is taking it to the next level, making an actual contest for who's achieved the least.