i've graphed some data points per 1000 pages, and it seems to be that there's an avarage of a +27.5 increase. there's a 30 replies for page, so 27.5 out of 30 replies are increasers (91.6667%) and 2.5 out of 30 are decreasers (0.0833%)
-
Hey Guest,
As you know, censorship around the world has been ramping up at an alarming pace. The UK and OFCOM has singled out this community and have been focusing its censorship efforts here. It takes a good amount of resources to maintain the infrastructure for our community and to resist this censorship. We would appreciate any and all donations.
Bitcoin (BTC): 39deg9i6Zp1GdrwyKkqZU6rAbsEspvLBJtETH: 0xd799aF8E2e5cEd14cdb344e6D6A9f18011B79BE9Monero (XMR): 49tuJbzxwVPUhhDjzz6H222Kh8baKe6rDEsXgE617DVSDD8UKNaXvKNU8dEVRTAFH9Av8gKkn4jDzVGF25snJgNfUfKKNC8
i've graphed some data points per 1000 pages, and it seems to be that there's an avarage of a +27.5 increase. there's a 30 replies for page, so 27.5 out of 30 replies are increasers (91.6667%) and 2.5 out of 30 are decreasers (0.0833%)
EvisceratedJester
|| What Else Could I Be But a Jester ||
- Oct 21, 2023
- 4,146
Your results look pretty different from mine
Would you mind explaining how you got these results?
there's probably alot of deviation, but i don't know how to autiomatically scrape posts automatically
Namelesa
Trapped in this Suffering
- Sep 21, 2024
- 962
you probably thought of cock too much when you were trying to get your results as so your analysis became less accurate. /jokeLast edited:https://www.desmos.com/calculator/upthfijkjy here's the graph if you want to edit itSimilar threads
- Deleted member 94706
- Suicide Discussion
Suicide DiscussionDeleted member 94706
