Quote Originally Posted by sjrapid View Post
I'd respectfully disagree, David. As well as having a little fun, and getting other XMTS members to rank themselves against the Kilted legend (who has taken the suggestion in good heart), my specific intention was to eliminate what you call longevity - thus enabling newbie members like myself whose addiction is still in its first year, to compare themselves with greater kilt collections and who have been at it for longer.
If I wander down the High Street, pop into a kilt maker's shop, buy a kilt, and then within the hour pop into the kilt shop at the other end of the street for another kilt, I could claim that I'm accumulating kilts at 17,520 per year. This then would give a 1.863 kH rating. Who's king of the mountain now?

But that result is completely bogus because it doesn't include longevity. To not include longevity wrongly diminishes Hamish's achievement and falsely promotes those of us who are lesser mortals. Goals worthy of achievement should require us to strive.

So, if I take this same extreme example and include what one might call Hamish time, then I think I get a more realistic rating:

Let:
k = number of kilts I own: 2
Hk = number of kilts Hamish owns: 76
t = time in years that I've owned kilts: 0.000114
Ht = time in years that Hamish has owned kilts (Hamish Time): 7.972

kt = rate that I claim to have acquired kilts per year: kt = k/t = 2 / 0.000114 = 17520
Hkt = rate that Hamish has acquired kilts per year: Hkt = Hk/Ht = 76 / 7.972 = 9.532

H = Hamish Rating (for Hamish this number is always 1)
Then my Hamish Rating is:

H = (kt/Hkt)*(t/Ht) = (17520/9.532)*(0.000114/7.972) = 0.026

By this method RiverKilt (55 kilts in 31 months) has a 0.723 Hamish rating. No small achievement that. I am a mere 52 mH by this method.