Most Profiles Invited

Is the concern is due to the fact that many profiles were retroactively reassigned to new "adders" a while back? If so, there's really nothing for Mike to check out -- that's been an open secret for a while.

Can you go to http://www.geni.com/statistics?tab=awards and tell me what your list looks like? The people at the top of mine, like Penny Deshur , don't look like they could have enough activity to have invited so many. Penny added only 2,684 but has invited 1,188.

Mine all look completely plausible. Is it possible that Penny is an association officer who has e-mail addresses for that many members of her tree?

in my family-group Private User invited most people to share their wisdom on geni. -jMu-

by-the-way: what are tree creators? In that particularly 'go to' I have several people 'in my family?' that created lost of new trees. How come? Maybe it's because I invited them to geni without even having created a profile about them before? In that case I like it, for it means they choose themselves to be part of this platform. groetUnujMu.

sorry: 'created lost of new trees' = created lots of new trees ! tapping is difficult under some circumstances.

but -thinking about it over & again- how is their a ranking possible then?

Look Henn Sarv - 2408, at least it is Estonian record

It appears to me that Penny invited 643 people, not 1,188. I'm not going to have time to dig into this any further right now.

On my Awards list, she's #1 at 1188. So this is a bug of some sort. In case you want to test, here's the top 10 from my Awards list

Most People Invited
Penny Deshur (Klein) (1188)
Max Gerald Heffler (1181)
Daniel Elliott Loeb (1108)
Gayle (Goldman) Miller (1009)
Randy Schoenberg (955)
Doron Leitner (842)
Kobi Avramov (809)
Adam Robert Brown (756)
Allen Mark Halberstadt (728)
Joshua Zvi Levin (676)

Randy Schoenberg, about Private User I see:
# 2,517 in my Awards page
# 2,517 in his own page - statistics
# 1,192 if I list him with a filter "invited by"

May be the cache is out of date for a long time and includes re-invited same persons. I'm just guess...

You, for exemple:
* Randy Schoenberg (955) versus
* http://www.geni.com/list?column_0=photo&column_1=name&colum... (592)

Just remember to read the title of the awards page before you publish these numbers on a page indexed by Google.
This is numbers you see because someone have trusted you family group access.

Mike Stangel I wish the profiles invited stat was working. Mine has not budged form 955 since we started this thread, even though I have continued to invite lots of people to geni.

Hmm, I'll have to investigate -- it ought to be working!

Thanks Mike!

Found the problem. I'm going to refresh the stats for everyone who has logged onto the site in the past week -- that'll take about 3 hours. I'll then run it again for everyone who has logged in, in the past six months -- that'll run about 2 days.

Great. Thanks so much. I think it's an important stat to keep track of, both for the tree and for the company. Thanks for fixing it. Randy

I dropped from 955 to 712. Will have to check what happened to the others.

Henn Sarv dropped form 2408 to 1289

Anilkumar Nair dropped from 2,906 to 1,511

I am curious how Anilkumar Nair Puthalath invited 1,511 while adding just 1,901 profiles. Seems unusual to me.

actually, it looks like the bug that we had for the past 9 months or so is now fixed and the number of invites is what you had before the bug

:-)

FYI I'll be revisiting how we calculate stats after profiles are merged -- we've been decrementing the "profiles added" count after merging, but recently decided that was unfair. This same logic may be affecting the "profiles invited" statistic.

Thanks Mike. I wish you could run some of these "top 10" lists with a script automatically. I think it would be really helpful identifying both good and bad behavior. For example, if you had a list of the biggest adders over the past week/month/year, we could monitor that and identify wholesale duplicators. At the same time it would encourage more good work on the tree.

For what it's worth, I think it would not be unfair to count only profiles where the manager is listed in the "added by" field as an added profile. If you lose out after a merge to a manager who added earlier, that would be fine. I often add a profile I have added earlier and then merge the two. I shouldn't get credit for both.

Interesting. Thanks for the update, Mike.

Speaking of merges: Has something changed to how primary management is assigned after merges? It used to be that the profile with the most details became the primary, but that doesn't always seem to be the case now.

Mike, - the big fair or not fair question is: Which number is used for the none-Pro limit of adding profiles - The actual added profiles count or the number of profiles you are listed on as "Added By"?

The nice thing with using the listed as "Added By" number is that users who get connected and merged into "the big tree" will be able to add more profiles, making their tree wider, since it is most likely that the profiles that get merged will not count as "added by" anymore.

If that is not a fact anymore we have lost an argument for asking people to join the big tree.

Bjorn 1+