Fortunato Posted:

This would be true if there weren’t a large percentage of people who decide to stop. There are also several boards (buildr and flezz) where the holder’s position can go down.

Short of people no longer wanting to top the leaderboards, I find it hard to believe that even the flezz and buildr leaderboards can have significant volatility among truly active players. If two equally good players start the game with a season’s difference in timing, and both stay equally active, the first to hit the ground will always have the advantage based on nothing more than hearing about the game first. Given a significant headstart, players of less skill can still maintain a lead over good ones. This, of course, isn’t really even corrected by my suggestion, it’s nature-of-the-beast material – I’m just not sure your examples are that good.

I also don’t think I follow why the “large percentage of people who decide to stop” is a factor. If we’re going to reward performance as compared to the rest of the community (which seems to be what the leaderboard peen is for), why shouldn’t it be based on actual participating members of the community? What’s the qualitative or philosophical distance between removing 10 inactive players or 10,000?