Outtakes in Blogging - New Years Stats Edition

Sometimes, trying to write a blog post ends up with hilariously poor results.  As an outtake, these are amusing to witness from the outside, of course, but there's a lot of frustration involved, as you might imagine.  Still, it's something that -I- can laugh at when presented with it, so it's not something I'm adverse to sharing and that's exactly what I'm going to do tonight.  You see, I -was- trying to figure out a very, very basic thing for an opening stat and, well, it kind of broke me.  I was essentially just trying to work with something without having enough data for it, which I realize now (and honestly realized at a few points, but damnit, I was going to try) and it just did not end well, as you can imagine.  But I'm welcoming you to enjoy my hilarious missteps in the process of trying to provide content because it in itself is content of sorts.  I'm inserting a page break, however, because it's a chatlog, which means it's quite long by nature without being -full-, as paragraphs are.  So, yes, hopefully you will enjoy it in lieu of actual numbers tonight.

good lord, did I wobble this one spectacularly

[00:01]	-->|	Haplo has joined the chat.
[00:01]	Haplo	'Lo
[00:01]	Mogs	HELLO
[00:01]	Mogs	I HAVE LEARNED SOMETHING
[00:01]	Mogs	CUMULATIVE GROWTHS ARE HARD TO REVERSE ENGINEER
[00:03]	Mogs	ESPECIALLY FOR THE EXPLICIT PURPOSE OF PROJECTING
[00:04]	Haplo	... What? :|
[00:04]	Mogs	I'm trying my hand at the Year in Review stat post
[00:05]	Haplo	Ahhh
[00:05]	Mogs	And I'm trying to project the YoY increase in delay if I keep at it the way I have been
[00:05]	Mogs	First post was on December 31st, 2011 or Day Zero
[00:05]	Mogs	Second was January 2nd, 2013, or a Two Day increase
[00:06]	Mogs	Today's will be January 9th, 2014, or a seven day increase on the two day increase for a nine day increase total
[00:06]	Mogs	Thus I'm trying to use those figures to project a next year
[00:06]	Mogs	and I'm getting 14 because of a cumulative growth
[00:06]	Mogs	because 0->2 = 2, 2->7 = 5, 2+5 = 7, 7+7 = 14
[00:08]	Mogs	And if that's true, I'm not sure if I then do another full cumulative of 2+5+7=14+7=21
[00:08]	Mogs	Or just 5+7=12
[00:09]	Mogs	To project the -next- next one
[00:10]	Haplo	nodnodnods.
[00:10]	Mogs	Or, I guess it would be
[00:10]	Mogs	5+7=12+7=19
[00:10]	Haplo	My advice
[00:10]	Haplo	Calculate the average posts vs days of your last year
[00:10]	Mogs	"stahp"?
[00:10]	Haplo	Then calculate your average posts vs days of your current year
[00:11]	Mogs	How would that correlate?
[00:13]	Haplo	Oh, you're trying to find the YoY increase in -delay- and not just general increase?
[00:13]	Mogs	Right.
[00:13]	Mogs	There's been a YoY -decrease- in general since I've posted less each consecutive year
[00:15]	Haplo	Ok, then
[00:15]	Haplo	What you do
[00:15]	Haplo	Is you do what I said
[00:15]	Haplo	Then divide your current year average by your last year average.
[00:17]	Mogs	How is that going to tell me what day I would post the New Years Stats next year if I continue to be as cumulatively lazy next year as I have this one
[00:17]	Mogs	i.e. the delay
[00:18]	Haplo	Oh, right
[00:18]	Haplo	Pardon, I see what you mean now
[00:19]	Haplo	Alright
[00:19]	Haplo	Go through every post last year
[00:19]	Haplo	And note down the delay in minutes
[00:19]	Haplo	Or days if each post is delayed by a day
[00:19]	Mogs	haplo
[00:19]	Mogs	stahp
[00:19]	Haplo	What's the matter? :|
[00:19]	Mogs	staaaaahhhhhp
[00:19]	Haplo	:|
[00:19]	Haplo	wins.
[00:20]	Mogs	you're convoluting my convoluted situation
[00:21]	Mogs	anyway, 14 is the correct answer for this go around at least
[00:21]	Mogs	meaning next year would then be the 23rd
[00:24]	Mogs	It's figuring out -that- cumulative growth that's the problem then
[00:25]	Mogs	Because 0->2 = 2, 2->7 = 5, 7->14 = 7
[00:25]	Mogs	Which still doesn't seem right
[00:26]	Haplo	What if
[00:27]	Haplo	You added up the delay in days between every New Years Stats post you've done
[00:27]	Haplo	And found the average
[00:27]	Mogs	haplo, I will fucking rip your throat out
[00:27]	Haplo	:|
[00:27]	Haplo	I'm being serious this time!
[00:28]	Mogs	I only have two delays to work with
[00:28]	Mogs	Because I have Day Zero, I have the 2nd and the 9th.
[00:29]	Mogs	Which is an average of 5.5
[00:30]	Haplo	Ok
[00:30]	Haplo	So your first delay was the 2012 post?
[00:30]	Mogs	Yes.
[00:31]	Haplo	And what was the delay there?
[00:31]	Mogs	2 days.
[00:31]	Haplo	And they 2013 Post was a delay of 9 days.
[00:31]	Mogs	Right.
[00:31]	Haplo	Then isn't the delay drift rate 7 days?
[00:32]	Mogs	That's the number I got with the Cumulative, yes.
[00:32]	Haplo	Right.
[00:33]	Haplo	So there you go then.
[00:35]	Mogs	so wait, would
[00:35]	Mogs	that mean that next year would be the 16th instead?
[00:36]	Haplo	At this projected rate, yes.
[00:36]	Mogs	did you seriously just ruin the last hour of my math with that
[00:36]	Haplo	That's the 'delay growth'
[00:36]	Haplo	Yep.
[00:37]	Mogs	but what about the next year
[00:37]	Haplo	Not enough data.
[00:37]	Mogs	yes there is, because you can extrapolate
[00:37]	Mogs	that is what I've been doing
[00:37]	Mogs	is extrapolating
[00:37]	Mogs	extrapolating the shit out of it
[00:38]	Haplo	You've been extrapolating with...
[00:38]	Haplo	Two data points.
[00:38]	Mogs	yes
[00:38]	Haplo	There isn't a respectable journal on Earth that would buy that.
[00:38]	Haplo	At -most- your extrapolations for the coming years would be extremely loose.
[00:38]	Haplo	And would slowly change with each year.
[00:40]	Haplo	Because you -could- say that due to this growth rate, the 2014 Stats post would be posted on the 16th
[00:40]	Haplo	But of course if you kept that growth up you would argue that the 2015 post would be posted on the 23rd.
[00:41]	Mogs	It wouldn't be the 23rd because it's reusing the previous one
[00:41]	Haplo	What do you mean, reusing the previous one?
[00:41]	Mogs	The cumulative growth is what would have to be found between the three years
[00:41]	Haplo	I
[00:42]	Haplo	Yes, that's what I've been saying :|
[00:42]	Haplo	You can't actually predict 2015's until you have more than two dates
[00:42]	Mogs	We're assuming the drift goes 2-5-7
[00:42]	Mogs	er
[00:42]	Mogs	no, now I'm confused
[00:42]	Haplo	What? :|
[00:43]	Haplo	The drift is 7 days
[00:43]	Haplo	Because 2012 was 2 days delay
[00:43]	Haplo	2013 was 9 days
[00:43]	Mogs	which means it wouldn't be another 7 days
[00:43]	Haplo	Which is a delay growth of 7 days
[00:43]	Haplo	Then you want to do percentile growth
[00:44]	Mogs	We're going from Day Zero (first year) to the second (second year) to the ninth (third year)
[00:44]	Haplo	Basically, your delay growth rate for 2013 was 350%.
[00:44]	Haplo	By that calculation, your 2014 Stats post would be posted on the 24th.
[00:45]	Mogs	am I like trying to do exponential instead or something
[00:46]	Mogs	Basically how I'm seeing it
[00:48]	Haplo	What are you actually trying to do? :|
[00:48]	Haplo	You're trying to work out the delay on which you post the Stats post for 2014, right?
[00:52]	Mogs	yes
[00:55]	Mogs	0<---------Day Zero
[00:55]	Mogs	|> 2<-----Delay 1
[00:55]	Mogs	||>2<-----Increase of 2 (2-0)
[00:55]	Mogs	2<---------Day posted
[00:55]	Mogs	|> 7<-----Delay 2
[00:55]	Mogs	||5<-------Increase of 5 (7-2)
[00:55]	Mogs	9<---------Day Posted
[00:55]	Mogs	|>7<------Projected Delay 3 (Because Cumulative increase of 2+5)
[00:55]	Mogs	||>9<-----Increase of 9 (16-7)
[00:55]	Mogs	16<--------Day Posted
[00:55]	Mogs	|>?<-------Delay desired
[00:59]	Mogs	extrapolation! *jazz hands*
[01:02]	Mogs	my brain is sad
[01:03]	Haplo	No no
[01:03]	Haplo	Doing that sort of cumulative growth rate is problematic
[01:04]	Haplo	Because you're not measuring delay growth
[01:04]	Haplo	You're measuring total delay
[01:04]	Haplo	And that's warping your results.
[01:05]	Mogs	but it is technically cumulative, right
[01:05]	Haplo	Yeah, but you can't use this to predict anything
[01:06]	Mogs	I'm still saying I was close
[01:06]	Haplo	0->2->5->9
[01:06]	Haplo	Is a delay chart of 0->2->3->4
[01:07]	Haplo	So following -that- growth chart, you'd post your Stats post for 2014 on the 14th.
[01:08]	Mogs	Numbers broke me
[01:08]	Mogs	I am broken
[01:08]	Haplo	What you've done
[01:08]	Mogs	they are a harsh mistress
[01:09]	Haplo	Is the equivalent of saying that Person A was born in 2000, had an Age Growth of 1 in 2001, and 1 in 2002, and so in 2003 he'll grow by 2 years.
[01:09]	Mogs	but I did it in the most fucking complicated way possible
[01:09]	Haplo	Yup.
[01:09]	Mogs	goddamnit
[01:11]	Mogs	Do you mind if I post this as a chatlog in a post as sort of an "Outtake" post tonight since I'm obviously not going to get anymore math done
[01:11]	Haplo	http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?id=3225#comic | This.
[01:11]	Haplo	Sure, go ahead.
[01:11]	Haplo	But read that comic
[01:11]	Mogs	oh my god
[01:11]	Mogs	that is me
[01:12]	Mogs	I am that girl
[01:12]	Mogs	minus being a girl
[01:14]	Haplo	Just another fine chapter in the book of how I am better at everything
[01:14]	Mogs	I will cut you

[01:15]

Haplo

But who'll fix your maths then?

I would like to say that no matter how many times I threaten bodily harm to one of my best friends, I insist that I'm not a bad person.  Also, yes, I fiddled with the timestamp.