[Babase] Grp on RANKS

Stephanie Combes babase@www.eco.princeton.edu
Tue, 28 Sep 2004 15:06:11 -0400


If I remember right, ranks was supposed to use the supergroup as long as it 
was a permanent group.  But, in reality, you put in the group you want it 
to use (in some cases a subgroup) and it would look to see who actually 
interacted in that subgroup.  This was mostly an issue with the splits that 
were occurring, particularly Alto's (messy one).  But, it has been a long 
while since I've run ranker, so take my memories with a grain of salt.

phone call - 1:00 just doesn't really work for me.  It doesn't allow me to 
cope with the juggling of my 2 job, 50+ hr work week.  So, I think it's 
probably easiest if y'all talk tomorrow and just email any new decisions to 
the listserve.

-steph

p.s. The woman Susan offered my position to has accepted the offer.  So, 
Leah Gerber will be my replacement, although she won't show up until 
NOvember I believe.



--On Tuesday, September 28, 2004 12:30 PM -0500 "Karl O. Pinc" 
<kop@meme.com> wrote:

>
> On 2004.09.28 10:23 Daphne A. Onderdonk wrote:
>>
>> So the question is what does the Ranker program currently use, and
>> what do we want it to use.  There are 2 parts to the Ranker program -
>> the part that creates the matrices, and the part that updates the
>> Ranks table.  When the program is run, it asks for a "group ID".
>> Karl, when it creates a matrix from this, does it take the supergroup
>> of that group ID (if they are different), and put everybody in the
>> matrix who's in that supergroup (according to Members), or does it
>> just include those present in that group (sub-group)?  Which does
>> Ranker use to put into the Ranks table when it updates Ranks?  I
>> think, from your question and from the documentation of Ranks, it
>> uses Supergroup.  But I don't think we would want it to use a
>> Supergroup in the Ranks table if it's only including the sub-group
>> members in the matrix.  And do we want to be able to rank individuals
>> within a sub-group?
>
> This is the crux of the matter.  Supergroup exists (IIRC) because
> when groups are in flux it does (did) not make sense to rank
> members in other than a larger proto-group (supergroup) sense.
> When the sub-groups become their own groups they are then
> coded as their own supergroup.
>
> I recall that the group that must be entered must be a supergroup,
> but that's not coded into the program, it'd be part of the foxpro
> 'form' which can't be looked at without foxpro.  (And which I'm always
> afraid to look at as foxpro seems to want to break older foxpro
> forms when using newer foxpro.)
>
> It believe that supergroup should be encoded into the queries on
> rnktypes, but at present it is not.   (I suppose it does not matter,
> now.)
>
>>
>> Jeanne would like to discuss this tomorrow in our conference call, so
>> this will hopefully give you all something to start thinking about in
>> the meantime.  We're on for tomorrow at 1:00, right?
>
> Good by me.
>
> I'll put off actually coding this until after the meeting.
>
> Karl <kop@meme.com>
> Free Software:  "You don't pay back, you pay forward."
>                   -- Robert A. Heinlein
> _______________________________________________
> Babase mailing list
> Babase@www.eco.princeton.edu
> http://www.eco.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/babase