Re: Results of the SourceForge Community Award

[Torsten Wagner <torsten.wagner@gmail.com>]

>Carsten Dominik wrote:
>> Well, at least it was not a close call :-)
>>
>>    http://sourceforge.net/community/cca09/winners/
>>
>> shows that we came in 9th of the 10 contenders.
>
>It looks to me that org-mode received around 873 votes which is pretty
>good in my book. PortableApps.com, a heavily advertised commercial
>product for Windows, could only muster 3880 votes. I am guessing that
>the percentage of PortableApps.com users who voted for it is much
>smaller than the percentage of org-mode users who voted for org-mode.
>
>The PortableApps.com website claims that 100 million portable apps have
>been downloaded which must mean that the number of users of
>PortableApps.com is huge compared to the number of users of org-mode.
>With no advertising, no money, and a much smaller user base, org-mode
>outperformed PortableApps.com in the voting. Sounds like a victory to me.


I just have to agree with that...
redefine the vote rule to be scientifically correct it should be 

impact = votes/user-base

this gives a similar value like the impact factor of scientific journals 
(published papers / overall citation of papers)  which more clearly depict the 
importance of the journal to its particular field. 

I guess with that org-mode might be the winner :)

Even if we just use the number of downloads I would say the number of 
downloads for org-mode is at least  two to three magnitudes smaller then 
PortableApps which makes org-mode (8.7e-4) has a 22.5 times higher impact then 
PortableApps (3.88e-5).

By the way is the number of org-mode users known somehow (and how to estimate 
it in future bundled with emacs23) ? Would be interesting to see how much 
people use org-mode

Nevertheless, even without this it was amazing to see that org-mode made it so 
far.

Bye
Totti

CC. Maybe someone should suggest this new rule set to sourceforge... and then 
lets see how 2010 is going on :)