Yay... congrats. :)

If only they actually said how many reviews Doug actually did last month.

As far as I counted, only six. :)

~ferich

That's less than 2 reviews per week..

As far as I've seen from him, they are all on the TI-89 Assembly page. The reviewers have tried to keep from reviewing programs that already have been reviewed, and there's not much there that hasn't been reviewed yet. Also, we don't have every single calculator like you do, Bryan, so we can't really write good reviews for calculators we don't own. I'd say 2 reviews a week is pretty high, IMHO.

~ferich

What's the problem with having more than 1 review for each program, as long as they are written by different people? That way you get different angles on the same program, instead of just one. It seems like that would be better.

Yeah, but they were *damned* good reviews!! :P

LOL

1st comment and congratulations to Doug Koellmer

err never mind I was too slow

Wow! Thanks everybody. I had no idea I was even in contention with all the other great reviewers we have at ticalc.org. I have to admit, I am very suprised. Thanks again everybody, and I hope I can keep writing the same great reviews.

Where did "Kay" come from?

Good question...

~ferich

I assume that since his last name starts with "K", he just spelled out the letter. Doug K->Doug Kay. Speaking of which, I wonder how one would spell all the letters in the alphabet...

Aeh
Bee
Cee
Dee
Ee
Eff
Never mind...

You got it.

My History teacher, Dr. McGinley, has a sign on his door that says "The Alphabet in Alphabetical order:
Aich
Ay
Aye"
(Etc...)
It's not funny, but it's supposed to be, so you have to give him a little credit.

. . . to Doug, for his important role in preserving the high quality reviews that continue to show more of ticalc's professional mannerism. Why, look at this example from the Top Skater (TI-89) review:

"There is absolutely gray-scale in this game; it is just black and white."

Never before have I seen such an elegant presentation of a paradox. If Doug would kindly post how he has proved this theory, then I'm sure that the mathematical community would be astounded by his astonishing manipulation of the laws of logic. It would surely win a nobel prize and distinction and acclaim on the same level as the proof of Fermat's Last Theorem and Einstein's Theory of Relativity.

I'd just like to encourage Doug and the rest of the ticalc.org reviews staff to keep up the good work - and remember, the quantity is more important than quality. Why cares how good the reviews are as long as there are a lot of them? With reviews like that quoted above, who needs to proof read?

And so, may ticalc.org continue to award those who posted numerous reviews in defiance with the laws of logic.

-----------------------

This post contains potentially harmful amounts of sarcasm. Should the viewer be offended by the implied mockery above, the author shall not be responsible in any way.

Scott, it's easy to fix grammatical mistakes like this one. By the context of the sentence, it's obvious that the the word "no" should be inserted there. Until Eric Sun reads your comment, it probably won't be fixed, unless some other staff member does. I think his reviews are quite good, which is more likely the reason why he was chosen to be ROTM over the rest of us than the number of reviews he submitted. Sam got it the first month due to his long-standing position as a reviewer, not to mention his contributions, as far as I'm concerned.

~ferich

What last month's winner have to do with anything? If you ask me, the reviewer of the month award is a pointless idea anyway...

Basically. It's just a way that ticalc.org thought up to get another news item per month. :)

ROTM provides incentives to actually make this site better. Rewarding good/quantitative effort is a good idea. It gets me moving.

BTW, Sam, I didn't intend to mean that your ROTM was meaningless, if that's what you thought.

~ferich

Well, at least that's supposed to be the point of it...

I'm just trying to point out that ticalc.org is trying to make it worthwhile. I'm just setting your work as a benchmark for writing good reviews.

~ferich

What can you expect...

Hey Scott, surely you remembered to give credit to the person that pointed out error in that reviews =}

It's fixed now.

~ferich

Yo Scott, whats with the hostility? I am sorry if leaving the word 'no' out of a sentence (whose meaning could easily be implied even with the simple error) offends you, but I am doing my best here. I really didn't appreciate your comment; especially considering how SIMPLE the mistake was. If I got an entire review wrong, than that would be grounds for correction. Nobodies perfect.

I appreciate all the positive postings that users have put up.

I think ticalc.org has proven with great assurance that they aren't perfect.

To err is to be human as they say...I think ;P

but mistakes like that aren't really important. I put on my review of zip86 that it only compressed bomberbloke 1 byte, but I forgot that the readme file states it was already compressed using the same algorithm by a different program :P

needless to say, many people emailed me about it :P

Aren't the colors black and white greyscale, too?

-nik

no.