3

The page I'm talking about is the Accounts tab in the Network Profile, example here.

The primary sort key seems fairly clearly "reputation," descending.
However, secondary sort keys don't seem obvious.

What I would expect is that:

  • If two accounts have equal reputation, question count, answer count, the one with more badges (perhaps gold, silver, bronze in that order) would appear higher in the list.
  • If two accounts have the same reputation and badge counts and answer count, the one with more questions should appear higher in the list.
  • If two accounts have the same reputation and badge counts and question count, the one with more answers should appear higher in the list.
  • If two accounts have the same reputation, badge counts, question and answer count, the one most recently visited should appear higher in the list. (?)
  • If two accounts have the same reputation, badge counts, question and answer count, and visit recency, the older account should appear higher in the list. (?)
  • If two accounts have the same reputation, badge counts, question and answer count, visit recency, and age, they should be in alphabetical order. (?)

Currently, "semi-sorted" seems to be the "actual" current state unless I'm missing a pattern.

Why not add additional sort criteria to the list creation, to more easily sort by level of activity descending?

Also, I'll make this one more of a feature request for additional sort levels than this question which asks more about the current state of the art, so as to help distinguish the two.

  • 1
    How often do two account have the same rep (besides 101 rep where there's no difference in q/a count either)? Ie how many people does this help, and in what way? – Double AA Jul 31 '15 at 0:08
  • 1
    I think there are plenty of cases where multiple accounts have 101 rep and there ARE differences in q/a count, particularly differences from 0. Adding some levels means that the accounts a person has actually participated on (e.g. writing a question or answer) would be above those where they haven't written any questions/answers in their accounts list. – WBT Jul 31 '15 at 0:50
1

The current secondary sort key appears to be the age of the site: for example, 160 reputation at Bicycles (4 years 11 months) sorts higher than 160 reputation at Engineering (6 months).

As for why not change it? The current sorting is a natural consequence of how the database is set up, and doesn't require any additional effort or computing resources. Changing it requires effort and computing resources, for very marginal gain: the only common time for a user to have the same rep on two sites is when the accounts are new, and new accounts are likely to have the same badge count, question count, and answer count.

| improve this answer | |

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .