The discrepancy is by design:
Total reputation is your current reputation on the site (accurate to within 24 hours).
Month reputation is the amount by which your reputation changed that month, excluding "private" reputation events. Certain reputation events are excluded from your public user profile, such as deleted posts or downvotes, so those are excluded ...
Not for at least a decade
Instead of making theoretical assumptions about what people *might* gain in rep, why not go on what people have actually earned?
Update: December 2017
Using Data from the past 12 months: (Jan 2017 to 22 Dec 2017):
At least 7.5 years
Huge shoutout to @Gordon Linoff who's maintained his frankly awesome pace for 3 years running ...
Jon can't exceed the daily gap without a large number of accepted answers (which, along with bounties, are the only things that don't count towards the gap). To get accept marks, you'll have to keep on contributing.
If Jon were to stop answering, he would still gain 200 points every day for the foreseeable future, but other users who continue to gain ...
You can't find your rank, but you can find out how well you stack up against the highest in a tag.
It shows you at the bottom of the list (unless you're actually in the list) so you can compare to how much you need to improve to be on the list of top users.
It's not exactly what you're looking for, ...
I think the best you can do is use this data.SE query which currently puts you at 108 in the C# tag.
You can also use this query if you just want a single tag or see who the other users are below is the first 109 users in c#
Rank User Link Score
------- ----------------------------- -----
1 Jon Skeet 56046
This math is pretty straightforward. At the moment I write this, Jon has 606,882 rep and #2 has 463,940 - a gap of about 150,000 rep. He gets 200-400 rep a day, the rep cap plus accepts. (Other answers have said 10K a month, which is roughly 300 a day.) Assume, for the fastest possible catchup:
Jon's accepts stop dead when he stops posting answers
User #2 ...
You can check the reputation tab on their profile to see where the reputation actually comes from, but in short the daily reputation cap is only for reputation earned from upvotes and suggested edits. It doesn't prevent you from also earning reputation by other means, such as accepted answers or bounties.
A TLDR, simple answer:
Go to this StackExchange Data Explorer Query, provide your userid (clip it from your profile url on the site) and a Reputation Cutoff, and you'll see where you rank (in terms of the top N percent, as opposed to percentile rank discussed further below).
1 - Rank vs All users
200 - Rank vs those tracked in the ...
According to this SEDE query (which might not be entirely accurate, since it can't account for answer downvotes given by users), eleven:
Biblical Hermeneutics: Soldarnal overtook Dɑvïd
Bicycles: Criggie overtook Argenti Apparatus
DevOps: 030 overtook Tensibai
History: Tom Au overtook T.E.D.
Homebrewing: Brewchez overtook Denny Conn
Italian Language: Charo ...
Jon Skeet is about 143K reputation above the next highest users. Furthermore, he has over 27,000 posts. He hit the reputation cap today 6 hours in to the day. Most likely, he will get 200 reputation even if he doesn't answer another question for a long time to come. But that will limit his ability to get accepted answers, dropping his rate down some. This ...
I wonder, is StackExchange hiring SQL programmers? I know how to get Unique values from a table!
Yes, we are!...but that's beside the point.
The issue here isn't solved by a Distinct() or any other simple means, because it's a high speed transactional problem. The load on a single SQL server is kept down via dirty reads using a READ UNCOMMITTED ...
This is intentional for the moment, we have an issue with the leagues population causing an inordinate amount of load on our SQL servers which I have yet to find time to investigate.
I just turned it on for Stack Overflow specifically, it's the SE 2.0 sites causing the SQL issue...Stack Overflow is fine.
We've been a little busy wit the failover to our ...
The "+3579" in your screenshot is the change in rank, not the change in reputation. Therefore, prior to the last "tick" of the list (I think in that case it's weekly), your rank was around 4.5k - you have moved up 3579 ranks to the new rank of 1080.
The reputation change is only shown with the "week reputation" column and the such.
The W3C Link Checker test executed on the Leagues page gives server side errors in the following seven links, which I have manually verified to be broken:
quarter: 171th of 108499 ==> 0.1576%
month: 113th of 39822 ==> 0.2837%
And the reputation league shows the best one. So in this case, you have a better classification percentage in the quarter league although in the absolute classification you are higher in the list.
Update: as you show in comments, note that users with less than 200 ...
The means to do this would be to utilize our API, which wouldn't be very difficult, quite a few people have done similar things.
I don't think this would work as a core feature because reputation alone is already a bit much when it comes to extrinsic motivation for some - adding more carrots at the end of the stick in a contest is definitely not going to ...
The Stack Exchange leagues page allows you to see all users, sorted by reputation over various time periods (week, month, quarter, year and all time), with your own profile placed nicely at the top. For example, if I select "All Time", I currently see this:
You can see the lists for all sites in the Stack Exchange network.
Note that it also notes on that ...
You will need to pass the 200 reputation mark before your reputation is comparable to the likes of the Skeet and co.
If you go to your profile page (click your username in the top nav) and click the link displayed in the image below:
If you want to access it quickly now, you can use this link. But for future reference use the highlighted method above.
In the 6 to 8 weeks this takes to get fixed, you can use the following userscript that solves the bug:
// @name set selected site
// @namespace https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/158100/rene
// @version 0.1
// @description set selected site in league
// @author rene
// @match https://stackexchange.com/...
In this case, the reputation league shows the correct amount of reputation gained. However, there is a bug in the functionality involving deleted posts, which are calculated as if they were not deleted and not subject to the daily reputation limit. This leads to situations where several users appear to have gained way more than 2000 reputation in a week, ...
It's worth remembering that the reputation leagues are "just for a bit of fun", and they aren't really worth worrying about.
They aren't going to show up in anything but the all time high scores, and least for me, it's been motivating - I WILL CATCH UP WITH JohnT some day.....
Maybe it's going to be a little like the old Seinfeld episode The Frogger, and ...
The leagues are generated once per day.
The last time they were generated was at midnight and no data for 2015 could have been collected at that point, the league data can only take activity up to that point into account. If only data up to 2014-12-31 23:59:59 can be used, there is nothing to calculate for 2015.
This is sort of already available in the form of combined flair:
However that usercard can't be reached from the normal profile nor from the network profile and the global flair does not include accounts with less than 200 reputation.
You can use The Stack Exchange Data Explorer to query all databases for a specific account. The query requires an accountid ...
Because reputation isn't inter-exchangeable among sites. 1000 reputation on Seasoned Advice means a lot more than on Stack Overflow. This is just because it is harder to gain reputation on smaller sites since often the number of voters are lower. Even on a single site it is hard to measure reputation, since very active tags tend to attract more voters than ...