Quote from: theymos_away on September 11, 2019, 04:15:02 AM

Quote from: suchmoon on September 11, 2019, 03:48:58 AM

Hmmm... equally spacing out super bumps over the course of the month seems to result in a lower total bumping effect than e.g. sending a bunch of superbumps in one day, waiting 30 days and 1 minute, and doing it again.

By "effect" I meant "total bump score contributed to good topics". By that measure, your two scenarios are equal assuming the same set of superbumps.

I don't think this is correct.

If you assume someone has a starting base bump score of 100:
On month 1, a forum member can make 30 superbumbs, and collectively add 660.68 to bump scores.

If the forum member made one superbump per day, and continues doing so, on the 31st day, the additional superbump will add an additional 1.056 points. The same number of points will be added on days 2-60 because she will continuously have made 29 superbumps in the last 30 days immediately prior to making that day's superbump. The total collective bump score from superbumping this way is ~31.68 from day 31-60. If someone makes 30 superbumps on day one, waits 30 days + one second, the first superbump on day 31 will be worth 100.

I think this sorting should only be applied for topics last posted in the last x amount of time, and if not, to sort by the default last posted date. As a test, I was able to bump a topic last posted in 7 years ago, and someone else bumped a topic last posted in 2013. By allowing very old threads to be bumped like this, you may be inadvertently be encouraging non-relevant threads to be nerco bumped.