Were be that pesky gnome

[KrewL RaiN]

The gnome copy cats are taking over bnet lol. Were like were be the real gnome =P

[Spht]

Should be back as soon as BNLS comes back

[brew]

Wha... BNLS is still down? Spht aren't you supposed to maintain it? What's wrong with BNLS in the first place? I may never get a chance to test my 0x1a code now ;(

[rabbit]

Spht can't turn on the server no matter how much access he has to it.

[Spht]

Just use a BNLS clone

[Barabajagal]

*PUNT*

[KrewL RaiN]

zomg it back keekekke

* KrewL RaiN kicks hdx server status thingy for not showing smilies

guess blns is back up? xD

[Spht]

The gnome copy cats are taking over bnet lol.

You mean CIanGnome for instance?

[KrewL RaiN]

omg busted xD that was fun though people thought I was the real one xD

The other 3 are hdxgnomie, chatgnome, and pawngnome (who keeps changing names that bugger)

[Spht]

omg busted xD that was fun though people thought I was the real one xD

The other 3 are hdxgnomie, chatgnome, and pawngnome (who keeps changing names that bugger)

I like how they're all "gnomes"...gold!

Edit:  Modified ClanGnome article to reflect this trend

[KrewL RaiN]

oh god, another one

[12:43:14 AM] <To TJOC.Gnome@Azeroth> FAKE GNOME #4 FAKE GNOME #4

[Spht]

Maybe I should keep up with the competition!

Any ideas for more statistical information the web site could show?  What information would you like to know about Battle.net clans that ClanGnome could figure out during its travels?

[KrewL RaiN]

this one is rigged: http://warlock.brent.googlepages.com/gnome

It has a most abused by list and other stats clangnome doesn't collect, but likes to spam its masters plugins url lol... aka spamgnome

[disco]

Can it (or does it already) show when clans were created?

[Spht]

this one is rigged: http://warlock.brent.googlepages.com/gnome

It has a most abused by list and other stats clangnome doesn't collect, but likes to spam its masters plugins url lol... aka spamgnome

Those statistics are quite flawed.

1) It doesn't forget clans.  Many of the clans that are listed on the web site have probably expired, or even re-created by someone else, making a lot of the information inaccurate.

2) "Highest level clans" is flawed.  If the bot saw 3 members with average level of 30, and another clan with 20 members with average level of 25, then the clan with 20 members should be considered "highest level clan."

3) "Most talkative clans" is highly unreliable to the point where it's useless

4) "Least intimate" is possibly flawed.  Does it keep track of all the members of a guild or something?  How does spotting a member outside the clan make that clan less intimate?  To ClanGnome, an "intimate" clan is one whose channel contains the highest ratio of members to visitors (and takes into account a couple other things).

5) It spits out raw stats when spoken to (or .commanded) on Battle.net, which isn't very gnomish!

Can it (or does it already) show when clans were created?

ClanGnome doesn't, no.  There's a link to a clan's Battle.net profile on the stats page though, which contains the creation date.