LadyLuna
Inactive Cam Model
- Mar 8, 2010
- 6,710
- 9,440
- 293
- Twitter Username
- @EveMatteo
- MFC Username
- LadyLuna
- Streamate Username
- Lady_Luna
- Clips4Sale URL
- http://clips4sale.com/store/42697/LadyLuna
Alright, we have two sets of figures, the set on the right and the set on the left. Please realize I pulled the tokens/hour for this out of my ass. The reality is that it will range anywhere from 1 token per hour to tens of thousands, with many hundreds of models.
SO! Explanation of the picture:
Each set has two columns. The first column is tokens/hour, which is the basis of the camscore. But the other basis is the average tokens/hour of all the girls, so after typing out all the tokens/hour of this little mockup, I found out the average. The first set, the average tokens/hour was 118.75. In the second column, I multiplied the first column by 1000 and divided it by the average.
Then I eliminated all the girls below a 500 camscore for the second set. This was all the girls who eared 50 tokens per hour. As you can see, the second set, the average was now higher. Since dividing by a bigger number makes smaller numbers for each person, the "camscore" went down. Those who previously had 505.2634 now have 466.6719
So yes, Shaun, you were right. Cutting those with a 100 or below will result with the next set falling below the cutoff mark,
If you wish to start cutting girls who don't earn enough, I suggest using something that DOESN'T rely on what the average girl makes as a standard, since cutting the lowest out of the group raises the average higher. Maybe, instead of focusing on the camscore, focus on the wages?
SO! Explanation of the picture:
Each set has two columns. The first column is tokens/hour, which is the basis of the camscore. But the other basis is the average tokens/hour of all the girls, so after typing out all the tokens/hour of this little mockup, I found out the average. The first set, the average tokens/hour was 118.75. In the second column, I multiplied the first column by 1000 and divided it by the average.
Then I eliminated all the girls below a 500 camscore for the second set. This was all the girls who eared 50 tokens per hour. As you can see, the second set, the average was now higher. Since dividing by a bigger number makes smaller numbers for each person, the "camscore" went down. Those who previously had 505.2634 now have 466.6719
So yes, Shaun, you were right. Cutting those with a 100 or below will result with the next set falling below the cutoff mark,
If you wish to start cutting girls who don't earn enough, I suggest using something that DOESN'T rely on what the average girl makes as a standard, since cutting the lowest out of the group raises the average higher. Maybe, instead of focusing on the camscore, focus on the wages?