Note to all: I gave Mr. Baker a chance to comment on this paper
before release. He refused. So, I had to go with several assumptions.
If those are wrong I'll be happy to make revisions.
The bottom line:
Mr. Baker's Honda-powered car is slightly faster than his Kent as
measured by fastest race lap in similar races over time. The
difference is statistically significant.
Mr. Baker's recent race wins are due more to a decline in performance
of the competition than any change in his car/engine or driving
skill. The decline is due to the absence of all three drivers (Floer,
McColl and McKay) who historically placed ahead of Mr. Baker. No
other drivers comparable to those three have surfaced. This
statistic, measured by winner's fastest lap time, is also
statistically significant.
The paper is here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-5YrNtWBfc-U7xQ11I9PHOe4WEuzN_Tq/view?usp=sharing
If anyone wants the data it's in a spreadsheet and I will send it
for you to analyze.
Constructive comments are welcome. Deflections and accusations are
not.
On 2022-10-15 15:44, Thomas E. wrote:
Note to all: I gave Mr. Baker a chance to comment on this paper
before release. He refused. So, I had to go with several assumptions.
If those are wrong I'll be happy to make revisions.
The bottom line:
Mr. Baker's Honda-powered car is slightly faster than his Kent as
measured by fastest race lap in similar races over time. The
difference is statistically significant.
1. Is it that the CAR is faster...
...or could it be that the driver has improved over the course of his
racing career?
2. Even if it is the car, is it the engine that is responsible...
...or could it be that the previous car was significantly (nearly 5%)
over weight compared to the current car?
Mr. Baker's recent race wins are due more to a decline in performance
of the competition than any change in his car/engine or driving
skill. The decline is due to the absence of all three drivers (Floer, McColl and McKay) who historically placed ahead of Mr. Baker. No
other drivers comparable to those three have surfaced. This
statistic, measured by winner's fastest lap time, is also
statistically significant.
The paper is here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-5YrNtWBfc-U7xQ11I9PHOe4WEuzN_Tq/view?usp=sharing
If anyone wants the data it's in a spreadsheet and I will send it
for you to analyze.
Constructive comments are welcome. Deflections and accusations areFallacious assumptions:
not.
'Background: Mr. Baker claims that there is no difference between the performance of the Kent and Honda cars he has raced at SCCBC.'
That's simply a lie. I have said on more than a few occasions that my previous car—an RF89 Van Diemen that had been rebuilt after a major
crash before I owned it—was significantly overweight.
'There was no change in the track length over the years
analyzed thus the lowest lap times are a valid and consistent metric
among all races'
Wrong. Race tracks evolve over time and everyone agrees that the track
is was slower when I began racing, got better with new paving, and has
since fallen off again.
'There were 15 abnormally high fastest race lap time outliers,
apparently due to track conditions'
And what makes you qualified to determine that those laps should be omitted?
Fallacious assumptions:
'Background: Mr. Baker claims that there is no difference between the
performance of the Kent and Honda cars he has raced at SCCBC.'
That's simply a lie. I have said on more than a few occasions that my
previous car—an RF89 Van Diemen that had been rebuilt after a major
crash before I owned it—was significantly overweight.
On Saturday, October 15, 2022 at 7:08:17 PM UTC-4, Alan wrote:If anyone wants the data it's in a spreadsheet and I will send it
On 2022-10-15 15:44, Thomas E. wrote:
Note to all: I gave Mr. Baker a chance to comment on this paper1. Is it that the CAR is faster...
before release. He refused. So, I had to go with several
assumptions. If those are wrong I'll be happy to make revisions.
The bottom line:
Mr. Baker's Honda-powered car is slightly faster than his Kent
as measured by fastest race lap in similar races over time. The
difference is statistically significant.
...or could it be that the driver has improved over the course of
his racing career?
2. Even if it is the car, is it the engine that is responsible...
...or could it be that the previous car was significantly (nearly
5%) over weight compared to the current car?
Mr. Baker's recent race wins are due more to a decline in
performance of the competition than any change in his car/engine
or driving skill. The decline is due to the absence of all three
drivers (Floer, McColl and McKay) who historically placed ahead
of Mr. Baker. No other drivers comparable to those three have
surfaced. This statistic, measured by winner's fastest lap time,
is also statistically significant.
The paper is here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-5YrNtWBfc-U7xQ11I9PHOe4WEuzN_Tq/view?usp=sharing
for you to analyze.Fallacious assumptions:
Constructive comments are welcome. Deflections and accusations
are not.
'Background: Mr. Baker claims that there is no difference between
the performance of the Kent and Honda cars he has raced at SCCBC.'
That's simply a lie. I have said on more than a few occasions that
my previous car—an RF89 Van Diemen that had been rebuilt after a
major crash before I owned it—was significantly overweight.
'There was no change in the track length over the years analyzed
thus the lowest lap times are a valid and consistent metric among
all races'
Wrong. Race tracks evolve over time and everyone agrees that the
track is was slower when I began racing, got better with new
paving, and has since fallen off again.
'There were 15 abnormally high fastest race lap time outliers,
apparently due to track conditions'
And what makes you qualified to determine that those laps should be
omitted?
Like I said, you had the opportunity to review and turned it down.
Thanks for the constructive input.
As I said later in the article with respect to the engine choice and performance: "It could be the car, Mr. Baker’s race prep, tires or
other factors."
As for track conditions you all run on the same track, so that does
affect relative performance. Floer was running the same speeds in
2016 until he departed in 2018. He consistently beat you. On the
weekend of 7/27/2019 you did a 71.875 fastest lap. That's comparable
to a 2016 Floer time. How is that possible if the track is
deteriorating? It would be VERY interesting to see Dave, Doug or Alan
come back and see what they could do after a few races. You are right
it would be a more valid comparison. Regardless, your times have been consistent since 2017.
I am outlier-qualified by a PhD minor in stats. Outliers are always
somewhat subjective. In this case I used race speeds as a proxy for
track conditions. If I had data on something like a traction metric
that could have been used in a regression analysis to make the
outliers comparable to good dry conditions. Lacking that the outlier
times are highly variable and could yield erroneous conclusions if
included. The 46 comparable races are enough to yield valid results.
Do you have anything specific to say about the excluded races shown
in endnote iii? Most of those lap times are 10-20 seconds slower than typical. The demarcation is pretty clear. But, looking back I might
have also excluded an odd race on 4/20/2019 that Knuckelkorn won with
a much slower faster lap than yours. But you had a quite typical
fastest time in that one so I left it in.
You are also the car owner. As such your performance reflects not
only your driving, but all else that goes into car prep. Tires,
setup, routine maintenance and likely many other items.
On Saturday, October 15, 2022 at 7:08:17 PM UTC-4, Alan wrote:
On 2022-10-15 15:44, Thomas E. wrote:
Note to all: I gave Mr. Baker a chance to comment on this paper
before release. He refused. So, I had to go with several assumptions.
If those are wrong I'll be happy to make revisions.
The bottom line:
Mr. Baker's Honda-powered car is slightly faster than his Kent as measured by fastest race lap in similar races over time. The
difference is statistically significant.
1. Is it that the CAR is faster...
...or could it be that the driver has improved over the course of his racing career?
2. Even if it is the car, is it the engine that is responsible...
...or could it be that the previous car was significantly (nearly 5%)
over weight compared to the current car?
Mr. Baker's recent race wins are due more to a decline in performance
of the competition than any change in his car/engine or driving
skill. The decline is due to the absence of all three drivers (Floer, McColl and McKay) who historically placed ahead of Mr. Baker. No
other drivers comparable to those three have surfaced. This
statistic, measured by winner's fastest lap time, is also
statistically significant.
The paper is here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-5YrNtWBfc-U7xQ11I9PHOe4WEuzN_Tq/view?usp=sharing
If anyone wants the data it's in a spreadsheet and I will send it
for you to analyze.
Constructive comments are welcome. Deflections and accusations areFallacious assumptions:
not.
'Background: Mr. Baker claims that there is no difference between the performance of the Kent and Honda cars he has raced at SCCBC.'
That's simply a lie. I have said on more than a few occasions that my previous car—an RF89 Van Diemen that had been rebuilt after a major crash before I owned it—was significantly overweight.
'There was no change in the track length over the years
analyzed thus the lowest lap times are a valid and consistent metric
among all races'
Wrong. Race tracks evolve over time and everyone agrees that the track
is was slower when I began racing, got better with new paving, and has since fallen off again.
That's comparable to a 2016 Floer time. How is that possible if the track is deteriorating? It would be VERY interesting to see Dave, Doug or Alan come back and see what they could do after a few races. You are right it would be a more valid comparison.'There were 15 abnormally high fastest race lap time outliers,
apparently due to track conditions'
And what makes you qualified to determine that those laps should be omitted?Like I said, you had the opportunity to review and turned it down. Thanks for the constructive input.
As I said later in the article with respect to the engine choice and performance: "It could be the car, Mr. Baker’s race prep, tires or other factors."
As for track conditions you all run on the same track, so that does affect relative performance. Floer was running the same speeds in 2016 until he departed in 2018. He consistently beat you. On the weekend of 7/27/2019 you did a 71.875 fastest lap.
I am outlier-qualified by a PhD minor in stats. Outliers are always somewhat subjective. In this case I used race speeds as a proxy for track conditions. If I had data on something like a traction metric that could have been used in a regressionanalysis to make the outliers comparable to good dry conditions. Lacking that the outlier times are highly variable and could yield erroneous conclusions if included. The 46 comparable races are enough to yield valid results.
Do you have anything specific to say about the excluded races shown in endnote iii? Most of those lap times are 10-20 seconds slower than typical. The demarcation is pretty clear. But, looking back I might have also excluded an odd race on 4/20/2019that Knuckelkorn won with a much slower faster lap than yours. But you had a quite typical fastest time in that one so I left it in.
You are also the car owner. As such your performance reflects not only your driving, but all else that goes into car prep. Tires, setup, routine maintenance and likely many other items.
On Saturday, October 15, 2022 at 8:53:07 PM UTC-4, Thomas E. wrote:That's comparable to a 2016 Floer time. How is that possible if the track is deteriorating? It would be VERY interesting to see Dave, Doug or Alan come back and see what they could do after a few races. You are right it would be a more valid comparison.
On Saturday, October 15, 2022 at 7:08:17 PM UTC-4, Alan wrote:
On 2022-10-15 15:44, Thomas E. wrote:Like I said, you had the opportunity to review and turned it down. Thanks for the constructive input.
Note to all: I gave Mr. Baker a chance to comment on this paper1. Is it that the CAR is faster...
before release. He refused. So, I had to go with several assumptions.
If those are wrong I'll be happy to make revisions.
The bottom line:
Mr. Baker's Honda-powered car is slightly faster than his Kent as
measured by fastest race lap in similar races over time. The
difference is statistically significant.
...or could it be that the driver has improved over the course of his
racing career?
2. Even if it is the car, is it the engine that is responsible...
...or could it be that the previous car was significantly (nearly 5%)
over weight compared to the current car?
Mr. Baker's recent race wins are due more to a decline in performanceFallacious assumptions:
of the competition than any change in his car/engine or driving
skill. The decline is due to the absence of all three drivers (Floer,
McColl and McKay) who historically placed ahead of Mr. Baker. No
other drivers comparable to those three have surfaced. This
statistic, measured by winner's fastest lap time, is also
statistically significant.
The paper is here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-5YrNtWBfc-U7xQ11I9PHOe4WEuzN_Tq/view?usp=sharing
If anyone wants the data it's in a spreadsheet and I will send it
for you to analyze.
Constructive comments are welcome. Deflections and accusations are
not.
'Background: Mr. Baker claims that there is no difference between the
performance of the Kent and Honda cars he has raced at SCCBC.'
That's simply a lie. I have said on more than a few occasions that my
previous car—an RF89 Van Diemen that had been rebuilt after a major
crash before I owned it—was significantly overweight.
'There was no change in the track length over the years
analyzed thus the lowest lap times are a valid and consistent metric
among all races'
Wrong. Race tracks evolve over time and everyone agrees that the track
is was slower when I began racing, got better with new paving, and has
since fallen off again.
'There were 15 abnormally high fastest race lap time outliers,
apparently due to track conditions'
And what makes you qualified to determine that those laps should be omitted?
As I said later in the article with respect to the engine choice and performance: "It could be the car, Mr. Baker’s race prep, tires or other factors."
As for track conditions you all run on the same track, so that does affect relative performance. Floer was running the same speeds in 2016 until he departed in 2018. He consistently beat you. On the weekend of 7/27/2019 you did a 71.875 fastest lap.
analysis to make the outliers comparable to good dry conditions. Lacking that the outlier times are highly variable and could yield erroneous conclusions if included. The 46 comparable races are enough to yield valid results.
I am outlier-qualified by a PhD minor in stats. Outliers are always somewhat subjective. In this case I used race speeds as a proxy for track conditions. If I had data on something like a traction metric that could have been used in a regression
that Knuckelkorn won with a much slower faster lap than yours. But you had a quite typical fastest time in that one so I left it in.
Do you have anything specific to say about the excluded races shown in endnote iii? Most of those lap times are 10-20 seconds slower than typical. The demarcation is pretty clear. But, looking back I might have also excluded an odd race on 4/20/2019
You are also the car owner. As such your performance reflects not only your driving, but all else that goes into car prep. Tires, setup, routine maintenance and likely many other items.
Which you've admitted that you've not corrected for. As such, your numbers are worthless.
On 2022-10-16 03:58, -hh wrote:That's comparable to a 2016 Floer time. How is that possible if the track is deteriorating? It would be VERY interesting to see Dave, Doug or Alan come back and see what they could do after a few races. You are right it would be a more valid comparison.
On Saturday, October 15, 2022 at 8:53:07 PM UTC-4, Thomas E. wrote:
On Saturday, October 15, 2022 at 7:08:17 PM UTC-4, Alan wrote:
On 2022-10-15 15:44, Thomas E. wrote:Like I said, you had the opportunity to review and turned it down. Thanks for the constructive input.
Note to all: I gave Mr. Baker a chance to comment on this paper1. Is it that the CAR is faster...
before release. He refused. So, I had to go with several assumptions. >>>> If those are wrong I'll be happy to make revisions.
The bottom line:
Mr. Baker's Honda-powered car is slightly faster than his Kent as
measured by fastest race lap in similar races over time. The
difference is statistically significant.
...or could it be that the driver has improved over the course of his >>> racing career?
2. Even if it is the car, is it the engine that is responsible...
...or could it be that the previous car was significantly (nearly 5%) >>> over weight compared to the current car?
Mr. Baker's recent race wins are due more to a decline in performance >>>> of the competition than any change in his car/engine or drivingFallacious assumptions:
skill. The decline is due to the absence of all three drivers (Floer, >>>> McColl and McKay) who historically placed ahead of Mr. Baker. No
other drivers comparable to those three have surfaced. This
statistic, measured by winner's fastest lap time, is also
statistically significant.
The paper is here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-5YrNtWBfc-U7xQ11I9PHOe4WEuzN_Tq/view?usp=sharing
If anyone wants the data it's in a spreadsheet and I will send it
for you to analyze.
Constructive comments are welcome. Deflections and accusations are
not.
'Background: Mr. Baker claims that there is no difference between the >>> performance of the Kent and Honda cars he has raced at SCCBC.'
That's simply a lie. I have said on more than a few occasions that my >>> previous car—an RF89 Van Diemen that had been rebuilt after a major >>> crash before I owned it—was significantly overweight.
'There was no change in the track length over the years
analyzed thus the lowest lap times are a valid and consistent metric
among all races'
Wrong. Race tracks evolve over time and everyone agrees that the track >>> is was slower when I began racing, got better with new paving, and has >>> since fallen off again.
'There were 15 abnormally high fastest race lap time outliers,
apparently due to track conditions'
And what makes you qualified to determine that those laps should be omitted?
As I said later in the article with respect to the engine choice and performance: "It could be the car, Mr. Baker’s race prep, tires or other factors."
As for track conditions you all run on the same track, so that does affect relative performance. Floer was running the same speeds in 2016 until he departed in 2018. He consistently beat you. On the weekend of 7/27/2019 you did a 71.875 fastest lap.
analysis to make the outliers comparable to good dry conditions. Lacking that the outlier times are highly variable and could yield erroneous conclusions if included. The 46 comparable races are enough to yield valid results.
I am outlier-qualified by a PhD minor in stats. Outliers are always somewhat subjective. In this case I used race speeds as a proxy for track conditions. If I had data on something like a traction metric that could have been used in a regression
that Knuckelkorn won with a much slower faster lap than yours. But you had a quite typical fastest time in that one so I left it in.
Do you have anything specific to say about the excluded races shown in endnote iii? Most of those lap times are 10-20 seconds slower than typical. The demarcation is pretty clear. But, looking back I might have also excluded an odd race on 4/20/2019
You are also the car owner. As such your performance reflects not only your driving, but all else that goes into car prep. Tires, setup, routine maintenance and likely many other items.
Which you've admitted that you've not corrected for. As such, your numbers are worthless.
There was never any chance he'd look at this honestly.
On Sunday, October 16, 2022 at 2:43:46 PM UTC-4, Alan wrote:That's comparable to a 2016 Floer time. How is that possible if the track is deteriorating? It would be VERY interesting to see Dave, Doug or Alan come back and see what they could do after a few races. You are right it would be a more valid comparison.
On 2022-10-16 03:58, -hh wrote:
On Saturday, October 15, 2022 at 8:53:07 PM UTC-4, Thomas E. wrote:
On Saturday, October 15, 2022 at 7:08:17 PM UTC-4, Alan wrote:
On 2022-10-15 15:44, Thomas E. wrote:Like I said, you had the opportunity to review and turned it down. Thanks for the constructive input.
Note to all: I gave Mr. Baker a chance to comment on this paper1. Is it that the CAR is faster...
before release. He refused. So, I had to go with several assumptions. >>>>>> If those are wrong I'll be happy to make revisions.
The bottom line:
Mr. Baker's Honda-powered car is slightly faster than his Kent as
measured by fastest race lap in similar races over time. The
difference is statistically significant.
...or could it be that the driver has improved over the course of his >>>>> racing career?
2. Even if it is the car, is it the engine that is responsible...
...or could it be that the previous car was significantly (nearly 5%) >>>>> over weight compared to the current car?
Mr. Baker's recent race wins are due more to a decline in performance >>>>>> of the competition than any change in his car/engine or drivingFallacious assumptions:
skill. The decline is due to the absence of all three drivers (Floer, >>>>>> McColl and McKay) who historically placed ahead of Mr. Baker. No
other drivers comparable to those three have surfaced. This
statistic, measured by winner's fastest lap time, is also
statistically significant.
The paper is here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-5YrNtWBfc-U7xQ11I9PHOe4WEuzN_Tq/view?usp=sharing
If anyone wants the data it's in a spreadsheet and I will send it
for you to analyze.
Constructive comments are welcome. Deflections and accusations are >>>>>> not.
'Background: Mr. Baker claims that there is no difference between the >>>>> performance of the Kent and Honda cars he has raced at SCCBC.'
That's simply a lie. I have said on more than a few occasions that my >>>>> previous car—an RF89 Van Diemen that had been rebuilt after a major >>>>> crash before I owned it—was significantly overweight.
'There was no change in the track length over the years
analyzed thus the lowest lap times are a valid and consistent metric >>>>> among all races'
Wrong. Race tracks evolve over time and everyone agrees that the track >>>>> is was slower when I began racing, got better with new paving, and has >>>>> since fallen off again.
'There were 15 abnormally high fastest race lap time outliers,
apparently due to track conditions'
And what makes you qualified to determine that those laps should be omitted?
As I said later in the article with respect to the engine choice and performance: "It could be the car, Mr. Baker’s race prep, tires or other factors."
As for track conditions you all run on the same track, so that does affect relative performance. Floer was running the same speeds in 2016 until he departed in 2018. He consistently beat you. On the weekend of 7/27/2019 you did a 71.875 fastest lap.
analysis to make the outliers comparable to good dry conditions. Lacking that the outlier times are highly variable and could yield erroneous conclusions if included. The 46 comparable races are enough to yield valid results.
I am outlier-qualified by a PhD minor in stats. Outliers are always somewhat subjective. In this case I used race speeds as a proxy for track conditions. If I had data on something like a traction metric that could have been used in a regression
that Knuckelkorn won with a much slower faster lap than yours. But you had a quite typical fastest time in that one so I left it in.
Do you have anything specific to say about the excluded races shown in endnote iii? Most of those lap times are 10-20 seconds slower than typical. The demarcation is pretty clear. But, looking back I might have also excluded an odd race on 4/20/2019
You are also the car owner. As such your performance reflects not only your driving, but all else that goes into car prep. Tires, setup, routine maintenance and likely many other items.
Which you've admitted that you've not corrected for. As such, your numbers are worthless.
There was never any chance he'd look at this honestly.
There was always the possibility… just as how there was always the potential
that he lacks the skills to do the appropriate analysis. After all, his chickens
didn’t exactly have a learning curve to be concerned about.
-hh
On Saturday, October 15, 2022 at 8:53:07 PM UTC-4, Thomas E. wrote:That's comparable to a 2016 Floer time. How is that possible if the track is deteriorating? It would be VERY interesting to see Dave, Doug or Alan come back and see what they could do after a few races. You are right it would be a more valid comparison.
On Saturday, October 15, 2022 at 7:08:17 PM UTC-4, Alan wrote:
On 2022-10-15 15:44, Thomas E. wrote:Like I said, you had the opportunity to review and turned it down. Thanks for the constructive input.
Note to all: I gave Mr. Baker a chance to comment on this paper1. Is it that the CAR is faster...
before release. He refused. So, I had to go with several assumptions.
If those are wrong I'll be happy to make revisions.
The bottom line:
Mr. Baker's Honda-powered car is slightly faster than his Kent as
measured by fastest race lap in similar races over time. The
difference is statistically significant.
...or could it be that the driver has improved over the course of his
racing career?
2. Even if it is the car, is it the engine that is responsible...
...or could it be that the previous car was significantly (nearly 5%)
over weight compared to the current car?
Mr. Baker's recent race wins are due more to a decline in performanceFallacious assumptions:
of the competition than any change in his car/engine or driving
skill. The decline is due to the absence of all three drivers (Floer,
McColl and McKay) who historically placed ahead of Mr. Baker. No
other drivers comparable to those three have surfaced. This
statistic, measured by winner's fastest lap time, is also
statistically significant.
The paper is here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-5YrNtWBfc-U7xQ11I9PHOe4WEuzN_Tq/view?usp=sharing
If anyone wants the data it's in a spreadsheet and I will send it
for you to analyze.
Constructive comments are welcome. Deflections and accusations are
not.
'Background: Mr. Baker claims that there is no difference between the
performance of the Kent and Honda cars he has raced at SCCBC.'
That's simply a lie. I have said on more than a few occasions that my
previous car—an RF89 Van Diemen that had been rebuilt after a major
crash before I owned it—was significantly overweight.
'There was no change in the track length over the years
analyzed thus the lowest lap times are a valid and consistent metric
among all races'
Wrong. Race tracks evolve over time and everyone agrees that the track
is was slower when I began racing, got better with new paving, and has
since fallen off again.
'There were 15 abnormally high fastest race lap time outliers,
apparently due to track conditions'
And what makes you qualified to determine that those laps should be omitted?
As I said later in the article with respect to the engine choice and performance: "It could be the car, Mr. Baker’s race prep, tires or other factors."
As for track conditions you all run on the same track, so that does affect relative performance. Floer was running the same speeds in 2016 until he departed in 2018. He consistently beat you. On the weekend of 7/27/2019 you did a 71.875 fastest lap.
analysis to make the outliers comparable to good dry conditions. Lacking that the outlier times are highly variable and could yield erroneous conclusions if included. The 46 comparable races are enough to yield valid results.
I am outlier-qualified by a PhD minor in stats. Outliers are always somewhat subjective. In this case I used race speeds as a proxy for track conditions. If I had data on something like a traction metric that could have been used in a regression
that Knuckelkorn won with a much slower faster lap than yours. But you had a quite typical fastest time in that one so I left it in.
Do you have anything specific to say about the excluded races shown in endnote iii? Most of those lap times are 10-20 seconds slower than typical. The demarcation is pretty clear. But, looking back I might have also excluded an odd race on 4/20/2019
You are also the car owner. As such your performance reflects not only your driving, but all else that goes into car prep. Tires, setup, routine maintenance and likely many other items.
Which you've admitted that you've not corrected for. As such, your numbers are worthless.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 300 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 70:24:03 |
| Calls: | 6,712 |
| Files: | 12,244 |
| Messages: | 5,356,840 |