The Glen Waverley Uniting Church PSALTER|
Size: 4604
Comment: auto-update by eldersTally.py, version 1.0.0
|
Size: 5153
Comment: auto-update by eldersTally.py, version 1.0.0
|
| Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
| Line 5: | Line 5: |
| This table is current for 24 Jun 2012 at 15:19 || Name ||<-2:> Number of Duties || |
Numbers in parentheses are vestry duties. This table is current for 29 May 2013 at 00:40 || Name ||<-2:> Number of Duties(vestry) || |
| Line 8: | Line 9: |
| || AlanBarnard ||<:> 10 ||<:> 0 ||<:> 3.19||<:> 0.00|| || BarbaraKrieger ||<:> 9 ||<:> 9 ||<:> 2.88||<:> 2.69|| || BelindaChung ||<:> 3 ||<:> 12 ||<:> 0.96||<:> 3.59|| || BelindaClear ||<:> 8 ||<:> 11 ||<:> 2.56||<:> 3.29|| || BevRichardson ||<:> 11 ||<:> 10 ||<:> 3.51||<:> 2.99|| || BeverlyMcGlead ||<:> 11 ||<:> 10 ||<:> 3.51||<:> 2.99|| || DavidJackson ||<:> 9 ||<:> 0 ||<:> 2.88||<:> 0.00|| || DougNewberry ||<:> 7 ||<:> 12 ||<:> 2.24||<:> 3.59|| || ElwynPederson ||<:> 7 ||<:> 0 ||<:> 2.24||<:> 0.00|| || [[GaelOBrien]] ||<:> 6 ||<:> 12 ||<:> 1.92||<:> 3.59|| || GailIrvine ||<:> 3 ||<:> 12 ||<:> 0.96||<:> 3.59|| || GeraldineFleming ||<:> 8 ||<:> 12 ||<:> 2.56||<:> 3.59|| || GlennLaub ||<:> 12 ||<:> 10 ||<:> 3.83||<:> 2.99|| || GraemeFrecker ||<:> 12 ||<:> 10 ||<:> 3.83||<:> 2.99|| || GrahamLockhart ||<:> 1 ||<:> 0 ||<:> 0.32||<:> 0.00|| || HeatherHon ||<:> 1 ||<:> 13 ||<:> 0.32||<:> 3.89|| || HerbFleming ||<:> 9 ||<:> 0 ||<:> 2.88||<:> 0.00|| || IanMcMillan ||<:> 8 ||<:> 11 ||<:> 2.56||<:> 3.29|| || JanClear ||<:> 11 ||<:> 10 ||<:> 3.51||<:> 2.99|| || JitTan ||<:> 9 ||<:> 11 ||<:> 2.88||<:> 3.29|| || JohnBattisson ||<:> 2 ||<:> 0 ||<:> 0.64||<:> 0.00|| || JohnHurst ||<:> 11 ||<:> 9 ||<:> 3.51||<:> 2.69|| || JohnKenez ||<:> 2 ||<:> 0 ||<:> 0.64||<:> 0.00|| || JonathanChong ||<:> 11 ||<:> 10 ||<:> 3.51||<:> 2.99|| || JoyJackson ||<:> 9 ||<:> 0 ||<:> 2.88||<:> 0.00|| || JudyLowe ||<:> 9 ||<:> 10 ||<:> 2.88||<:> 2.99|| || KayeMackinnon ||<:> 6 ||<:> 11 ||<:> 1.92||<:> 3.29|| || KayeMorgan ||<:> 9 ||<:> 10 ||<:> 2.88||<:> 2.99|| || KenDevos ||<:> 13 ||<:> 11 ||<:> 4.15||<:> 3.29|| || LaurelMuir ||<:> 9 ||<:> 11 ||<:> 2.88||<:> 3.29|| || LoisHosking ||<:> 6 ||<:> 11 ||<:> 1.92||<:> 3.29|| || MargaretDuncan ||<:> 9 ||<:> 11 ||<:> 2.88||<:> 3.29|| || MargaretFraser ||<:> 8 ||<:> 10 ||<:> 2.56||<:> 2.99|| || MarjorieBedford ||<:> 12 ||<:> 10 ||<:> 3.83||<:> 2.99|| || MarkEaston ||<:> 3 ||<:> 12 ||<:> 0.96||<:> 3.59|| || MichaelPatterson ||<:> 8 ||<:> 11 ||<:> 2.56||<:> 3.29|| || PeterBarr ||<:> 7 ||<:> 0 ||<:> 2.24||<:> 0.00|| || PeterThorpe ||<:> 3 ||<:> 0 ||<:> 0.96||<:> 0.00|| || RossMackinnon ||<:> 5 ||<:> 10 ||<:> 1.60||<:> 2.99|| || ShirleyHarding ||<:> 7 ||<:> 11 ||<:> 2.24||<:> 3.29|| || SueMorgan ||<:> 8 ||<:> 11 ||<:> 2.56||<:> 3.29|| || unavailable ||<:> 1 ||<:> 0 ||<:> 0.32||<:> 0.00|| || || 7.45 || 10.77 || || || |
|| AlanBarnard ||<:> 1 ||<:> 0 ||<:> 0.26||<:>-|| || AlisonBarr ||<:> 1(1) ||<:> 0(0) ||<:> 0.26||<:>-|| || AlisonClarkson ||<:> 2 ||<:> 0 ||<:> 0.51||<:>-|| || BarbaraKrieger ||<:> 12 ||<:> 9 ||<:> 3.07||<:> 3.66|| || BelindaChung ||<:> 14 ||<:> 10 ||<:> 3.58||<:> 4.07|| || BelindaClear ||<:> 14(1) ||<:> 9(0) ||<:> 3.58||<:> 3.66|| || BevRichardson ||<:> 13(4) ||<:> 5(5) ||<:> 3.32||<:> 2.03|| || BeverlyMcGlead ||<:> 10(2) ||<:> 8(0) ||<:> 2.56||<:> 3.25|| || DavidMorgan ||<:> 6 ||<:> 10 ||<:> 1.53||<:> 4.07|| || DougNewberry ||<:> 13(1) ||<:> 8(3) ||<:> 3.32||<:> 3.25|| || [[GaelOBrien]] ||<:> 13(7) ||<:> 7(2) ||<:> 3.32||<:> 2.85|| || GailIrvine ||<:> 15 ||<:> 9 ||<:> 3.84||<:> 3.66|| || GeraldineFleming ||<:> 12(5) ||<:> 7(2) ||<:> 3.07||<:> 2.85|| || GlennLaub ||<:> 10(3) ||<:> 7(2) ||<:> 2.56||<:> 2.85|| || GraemeFrecker ||<:> 11(6) ||<:> 8(2) ||<:> 2.81||<:> 3.25|| || HeatherHon ||<:> 14(3) ||<:> 7(2) ||<:> 3.58||<:> 2.85|| || HerbFleming ||<:> 1(1) ||<:> 6(6) ||<:> 0.26||<:> 2.44|| || IanMcMillan ||<:> 10(4) ||<:> 7(2) ||<:> 2.56||<:> 2.85|| || JanClear ||<:> 12(7) ||<:> 5(4) ||<:> 3.07||<:> 2.03|| || JitTan ||<:> 11(6) ||<:> 6(4) ||<:> 2.81||<:> 2.44|| || JohnHurst ||<:> 12(6) ||<:> 5(3) ||<:> 3.07||<:> 2.03|| || JonathanChong ||<:> 8(4) ||<:> 8(2) ||<:> 2.05||<:> 3.25|| || JudyLowe ||<:> 10(3) ||<:> 7(3) ||<:> 2.56||<:> 2.85|| || KayeMackinnon ||<:> 11(1) ||<:> 7(1) ||<:> 2.81||<:> 2.85|| || KayeMorgan ||<:> 14 ||<:> 10 ||<:> 3.58||<:> 4.07|| || KenDevos ||<:> 11(6) ||<:> 7(3) ||<:> 2.81||<:> 2.85|| || LaurelMuir ||<:> 10(4) ||<:> 5(3) ||<:> 2.56||<:> 2.03|| || LoisHosking ||<:> 11(2) ||<:> 7(0) ||<:> 2.81||<:> 2.85|| || LynneBoyer ||<:> 8 ||<:> 9 ||<:> 2.05||<:> 3.66|| || MargaretDuncan ||<:> 9 ||<:> 0 ||<:> 2.30||<:>-|| || MargaretFraser ||<:> 10(4) ||<:> 8(0) ||<:> 2.56||<:> 3.25|| || MarjorieBedford ||<:> 10(4) ||<:> 0(0) ||<:> 2.56||<:>-|| || MarkEaston ||<:> 13(1) ||<:> 9(0) ||<:> 3.32||<:> 3.66|| || MikePatterson ||<:> 11 ||<:> 0 ||<:> 2.81||<:>-|| || PeterStewart ||<:> 6(1) ||<:> 7(0) ||<:> 1.53||<:> 2.85|| || RossMackinnon ||<:> 12 ||<:> 8 ||<:> 3.07||<:> 3.25|| || ShirleyHarding ||<:> 12 ||<:> 9 ||<:> 3.07||<:> 3.66|| || SueMorgan ||<:> 10(3) ||<:> 6(4) ||<:> 2.56||<:> 2.44|| || VidaFoo ||<:> 7(2) ||<:> 6(5) ||<:> 1.79||<:> 2.44|| || unavailable ||<:> 1 ||<:> 0 ||<:> 0.26||<:>-|| || averages ||<:> 9.78 ||<:> 7.45 ||<:> 2.50 ||<:> 3.03 || |
| Line 54: | Line 53: |
| This table is generated by analyzing the past 52 weeks of duties (you can see this at EldersRosterPrevious), together with the next 52 weeks of (allocated) duties (you can see this at RosterEldersCurrent). Each welcoming, vestry or communion duty constitutes 1 duty, and these are tallied for each elder. Note that some elders have been withdrawn from the rosters for various reasons, so these will have zero tallies for the forthcoming 52 weeks. |
This table is generated by analyzing the past 52 weeks of duties (you can see this at EldersRosterPrevious), together with the next 52 weeks of (allocated) duties (you can see this at RosterEldersCurrent). Each welcoming, vestry or communion duty constitutes 1 duty, and these are tallied for each elder. Note that some elders have been withdrawn from the rosters for various reasons, so these will have zero tallies for the forthcoming 52 weeks. |
| Line 62: | Line 55: |
| The roster allocation program attempts to keep the number of duties even across all elders, according to their preferences. This table therefore gives a rough indication of how well the roster allocation is working. Variations between elders may arise because of those preferences. For example, relatively few elders have expressed a preference for 4:30 and 7:00pm services, so they may allocated more frequently, and hence have higher tallies than average. Elders who are absent for long periods of the year may also have fewer allocations than average. |
The roster allocation program attempts to keep the number of duties even across all elders, according to their preferences (see EldersRosterPreferences). This table therefore gives a rough indication of how well the roster allocation is working. Variations between elders may arise because of those preferences. For example, relatively few elders have expressed a preference for 4:30 and 7:00pm services, so they may allocated more frequently, and hence have higher tallies than average. Elders who are absent for long periods of the year may also have fewer allocations than average. The last two columns of the table show the individual percentage contributions. The closer these are to the average percentages shown at the bottom of the column, the better the allocation process is performing. The last row of the table shows the averages for the previous and next 52 weeks, NOT counting zero entries. Note how the average has risen, reflecting the fact that a) there are (slightly) more duties, and b) fewer elders to perform them. |
| Line 73: | Line 62: |
| ~- This page automatically generated by eldersTally v1.0.0 on 2012-06-24 15:19:37.562568 -~ | ~- This page automatically generated by eldersTally v1.0.0 on 2013-05-29 00:40:27.275927 -~ |
Elders Duties Tally
This page details the number of elders duties perfomed over the last 52 weeks, and the next 52 weeks. The forward tally is of course dependent upon the allocations remaining stable. Numbers in parentheses are vestry duties. This table is current for 29 May 2013 at 00:40
Name |
Number of Duties(vestry) |
|||
|
last 52 weeks |
next 52 weeks |
percent last |
percent next |
1 |
0 |
0.26 |
- |
|
1(1) |
0(0) |
0.26 |
- |
|
2 |
0 |
0.51 |
- |
|
12 |
9 |
3.07 |
3.66 |
|
14 |
10 |
3.58 |
4.07 |
|
14(1) |
9(0) |
3.58 |
3.66 |
|
13(4) |
5(5) |
3.32 |
2.03 |
|
10(2) |
8(0) |
2.56 |
3.25 |
|
6 |
10 |
1.53 |
4.07 |
|
13(1) |
8(3) |
3.32 |
3.25 |
|
13(7) |
7(2) |
3.32 |
2.85 |
|
15 |
9 |
3.84 |
3.66 |
|
12(5) |
7(2) |
3.07 |
2.85 |
|
10(3) |
7(2) |
2.56 |
2.85 |
|
11(6) |
8(2) |
2.81 |
3.25 |
|
14(3) |
7(2) |
3.58 |
2.85 |
|
1(1) |
6(6) |
0.26 |
2.44 |
|
10(4) |
7(2) |
2.56 |
2.85 |
|
12(7) |
5(4) |
3.07 |
2.03 |
|
11(6) |
6(4) |
2.81 |
2.44 |
|
12(6) |
5(3) |
3.07 |
2.03 |
|
8(4) |
8(2) |
2.05 |
3.25 |
|
10(3) |
7(3) |
2.56 |
2.85 |
|
11(1) |
7(1) |
2.81 |
2.85 |
|
14 |
10 |
3.58 |
4.07 |
|
11(6) |
7(3) |
2.81 |
2.85 |
|
10(4) |
5(3) |
2.56 |
2.03 |
|
11(2) |
7(0) |
2.81 |
2.85 |
|
8 |
9 |
2.05 |
3.66 |
|
9 |
0 |
2.30 |
- |
|
10(4) |
8(0) |
2.56 |
3.25 |
|
10(4) |
0(0) |
2.56 |
- |
|
13(1) |
9(0) |
3.32 |
3.66 |
|
11 |
0 |
2.81 |
- |
|
6(1) |
7(0) |
1.53 |
2.85 |
|
12 |
8 |
3.07 |
3.25 |
|
12 |
9 |
3.07 |
3.66 |
|
10(3) |
6(4) |
2.56 |
2.44 |
|
7(2) |
6(5) |
1.79 |
2.44 |
|
unavailable |
1 |
0 |
0.26 |
- |
averages |
9.78 |
7.45 |
2.50 |
3.03 |
Explanation
This table is generated by analyzing the past 52 weeks of duties (you can see this at EldersRosterPrevious), together with the next 52 weeks of (allocated) duties (you can see this at RosterEldersCurrent). Each welcoming, vestry or communion duty constitutes 1 duty, and these are tallied for each elder. Note that some elders have been withdrawn from the rosters for various reasons, so these will have zero tallies for the forthcoming 52 weeks.
The roster allocation program attempts to keep the number of duties even across all elders, according to their preferences (see EldersRosterPreferences). This table therefore gives a rough indication of how well the roster allocation is working. Variations between elders may arise because of those preferences. For example, relatively few elders have expressed a preference for 4:30 and 7:00pm services, so they may allocated more frequently, and hence have higher tallies than average. Elders who are absent for long periods of the year may also have fewer allocations than average.
The last two columns of the table show the individual percentage contributions. The closer these are to the average percentages shown at the bottom of the column, the better the allocation process is performing.
The last row of the table shows the averages for the previous and next 52 weeks, NOT counting zero entries. Note how the average has risen, reflecting the fact that a) there are (slightly) more duties, and b) fewer elders to perform them.
This page automatically generated by eldersTally v1.0.0 on 2013-05-29 00:40:27.275927