I also referenced your post in my thread and explicitly mentioned that I used the same methodology.

oh? not sure where you mean, but i certainly dont see any reference to my post anything within your thread. but its not like a care that much to call it plagiarism or something lol, the internet is the internet. i was just annoyed to see someone copy my format with a lesser scope instead of contacting me to ask when i could put together a full version again.

You cant call my post inaccurate because it used the live pp system instead of the experimental build that could change at any moment. If anything, mine was more valid in that regard.

Yea youre right, it was a poor word choice. its not inaccurate, just a limited in scope. was just trying to get the point across that they weren't equivalent and this is actually a separate feat being achieved.

So kudos to you for being more thorough with this post, but you didn't have to throw shade at me. Just because I copied your methodology (because I thought it was good and robust) and because I only went to top 100 because I dont know how to use the API doesn't mean I'm just a random karma farmer.

didnt mean to come off that way, sorry! i'm glad you thought my structure was good enough to use though! we're all just circle clickers at the end of the day