Originally Posted by Litotes
OK, fair enough. I won't blame you for the misleading wording when it was clearly invented by others.
Yeah, I guess all those people saying they're under 30, 40, 50 when they're not might actually have a case.
This is amazing work!! I personally wouldn't mind if the ranking cut offs were a lot stricter (e.g. top 1000 for 18) but no harm in having more.