>>10642
Your solution in
>>10643 looks maybe a bit cumbersome and autistic to me, but if you find it works and doesn't annoy the server you are talking to (I imagine generating those queries is a little CPU expensive on their end), then that could be a solution. I might tune those ranges to be a bit broader, with maybe only five 'bands' of upvotes.
The DEAD result in
>>10646 is an artifact of that particular band not happening to have files on its first check, which is related to how thin it is. I recommend you wait a couple days and tell that single query to reset/check_now and see if you can initialise it with some files. As long as your check options for this sub are sufficiently broad, like 'only die if less than one new file in six months', I shouldn't think this kind of ratings based feed work ever die (after the first good initialisation) as long as the site is active.
>>10644
Do you mean like 'the files that appeared since I looked last'? Unfortunately, watchers don't keep those sorts of records, so they only ever reproduce what their
file import options have set in their 'presentation/publish' settings.
For the apostrophe, I meant that as the plural of watchers, as
>>10645 says, since it works for multi-selection. It doesn't fix itself if you only have one watcher selected. There are a bunch of places around the program where I lazily use the plural label like this even when currently only one thing is selected, like 'do action x to this 1 files', because the finicky text alteration every time for a singular selection is a pain in the ass. I eagerly await the AI takeover that will force all humans to standardise to One Perfect Language that has a single letter for pluralisation and a library I can import to handle it automatically.