how about you substract the 21 kills :)

Ryan messed up the calculation for ppg

I don't think it's messed up, kills, referrals, membership and tourney points are just not included.

(And if you lose your first [few] games, you don't get negative points, but will still get a negative PPG; thus - even when you later get a positive score - your PPG will be lower than you'd expect by simply calculating your (Points - membership, referral, kill points)/games ratio.

referrals, membership and tourney points are not included in ppg and that's logical

personally I would prefer kill points to be included in ppg

"Ryan messed up" That's blasphemy jurgz! It always was supposed to be messed up.

Well ppg calculation predates kill points by years, so if it's a "mess", it's only since it wasn't updated to reflect those.

Which is not necessarily a bad thing imho, since that means that normal points from a regular table can be modeled as the payoff of a zero-sum game (what's gained by some people is lost by others) and the weighted average of ppg over all players (where the weights are the number of points played by each of them) should be around 0 (save rounding errors etc.). Then a positive ppg after a decent number of games might represent something like "more skillful than the avg. player playing against him", and negative ppg the opposite.

Kill points on the other hand are given to people without anyone losing them, so a ppg including these might make it lose this desirable property. (You can calculate points from kills by simply multiplying you killcount by 50 anyways, and can easily divide it by your number of games, if you want to know how many points per game you have collected from those.)

*weights are the number of games played by each of them