Somewhere around 2016-2017, i witnessed people creating 0 fee transactions and getting them confirmed. As long as a single miner runs an old node, a patched node or an alternative node (like btcd) that is configured to accept and relay 0 fee transactions, AND still uses the old, deprecated priority mechanism you can always try to setup a patched node and connect directly to this mining node, then create a 0 fee transaction and get it broadcasted to this miner's node...
However, at this point in time, you'd need very specific and detailed info about which miners would be running such a patched and alternatively-configured node, my guess would be there aren't many of those miners left.
And in the odd chance you do get a 0 fee transaction in his/her node's mempool, and your transaction has very high priority (and the miner still reserves a space in his/her block for high priority transactions), the miner would still need to find a block header whose hash is under the current target (ie solve the block).
Odds are small, very, very, small... But i don't think they're absolute 0.
I imagine about some problems with 0-fee transactions: - How long does it take to get confirmations?
- With today very high dificulty of bitcoin, if someone set up his/her node and do some technical steps to try luck and get 0-fee transactions, I think it sounds very crazy.
[1] Time always make sense. One can send coins and wait for hours or days but too long waiting time does not a comfortable thing to suffer. According to https://whatthefee.io/, at the current status of bitcoin network, 3 satoshis/ byte is the most comfortable fee (corresponds to acceptable waiting time) to move coins. I think one can carefully check suggested fees before moving coins but most of time, I move my coins at 1 satoshi/byte and it works smooth. Beyond that, I know the expiration time of unconfirmed transactions is 72 hours (3 days) [3]. Waiting 3 days, and repeat 0-fee transactions, then wait for luck again sounds very crazy. [2] If one can be able to set up patched node, then miner's node, I don't see the difference between 0-fee or 1-satoshi/byte transactions for them to spend time (to setup and wait) for luck (too) to get 0-fee transactions. [3] https://hackernoon.com/holy-cow-i-sent-a-bitcoin-transaction-with-too-low-fees-are-my-coins-lost-forever-7a865e2e45ba
I'm interested, I used to be able to consolidate inputs for free, and I didn't mind waiting a day or two if I did not need to spend them otherwise.
If three days pass and your transactions don't get confirmations, you have to repeat free-consolidated transactions again. Otherwise we just stick to 1 sat, and that's still fine.
I think 1 satoshi/byte transaction is fine enough.
What % of chances are there of a 0 sat/byte fee transaction to get relayed through a node allowing such 0 fee transactions these days if mempool has got a very big amount of transactions stuck at that level?
If 0 satoshi/byte transaction is realistic, I think there are sites suggest it already. I have never seen 0 satoshi/byte transactions suggested by https://whatthefee.io/ or https://coinb.in/#fees |
|
|
|
Received, thank you. For future reference, there is a minimum interest of 0.0007BTC as stated in the original thread, (repayment should have been 0.0107BTC) but I won't hold you to it this time.
Thanks for your sympathy. I did not notice the minimum repayment in OP. I am sorry and next time when we make next loan, I will repay with the rest of repayment for this round, I promise. |
|
|
|
I feel like I've been insane this week being to able post more than 50 after a long time. Phew~~~
Not only you, fella. I joined the PlayBetr campaign recent weeks, and last 3 weeks I made above 45 posts weekly in average (41, 53, 41 for the week #23, #24, and #25 respectively). Hope that PlayBetr get benefits from my madness with high-quality maniac posting. BTW, payment received. Have a nice weekend, PlayBetr gang and manager. |
|
|
|
Hi DarkStar  I need a loan. Please can you help me ? Request For a No Collateral Loan from DarkStarRequired BTC Amount: 0.01 BTCEstimated Loan Duration: 30 days BTC Address: 3Cb23YFHZbCsiSwVarAeutk349RUPhGeiU Signed Message: -----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
This is tranthidung from bitcointalk and today is the 2nd of November 2019.
I am asking DarkStar_ for a 0.01 BTC loan.
Duration : 30 days max.
If accepted, please send 0.01 BTC to : 3Cb23YFHZbCsiSwVarAeutk349RUPhGeiU
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
bc1qkjrr4u80fpyk59nlrlmzyfxfe37smauherfvfr
H+6mOJKSwkDb7sW7zjJP2Tti5GY9o1lIBiBEa5RjziSvI1NijCsqrxwtqVcS4pvsLwmswEMWxIf5zpP8zXlnEVM=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE----- Thank you, and have a nice weekend. Accepted at a 0.234% daily rate, BTC sent: a1661e60c20a3e9150dc5262b71d85389f2c744b442d89350849cde11b71bd0cHi DarkStar_ I don't want to spoil the thread so when you accepted my loan application 2 weeks ago, I did not reply, just gave you a merit instead. It is very good to get your acceptance with the lowest interest rate for Tier 3 (0.234% daily rate). Thank you. 15 days passed, today I return you BTC 0.010351. . di 0.234*15
3.51
. di 0.01*1.0351
.010351
Loan repaid: https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/transaction/801a530c86a963aa3c57555b6401687a5f7664f2ecbc111c5102a78272222979Thank you again and have a nice weekend, DarkStar_. |
|
|
|
I don't mind sending you the transaction ID if it'll help.
There is no risk if one discloses us his/her transaction ID(s), isn't it? As I know, only discloses of wallet ID(s) is risky because from which technical guys can bruteforce wallets and steal private keys, then steal bitcoin. As such, it's generally a good idea, when helping someone, to walk them through the process as much as possible. Rather than asking them what site (or address, or transaction ID, etc), so that you can check on it for them, it's better to explain to them how they can check on it themselves.
I agreed and this thread is helpful for OP: List of useful Bitcoin block explorers |
|
|
|
Users with a full node can broadcast the transaction and the owner can actually choose to re-broadcast it with higher fees. Although that requires some more technical steps.
However, the simplest solution is to just wait as a miner would eventually pick it up form the mempool. Although with some delay probably.
If one uses the Electrum wallet, there are three options to do: - Waiting patiently over long period to see that transaction confirmed or cancelled (I don't think people are patiently enough to wait for cancel of their transactions. In constrast if people are patiently enough, after hours or days their transactions will be confirmed).
- Use the RBF (Replace-by-Fee) option
- Use the Child-pays-for-parent transactions
Please see details: What is Replace-by-fee? To solve this problem, the concept of replace-by-fee was developed: by requiring replacements to pay for not only its own cost, but also the fee of the transactions being replaced, the DoS risk was strictly less than the risk of flooding with separate transactions.
If you have made a transaction that is unconfirmed, you can: - Wait for a long time. Eventually, your transaction will either be confirmed or cancelled. This might take several days.
- Increase the transaction fee. This is only possible for “replaceable” transactions. To create this type of transaction, you must have checked “Replaceable” on the send tab before sending the transaction. If you’re not seeing the “Replaceable” option on the send tab go to Tools menu > Preferences > Fees tab and set “Propose Replace-By-Fee” to “Always”. Transactions that are replaceable have the word “Replaceable” in the date column on the history tab. To increase the fee of a replaceable transaction right click on its entry on the history tab and choose “Increase Fee”. Set an appropriate fee and click on “OK”. A window will popup with the unsigned transaction. Click on “Sign” and then “Broadcast”.
There is another option for you: A child pays for parent transactions - Create a “Child Pays for Parent” transaction. A CPFP is a new transaction that pays a high fee in order to compensate for the small fee of its parent transaction. It can be done by the recipient of the funds, or by the sender, if the transaction has a change output. To create a CPFP transaction right click on the unconfirmed transaction on the history tab and choose “Child pays for parent”. Set an appropriate fee and click on “OK”. A window will popup with the unsigned transaction. Click on “Sign” and then “Broadcast”.
It is better for senders to check suggested good transaction fees before set-up fees for their transactions to avoid unexpected stuck transactions as well as some technical steps to boost transactions with higher fees, and to save more time (less waiting time). According to [1], the suggested fees at the moment is 1 satoshi/byte. According to [2], one can move their transactions with 4 satoshis/byte of fees and has 95% of probability to get confirmations after 2 to 3 hours. Remember to check your wallet version is the newest one. If not, download the newest version from official site and verify it before installing and making transactions. Don't trust, verify! If you do it the first time (with RBF or CPFP), let try it with your very small fund (for initial transactions and for transaction accelerator steps). Lastly, you can find services if you still don't know how to do it yourself by searching with keyword "Bitcointalk.org + bitcoin accelerator". In my opinion, I don't see reason to lose my satoshis with too high fees or with bitcoin accelerator services. I know a free service: https://bitaccelerate.com/. If you are interested (OP), you can give it a try. As I suggested previously, when you try to do something for the first time, try it with very small fund. References:[/list] |
|
|
|
Huh. I hadn't looked at that number in a while. Weren't there something like 120 merit sources at one point?
Your memory is correct but the total merit sources was at 120 at two points at least: on 17/9/2018 and 22/12/2018. Here you go (I posted link to this thread in my above post but it seems you did not notice it.)  The all time high of total merit sources is 131 (from my sparsely observation but it could be wrong). Time-series plot:Updated data:. list id day month2 year date meritsource smerit, abb(30)
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| id day month2 year date meritsource smerit |
|-------------------------------------------------------------|
1. | 1 24 1 2018 24jan2018 35 8125 |
2. | 2 26 1 2018 26jan2018 49 9025 |
3. | 3 1 3 2018 01mar2018 57 11975 |
4. | 4 12 3 2018 12mar2018 77 17650 |
5. | 5 22 3 2018 22mar2018 80 17800 |
|-------------------------------------------------------------|
6. | 6 18 5 2018 18may2018 80 18500 |
7. | 7 6 7 2018 06jul2018 82 18900 |
8. | 8 11 7 2018 11jul2018 83 19100 |
9. | 9 17 9 2018 17sep2018 120 23045 |
10. | 10 17 11 2018 17nov2018 119 22045 |
|-------------------------------------------------------------|
11. | 11 22 12 2018 22dec2018 120 22055 |
12. | 12 5 1 2019 05jan2019 123 20735 |
13. | 13 6 2 2019 06feb2019 122 20835 |
14. | 14 15 3 2019 15mar2019 130 20605 |
15. | 15 27 6 2019 27jun2019 131 21045 |
|-------------------------------------------------------------|
16. | 16 30 10 2019 30oct2019 130 20895 |
17. | 17 14 11 2019 14nov2019 90 18821 |
18. | 18 15 11 2019 15nov2019 98 21671 |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
|
|
|
|
We have added a link to this official thread on our website for verification!  By the way, as I proposed days ago and have not yet received reply from Roobet.com team. Can you please consider my suggestion. And if you think it is a good one, please edit the text a little bit (just take seconds to do this, I guess). I saw this one on Roobet.com. If admin of Roobet see my post, I think it is better to edit it from "Bitcoin Talk" to "Bitcointalk". |
|
|
|
Edit: there are now 98 merit sources and it looks like the total source merit decreased so some sources were removed.
Not only this. Total merit sources decrease 24.6% whilst total sMerits allocated to all sources each 30 days increase 3.7%. Details: . di (130-98)/130*100
24.615385
. di (21671-20895)/20895*100
3.7138071
Additionally, please see. For theoritical increase of 30-days sMerits for each source, let assume each source receive same sMerits before and after the latest changes. . di 20895/130
160.73077
. di 21671/98
221.13265
. di (222-161)/161*100
37.888199
From the above calculation, each source was allocated 161 and 222 sMerits before and after the latest changes, respectively. So it means each source theoritically received around 61 more sMerits or 38-percent of increase for their 30-days allocated sMerits. You wrote this Mine was increased as well. The adjustment is based on the last 6 months of sMerit sent including both source merit and personal merit and the amount was multiplied by 175%.
So the assumption above is wrong, it is just for fun to give us a kind of estimation. |
|
|
|
Update:I don't know which day it happened but yesterday (I did check the merit source stat page recent days), the forum has only 90 merit sources in total (from the previous figure at 130). 40 merit sources were removed. The last time we saw such very low total merit sources is at 11/7/2018 with 83 merit sources in total. Simultaneously, the total sMerits allocated to merit sources decreased to 18821 Fortunately, today, the forum has 98 merit sources in total (from the previous figure at 130) and the total sMerits allocation for each 30 days increase to 21671 (from the previous figure at 20895). - Total merit sources: decrease 24.6%
- Total sMerits allocated each 30 days: increase 3.7%
. di (130-98)/130*100
24.615385
. di (21671-20895)/20895*100
3.7138071
It is a big move! There are 98 merit sources with a total merit generation of up to 21671 sMerit per 30 days
Time-series plot:Updated data:. list id day month2 year date meritsource smerit, abb(30)
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| id day month2 year date meritsource smerit |
|-------------------------------------------------------------|
1. | 1 24 1 2018 24jan2018 35 8125 |
2. | 2 26 1 2018 26jan2018 49 9025 |
3. | 3 1 3 2018 01mar2018 57 11975 |
4. | 4 12 3 2018 12mar2018 77 17650 |
5. | 5 22 3 2018 22mar2018 80 17800 |
|-------------------------------------------------------------|
6. | 6 18 5 2018 18may2018 80 18500 |
7. | 7 6 7 2018 06jul2018 82 18900 |
8. | 8 11 7 2018 11jul2018 83 19100 |
9. | 9 17 9 2018 17sep2018 120 23045 |
10. | 10 17 11 2018 17nov2018 119 22045 |
|-------------------------------------------------------------|
11. | 11 22 12 2018 22dec2018 120 22055 |
12. | 12 5 1 2019 05jan2019 123 20735 |
13. | 13 6 2 2019 06feb2019 122 20835 |
14. | 14 15 3 2019 15mar2019 130 20605 |
15. | 15 27 6 2019 27jun2019 131 21045 |
|-------------------------------------------------------------|
16. | 16 30 10 2019 30oct2019 130 20895 |
17. | 17 14 11 2019 14nov2019 90 18821 |
18. | 18 15 11 2019 15nov2019 98 21671 |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
Last time when theymos removed one or two merit sources, he added dozen of new merit sources (some months ago). I would go crazy if theymos adds 32 new merit sources in a row when merit system has been in very stable operational phase. Anyway, good luck for all merit source applicants.
For theoritical increase of 30-days sMerits for each source, let assume each source receive same sMerits before and after the latest changes. . di 20895/130
160.73077
. di 21671/98
221.13265
. di (222-161)/161*100
37.888199
From the above calculation, each source was allocated 161 and 222 sMerits before and after the latest changes, respectively. So it means each source theoritically received around 61 more sMerits or 38-percent of increase for their 30-days allocated sMerits. You wrote this Mine was increased as well. The adjustment is based on the last 6 months of sMerit sent including both source merit and personal merit and the amount was multiplied by 175%.
So the assumption above is wrong, it is just for fun to give us a kind of estimation.
|
|
|
|
How much time do withdrawals take for this site?
It depends upon network conditions and your case (self-adjust transaction fees - too low than good fees to have fast enough transactions), suspecious users will have manual withdrawal confirmation from the site, that will takes up to several days. Source: https://vipgame.io/term |
|
|
|
@iasenko, you know what? You created your account only one day before I created mine. Today, I told about my 2 nd anniversary here. See. I want to take advantage of your thread and your 2 nd anniversary thread to say thanks to you and your very early threads in 2018 and 2019, that inspired me that I can rank up with the merit system and new rank requirements. I impressed with your total log-in time to learn within your very early months in the forum. From your threads and your adventure, I knew I can do it so I have never stopped dreaming and improving myself. Together, we have been self-made Hero members. I don't say we are at same class of users but having same rank and completely self-made makes lot of sense already. Congratulations, @iasenko! |
|
|
|
There are different type of gamblers that rest of gamblers can't just understand forever. No real gambler would play to win money, of course if it is poker or any other game where you "gamble" against another person that would be understandable and I get that.
However, if you are gambling against the house that means you will lose your money, it doesn't matter if it is 1% or 10% but you WILL lose your money, that is how casinos work and that is how they make their money, sure there are times you get lucky and hit a big win and you can leave to stay profitable but in the long term house will take your money no matter what the house edge is. So, what you can do is to just enjoy the game, just have fun and get the most entertainment out of the casino as you can which means house edge doesn't matter.
The ability to control emotion and greediness is the determinant thing to help people don't lose all of their funds because of gambling. It is true for gambling as well as trading. For serious traders who seriously think that trading is their daily lives and bring vital daily income for them and their families, they don't take too high risks that in turn might put them and their funds under potential liquidations. It is the same for gambling. Serious and wise gamblers identify at the start that how much funds they afford to lose for gambling. Besides that they identify at beginnings that even in worst cases (when they lose control of emotion, greediness and with very bad luck) they will lose all their funds for gambling but they still have most of their assets to live and move forwards. |
|
|
|
Now with the merit system and activity locks, older accounts have an advantage in terms of how much their signature space is valued. It'd be interesting to see how many of those personal signatures are rented or in any way paid for by third parties. Perhaps for legendary users with outstanding posts there's a considerable market even outside of the campaigns.
You made a very arbitrary comment, without evidence. I agreed that good posters have higher odds to be hired by third-party companies which don't officially promote in the forum through signature campaigns. Nevertheless it is worthy to note that those sort of users are very limited and most of them already took part in ChipMixer and other good campaigns. The OP shows that there are 28% (28 users) of top 100 merited users have worn their personal signature. Now, let's me show you more details. In descending orders, 29% of them simply wear their personal text, 25% of them wear their self-advertised signature (for their services, topics); 14.3% of them wear their donation address and the same percentage for the forum's 10 th anniversary; 7% of them wear their personal sites. The rest three categories with 3.6% (~ 1 user) for each, wear their personal image, third-party signature and signature ban. What we can see from the result? Among the top 100 merited users, only 1 user have worn the signature of third-party company (Bybit) but I don't know it is a paid signature or not (I guess not). . tab sigdetails
sigdetails | Freq. Percent Cum.
--------------------------+-----------------------------------
10th anniversary | 4 14.29 14.29
donation address | 4 14.29 28.57
personal image | 1 3.57 32.14
personal sites | 2 7.14 39.29
personal text | 8 28.57 67.86
self-advertised signature | 7 25.00 92.86
signature ban | 1 3.57 96.43
third-party signature | 1 3.57 100.00
--------------------------+-----------------------------------
Total | 28 100.00
Details: . list username signature sigdetails median p25 p75 min max if signature == "personal", abb(30)
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| username signature sigdetails median p25 p75 min max |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
2. | fillippone personal personal text 47 33 63 23 113 |
7. | micgoossens personal personal text 25 24 38 16 62 |
9. | VB1001 personal donation address 23 16 31 5 54 |
11. | theymos personal donation address 22 12 41 1 119 |
14. | loyvesmayfamilis personal signature ban 20 4 29 0 49 |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
15. | Veleor personal 10th anniversary 17 12 23 2 81 |
16. | achow101 personal donation address 17 10 29 1 60 |
26. | JayJuanGee personal donation address 13 7 16 3 57 |
29. | Carlton Banks personal personal text 12 10 18 7 60 |
30. | TheFuzzStone personal self-advertised signature 12 7 15 0 53 |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
32. | minerjones personal self-advertised signature 12 3 14 1 23 |
33. | Coding Enthusiast personal self-advertised signature 11 5 17 0 45 |
38. | chimk personal 10th anniversary 10 5 13 3 30 |
44. | xtraelv personal personal text 9 3 18 0 47 |
45. | Goran_ personal third-party signature 9 5 10 0 21 |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
51. | philipma1957 personal personal text 8 5 12 2 26 |
52. | jojo69 personal personal text 8 4 10 1 18 |
57. | Last of the V8s personal personal image 7 1 25 0 43 |
58. | krogothmanhattan personal self-advertised signature 7 3 10 0 28 |
60. | Jet Cash personal personal sites 6 3 9 0 16 |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
78. | Quickseller personal personal text 3 0 8 0 18 |
81. | qwk personal personal text 2 1 5 0 10 |
82. | Vod personal personal sites 2 1 4 0 14 |
85. | Alex_Sr personal 10th anniversary 2 0 7 0 18 |
87. | OgNasty personal self-advertised signature 2 1 3 0 7 |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
96. | theyoungmillionaire personal 10th anniversary 1 0 4 0 25 |
99. | nullius personal self-advertised signature 0 0 0 0 3 |
100. | ICOEthics personal self-advertised signature 0 0 1 0 8 |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
By the way, I think you'd be a good candidate for Chipmixer but obviously I have no say in the matter. When a spot does open up, there are usually a lot of really good applicants and DarkStar has to choose someone. Don't feel bad about the rejections and my advice is to just keep trying when spots open up.
It is my honor to have a very good feedback from you. It give me more strength and belief to keep doing good things that I have continuously made since late of the January of 2018. Who knows, someday I might be on ChipMixer. Good attitude changes our lives (I should limit to my life but I think it is right for all). In January of 2018, I did not believe that I can rank up to the Full Member rank but today looking back I have been a Hero member and I definitely know I will rank up to the Legendary rank (just a matter of time, merit requirement does not a matter with me). Now, my targets naturally raise higher. I want to participate in the ChipMixer campaign. In a summary, for newbies, I would say: Good attitude --- Knowledge increases --- Good posts --- More merits --- Higher ranks --- Higher income (from signature, that is a privilege, not a rights) --- Top ranks --- Top signature campaigns --- Higher reputation. Merits --- Ranks --- Income: It is a very interesting cycle. |
|
|
|
they can bet in bigger number of doges but that will only make the game slower if their goal is to play for profit because like you said , the value of doge is verry low but doge is a good coin choice when playing for fun only .
doge coin is also a good coin for those who dont like waiting when depositing because its a lite/light altcoin which is fast compare to btc and other heavier alts like eth . gl to roobet casino . hope they can catch up on the competitive market of gambling .
Human tend to prefer to own more, more coins and yes, quantity makes sense for most of us. With the same value of coins if we cash out into fiat, I think most of us would prefer to see bigger amount of coins in Dogecoin, in millions, rather than some Ethereum coins. It is basic preference of human. Moreover, there is - at least - another reason why Dogecoin is a favorite one for casinos. I have never heard or read somewhere that Dogecoin network has congestion issues. I could miss something and I could be wrong but from my knowledge and my three years in crypto market, I have never heard congestions on Dogecoin network. It is good to use on casinos. |
|
|
|
What complaints were these? I don't recall hearing any bitching about the Chipmixer posse and their participants' earned merits or anything like that.
Kind of troll or drama recent days in Meta. I don't remember where I read it but it truly existed in Meta board. Anyway it does not a serious problem. It makes sense that Chipmixer would have a lot of the highest merited members in it, because DarkStar_ is very selective when choosing new members for it. There isn't a merit requirement officially but I'm sure he takes that into account if there's a choice between a bunch of applicants, which there always is when a spot opens. I really wish other campaigns would be more selective--maybe not as selective as the Chipmixer campaign, but the closer the better. DarkStar_ also takes into account an applicant's trust score as well, so the campaign ends up with a lot of the best posters and some of the most trustworthy ones as well. I think that's great.
The fact is the quality of ChipMixer reflects not only by its participants but also by its applicants. By saying about applicants, I exclude blind applicants who woke up or simply ignore their low quality and try 'a shot' to see how luck their applications are. Those blind applicants surely fail at very first screening phase of DarkStar_. For the rest, they are obviously very good applicants, I see them as above-average users and some of them are outstandings. That campaign is a very competitive one and their applicants have to fight each other to get spots. Eventually, only outstanding posters chosen by DarkStar_ after a very tough selection process. Honestly, I applied in ChipMixer for two rounds and know how competitive it is, and I wish that someday I will succeed with my application. |
|
|
|
a merit source per local board section might be a solution to encourage every member of their respective nation to effectively share their thoughts and ideas.
I don't think so. Good posters will make their posts when they have valuable ideas to share or discuss with others, in their local boards or international boards (in English). I think most of users join the forum with initial purposes to discover about Bitcoin and blockchain technology do have acceptable English skills. It means they can understand what they read and can write understandable posts. With never-stop-upgrading Google Translator and other helpful softwares (such as grammarly.com), their lives have become easier. The biggest barriers likely are why they join the forum. That's all. There is at least one wrong point in your proposal. That is not all of local boards are actively communicating among local users. In inactive local boards, I don't think the forum should allocate merit sources for those boards. I could be wrong but everyone here have to expand to International boards in order to learn knowledge and become more knowledgeable at faster speed. Sticking all the time or most of time in local boards is not a wisely approach. Lastly, I don't think there is need to create a new thread like this because you can join and discuss in available threads on same suggestion. In 2018, theymos claimed that there was very little local boards did not have merit source(s). I believe that currently most or all (?) of local boards have merit source(s). What people asked recent months (as of my best knowledge) is adding new merit source(s) for their local boards. 1 merit source in every Local Boards, Is it Possible?Local Merit Sources ProblemCriterion for selecting a moderator for the local sectionYou also can support merit sources (ask for increases of their allocated sMerits) or merit source applications (not yet accepte) in your local boards {LIST}of the Merit Sources asking for more/less source merit, @theymos. {list} Open Merit Source Applications,waiting list. |
|
|
|
Originated from complaints about domination of ChipMixer signature, I used the available data from that thread: Weekly earned merits (median) of top 100 merited users. Then, I played around to see how signatures distributed over top 100 merited users. Notes: - The top 100 merited users in the analysis identified by snapshotting at the 2019w36, according to the data update in [CLUBS] Top Merited-Users Classified into 4 Clubs, with weekly support to update from @LoyceV.
- Observational period: 2019w23 - 2019w44 (21 weeks)
- Weekly statistics are not exactly for each week in Calendar day (due to theymos data dump). See explanation here.
Ex: 2019w36 includes 5 days in 2019w36 and 2 days in 2019w37. - Signature worn by users: snapshotted today
ABSTRACT- ChipMixer is the dominant signature, which accounts for 31% of signature worn by top 100 merited users
- The second and third highest worn signature are: Personal and None with 28% and 10%, respectively.
- The fourth one is FortuneJack (8%)
- The fifth one is Roobet (5%)
- Personal means those users worn signature based on their personal favorites (donation addresses, forum signature for the 10th anniversary, etc.) - None: means those users have not worn any signature as of the thread's publishing time.
The results show us the fact that there are 38% of users in the top 100 merited users don't wear any signature or simply wear their personal text/ signatures, that cumulative percentage is much higher than the figure of 31% users who worn ChipMixer signature. Is it time to stop complaining? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Results:I descendingly sorted the median of weekly earned merits from top 100 merited users, then listed them with some basic stats and signature they are wearing as of writing: - median: Median of weekly earned-merits
- p25: the 25th percentile of weekly earned-merits
- p75: the 75th percentile of weekly earned-merits
- min: the minimum of weekly earned-merits
- max: the maximum of weekly earned-merits
. list username signature median p25 p75 min max, abb(30)
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| username signature median p25 p75 min max |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
1. | LoyceV ChipMixer 49 26 60 16 110 |
2. | fillippone personal 47 33 63 23 113 |
3. | o_e_l_e_o ChipMixer 45 27 53 12 82 |
4. | suchmoon ChipMixer 36 21 47 10 87 |
5. | nutildah Sportsbet.io 33 22 43 4 66 |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
6. | mikeywith ChipMixer 27 18 30 8 51 |
7. | micgoossens personal 25 24 38 16 62 |
8. | bob123 ChipMixer 24 12 35 0 56 |
9. | VB1001 personal 23 16 31 5 54 |
10. | DdmrDdmr ChipMixer 22 18 34 5 67 |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
11. | theymos personal 22 12 41 1 119 |
12. | LFC_Bitcoin Bitcasino.io 21 17 27 10 48 |
13. | witcher_sense Cryptotalk.org 21 14 30 3 61 |
14. | loyvesmayfamilis personal 20 4 29 0 49 |
15. | Veleor personal 17 12 23 2 81 |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
16. | achow101 personal 17 10 29 1 60 |
17. | pooya87 ChipMixer 16 11 20 7 30 |
18. | bitmover Yolodice 16 7 21 4 68 |
19. | gentlemand ChipMixer 15 10 23 4 31 |
20. | morillz7z Sportsbet.io 15 10 19 4 39 |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
21. | BitCryptex ChipMixer 15 6 20 2 30 |
22. | 1miau ChipMixer 15 10 26 4 100 |
23. | wwzsocki Roobet 14 6 22 0 78 |
24. | taikuri13 ChipMixer 13 9 20 5 34 |
25. | tranthidung PlayBetr 13 9 26 1 104 |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
26. | JayJuanGee personal 13 7 16 3 57 |
27. | CryptopreneurBrainboss Roobet 13 10 15 3 79 |
28. | TryNinja ChipMixer 12 9 19 0 32 |
29. | mjglqw ChipMixer 12 5 15 0 24 |
30. | Carlton Banks personal 12 10 18 7 60 |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
31. | minerjones personal 12 3 14 1 23 |
32. | TheFuzzStone personal 12 7 15 0 53 |
33. | tvplus006 Match365 11 7 21 0 37 |
34. | yahoo62278 Cryptotalk.org 11 6 20 0 112 |
35. | iasenko ChipMixer 11 2 20 0 40 |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
36. | yogg ChipMixer 11 4 18 0 61 |
37. | Coding Enthusiast personal 11 5 17 0 45 |
38. | actmyame ChipMixer 10 8 17 0 32 |
39. | ETFbitcoin ChipMixer 10 7 15 1 47 |
40. | HCP ChipMixer 10 5 17 1 26 |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
41. | chimk personal 10 5 13 3 30 |
42. | HairyMaclairy none 10 8 16 0 42 |
43. | xhomerx10 none 9 5 13 0 36 |
44. | Xal0lex Blocknance 9 6 20 2 38 |
45. | xtraelv personal 9 3 18 0 47 |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
46. | Goran_ personal 9 5 10 0 21 |
47. | Coolcryptovator Bitsler 9 2 12 0 25 |
48. | philipma1957 personal 8 5 12 2 26 |
49. | Steamtyme ChipMixer 8 5 16 2 129 |
50. | abhiseshakana ChipMixer 8 5 13 0 20 |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
51. | The Pharmacist ChipMixer 8 4 10 0 29 |
52. | jojo69 personal 8 4 10 1 18 |
53. | DireWolfM14 Roobet 8 5 14 0 43 |
54. | mu_enrico Roobet 7 4 15 1 23 |
55. | Last of the V8s personal 7 1 25 0 43 |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
56. | mocacino ChipMixer 7 5 15 0 28 |
57. | DarkStar_ ChipMixer 7 4 14 2 45 |
58. | krogothmanhattan personal 7 3 10 0 28 |
59. | asche ChipMixer 7 4 10 1 33 |
60. | marlboroza ChipMixer 6 2 15 0 48 |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
61. | pandukelana2712 PlayBetr 6 2 7 0 25 |
62. | Lafu Roobet 6 2 8 0 19 |
63. | Jet Cash personal 6 3 9 0 16 |
64. | stompix ChipMixer 6 2 11 1 20 |
65. | Husna QA ChipMixer 5 3 7 0 31 |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
66. | Coin-1 E3T 5 4 8 0 23 |
67. | Lauda FortuneJack 5 1 9 0 21 |
68. | Artemis3 777coin 5 2 9 0 19 |
69. | gmaxwell none 5 1 15 0 113 |
70. | joniboni ChipMixer 5 1 9 0 17 |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
71. | LeGaulois ChipMixer 4 2 5 0 18 |
72. | SaltySpitoon FortuneJack 4 1 12 0 27 |
73. | BobLawblaw none 4 2 9 0 27 |
74. | TheNewAnon135246 FortuneJack 3 1 7 0 15 |
75. | Quickseller personal 3 0 8 0 18 |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
76. | satoshi none 3 1 17 0 71 |
77. | hilariousetc ChipMixer 3 1 10 0 30 |
78. | Pmalek FortuneJack 3 2 9 0 17 |
79. | bones261 none 3 1 8 0 27 |
80. | Hhampuz FortuneJack 3 1 6 0 36 |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
81. | qwk personal 2 1 5 0 10 |
82. | roycilik Smartmixer.io 2 1 9 0 35 |
83. | HeRetiK ChipMixer 2 1 4 0 20 |
84. | hilariousandco FortuneJack 2 1 7 0 18 |
85. | Vod personal 2 1 4 0 14 |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
86. | mole0815 agareum 2 1 6 0 34 |
87. | coinlocket$ Bitcasino.io 2 0 2 0 25 |
88. | Alex_Sr personal 2 0 7 0 18 |
89. | OgNasty personal 2 1 3 0 7 |
90. | infofront none 2 0 5 0 72 |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
91. | theyoungmillionaire personal 1 0 4 0 25 |
92. | Flying Hellfish FortuneJack 1 0 4 0 26 |
93. | Lutpin CryptoGames 1 0 3 0 7 |
94. | PHI16168 Cryptotalk.org 1 0 2 0 17 |
95. | TMAN FortuneJack 1 0 2 0 6 |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
96. | Piggy none 1 0 2 0 7 |
97. | ICOEthics personal 0 0 1 0 8 |
98. | nullius personal 0 0 0 0 3 |
99. | Toxic2040 none 0 0 6 0 36 |
100. | kenzawak none 0 0 1 0 23 |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Which signature worn by most of top 100 merited-users? Please see. . tab signature
signature | Freq. Percent Cum.
---------------+-----------------------------------
777coin | 1 1.00 1.00
Bitcasino.io | 2 2.00 3.00
Bitsler | 1 1.00 4.00
Blocknance | 1 1.00 5.00
ChipMixer | 31 31.00 36.00
CryptoGames | 1 1.00 37.00
Cryptotalk.org | 3 3.00 40.00
E3T | 1 1.00 41.00
FortuneJack | 8 8.00 49.00
Match365 | 1 1.00 50.00
PlayBetr | 2 2.00 52.00
Roobet | 5 5.00 57.00
Smartmixer.io | 1 1.00 58.00
Sportsbet.io | 2 2.00 60.00
Yolodice | 1 1.00 61.00
agareum | 1 1.00 62.00
none | 10 10.00 72.00
personal | 28 28.00 100.00
---------------+-----------------------------------
Total | 100 100.00
Update:The OP shows that there are 28% (28 users) of top 100 merited users have worn their personal signature. Now, let's me show you more details. In descending orders, 29% of them simply wear their personal text, 25% of them wear their self-advertised signature (for their services, topics); 14.3% of them wear their donation address and the same percentage for the forum's 10 th anniversary; 7% of them wear their personal sites. The rest three categories with 3.6% (~ 1 user) for each, wear their personal image, third-party signature and signature ban. What we can see from the result? Among the top 100 merited users, only 1 user have worn the signature of third-party company (Bybit) but I don't know it is a paid signature or not (I guess not). . tab sigdetails
sigdetails | Freq. Percent Cum.
--------------------------+-----------------------------------
10th anniversary | 4 14.29 14.29
donation address | 4 14.29 28.57
personal image | 1 3.57 32.14
personal sites | 2 7.14 39.29
personal text | 8 28.57 67.86
self-advertised signature | 7 25.00 92.86
signature ban | 1 3.57 96.43
third-party signature | 1 3.57 100.00
--------------------------+-----------------------------------
Total | 28 100.00
Details: . list username signature sigdetails median p25 p75 min max if signature == "personal", abb(30)
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| username signature sigdetails median p25 p75 min max |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
2. | fillippone personal personal text 47 33 63 23 113 |
7. | micgoossens personal personal text 25 24 38 16 62 |
9. | VB1001 personal donation address 23 16 31 5 54 |
11. | theymos personal donation address 22 12 41 1 119 |
14. | loyvesmayfamilis personal signature ban 20 4 29 0 49 |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
15. | Veleor personal 10th anniversary 17 12 23 2 81 |
16. | achow101 personal donation address 17 10 29 1 60 |
26. | JayJuanGee personal donation address 13 7 16 3 57 |
29. | Carlton Banks personal personal text 12 10 18 7 60 |
30. | TheFuzzStone personal self-advertised signature 12 7 15 0 53 |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
32. | minerjones personal self-advertised signature 12 3 14 1 23 |
33. | Coding Enthusiast personal self-advertised signature 11 5 17 0 45 |
38. | chimk personal 10th anniversary 10 5 13 3 30 |
44. | xtraelv personal personal text 9 3 18 0 47 |
45. | Goran_ personal third-party signature 9 5 10 0 21 |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
51. | philipma1957 personal personal text 8 5 12 2 26 |
52. | jojo69 personal personal text 8 4 10 1 18 |
57. | Last of the V8s personal personal image 7 1 25 0 43 |
58. | krogothmanhattan personal self-advertised signature 7 3 10 0 28 |
60. | Jet Cash personal personal sites 6 3 9 0 16 |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
78. | Quickseller personal personal text 3 0 8 0 18 |
81. | qwk personal personal text 2 1 5 0 10 |
82. | Vod personal personal sites 2 1 4 0 14 |
85. | Alex_Sr personal 10th anniversary 2 0 7 0 18 |
87. | OgNasty personal self-advertised signature 2 1 3 0 7 |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
96. | theyoungmillionaire personal 10th anniversary 1 0 4 0 25 |
99. | nullius personal self-advertised signature 0 0 0 0 3 |
100. | ICOEthics personal self-advertised signature 0 0 1 0 8 |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
