Bitcoin Forum
September 19, 2018, 08:17:41 AM *
News: ♦♦ Bitcoin Core users must update to 0.16.3 [Torrent]. More info.
  Home Help Search Donate Login Register  
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 »
1  Local / Esquina Libre / Restricciones y requisitos mejorados para newbies (novatos) on: September 17, 2018, 09:03:30 PM
Este post es una traducción de los cambios introducidos hoy, 17/09/2018, por parte de @theymos, y que afectan tanto al Sistema de Rangos como a la cantidad de méritos disponible en el sistema por parte de las Fuentes de Mérito. El post original se puede leer en inglés en el siguiente enlace: Enhanced newbie restrictions & requirements. Más allá de la importancia del contenido del post original, es interesante seguir todo el debate que ha surgido al respecto, cuanto menos en el hilo referenciado.

Debido a un exceso de posteo basura, necesitas ahora disponer de 1 mérito a fin de alcanzar el rango de Jr. Member. Todos los Jr. Members actuales que no cumplían este requisito (en el momento de ponerse en marcha el cambio) han sido degradados de rango. Así mismo, los Newbies ya no podrán establecer ninguna firma o texto personal.

Tened en cuenta que esto no afecta a:
- Limites en el ritmo de envío de PMs, establecidos en base a la actividad y al estado de lista blanca (whitelisted status).
- "You must wait ___ seconds..." (debe esperar ___ segudos …), basado puramente en actividad y en el estado de lista blanca (whitelisted status).

Pero si afecta a:
-   Poder votar en las encuestas
-   Jurisdicción del Patrullero (Patroller jurisdiction)
-   La opción de "ignore newbie PMs" (ignorar PMs procedentes de newbies)
-   "The body is omitted from this email because the sender is a newbie."(se omite el cuerpo del mensaje de este correo, debido a que el emisor es un newbie)
-   Límites del BBCode (bulleting board code)
-   Filtrado de enlaces de precisión reducida
-   Restricciones en las secciones del foro
Muchas de estas limitaciones pueden ser eliminadas haciéndose con un copper membership. En particular, puedes disponer de una firma a nivel de Member si dispones de un copper membership.

Una razón por la cual estaba dubitativo respecto de hacer esto con anterioridad es que hay ya muchísimas restricciones para los newbies, y no quería que el foro fuese poco acogedor para los newbies buenos. Consideraré ligar algunas de las restricciones a actividad en lugar de a rango en el futuro.

Con ayuda de DdmrDdmr, acabo de añadir 36 nuevas fuentes de mérito, las cuales deberían ayudar a que los newbies obtengan el requisito (para escalar de rango). No obstante, si eres incapaz de postear nada que merezca la pena, entonces nunca podrás subir de rango, ni deberías: este no es el foro para ti (en tal caso).
2  Other / Meta / sMerit participants – a worrying descending trend (!/?) on: September 15, 2018, 11:53:36 AM
1.   Introduction
This is not an in-depth analysis, but rather a specific focus on three basic elements that I regularly monitor and publish on the Merit Dashboard (Global Summary Tab – Weekly Ratios). Nevertheless, when one charts the underlying data, it sometimes becomes more comprehensible.
What worries me is how each month that goes by, less merit is awarded, by less people, to less people. There are multiple reasons behind this, which I do not wish to depict now, but rather focus on the fact that participation in the Merit System shrinks continuously overtime, be it as a merited or as a merited person.

2.   Awarded Merit

This is not new really, as coinlocket$ publishes a similar graph nearly every week on the Merit & new rank requirements and the Merit Dashboard tracks it too in a tabular manner. Nevertheless, it gives us context to the charts below. The reading is that the overall amount of awarded sMerit declines as time goes by, not as steeply as during Q1, but never reaching a zone where we can say it is at least stable for a few months in a row. Q2 ended with a 28,4% decrease in sMerit awarding comparing the quarter’s beginning and end weeks, and likewise Q3 (not ended yet) is down 19% so far.
The additional Merit Sources added over the past few months probably have stopped a stepper decline though, but even so.

3.   Senders

Logically correlated to the above, the total number of merit senders per week declines as time goes by noticeable. This is for me a rather significant fact, since it means less people have the capability or interest in awarding sMerit.

The nFrom column shown the number of forum members that have awarded sMerit each week. For the most recent complete week this September (03/09/2018 .. 09/09/2018), only 657 people awarded sMerit. That must be very far from what the initial idea was I’d say… Two months before, the figure was around 834 people, and two months before that 946. That’s around 30% less people playing ball as sMerit senders in four months.

The nFromNew column represents the amount on people that are new in the sending role; that is, that have never sent sMerit on a previous occasion. It therefore represents the set of forum members that join the game of merit sending. This number was of 129 people on the most recent complete week (and probably many of those run out soon enough of sendable merits). This logically also decreases overtime, but I wonder just how much this factor can go down before practically having an irrelevant role in the scheme of things.
I’ve also checked out of the 119 resent senders how many of those have never received sMerit before, and are therefore airdrop-only senders for sure: Nearly 40% (same results roughly on average over the last month). That means that every week, as of late, we get around 50 forum members that start meriting for the first time from their initial airdrop. Better late than never, but there must be thousands of accounts that, having airdropped sMerit, have not entered the game be it because they have no wish to, or because they are not active.

4.   Receivers

sMerit receiver trends are similar to the above both for the total amount of people that receive sMerit on a given week (nTo) and those that are new and have never receives sMerit before (nToNew).
The number or Receivers is greater than that of Senders as one would expect (merit sources are few but they award sMerit to many), but the overall figures are low: For the most recent complete week this September (03/09/2018 .. 09/09/2018), 876 different people received sMerit. Out of those, 198 were merited for the first time. Basically therefore, we’ve got as of late around 800 new people being merited per month. That doesn’t sound too bad, but since the sMerit/TX is really low, the base of receivers widens but with little awarding capabilities.

5.   In summary
My basic concern is focused on the sender’s side, since they are the origin of sMerit TXs. These numbers shrink week after week, so less people are factually playing this vital role in the system and, as side-effect, Merit Sources become more and more important as time goes by, with a very vital role concentrated on a small subset of forum members (see sMerit Senders & Receivers – Weight of top 100 and 200 weekly contributors). In my opinion, this trend has to be closely monitored and ideally flipped around, getting more people participating as awarders and not less week after week.
3  Other / Meta / Analysis - Ranked-up Users – Section/Subsection profile (& Local Boards) on: September 06, 2018, 05:46:12 PM
1.   Introduction.

On the Merit Dashboard there’s a section where we can see the current (as of last Friday)  2.561 total users that have ranked-up, needing merit as a requirement. I recently looked-up how many were from my local board (a measly 22), and thought it may be interesting to see a summary for the other local boards too. Since that would only be a subset, I went ahead and did the exercise for the whole 2.561 users to see if there was any interesting information that could be derived, and there is ….

Note: I am considering here all the current merit received for the above set of users up to date, not just the exact amount needed just to reach their current rank.

2.   Ranked-up users.

The ranked-up user summary is as follows as can be seen on the Merit Dashboard (see Tab labelled Ranked-up):

The detail of the usernames behind each of the above numbers can be seen on the Dashboard, so there is no need to replicate it here.

I will be treating the ranked-up users as a whole in the following sections, without separating by rank. This is due to the fact that 93% of ranked-up users are those that have reached the Member rank, and only 7% have reached higher ranks.  Replicating the below information tables by rank may make the post too long, although if required I can add it later on.

3.   Number of Merited Subsections

The following is a distribution of the number of Subsections a ranked-up forum member has been merited in:

It turns out that 58,65% of ranked-up users have been merited in a single subsection (be it a local board or otherwise as we’ll see further down), 28,50% have done so on 2 subsections, 12,57% on 3 subsections, and 10,27% on 4 subsections or above.

4.   Subsections in which ranked-up members have been merited in.

This is the most interesting table really, and we can derive some interesting insights based on its content.

Section: Forum Section.
Subsection: Forum subsection.
nUsers: Number of ranked-up users that have been merited in the subsection. The total of this column is more than the number of ranked-up members, since some are merited on multiple subsections.
%RankedUp: % of ranked-up users that have been merited in the subsection.
SingleSS: Number of ranked-up users that have been merited only in the subsection (and nowhere else).
%SingleSS: % of ranked-up users that have been merited only in the subsection.
nReceivedMerit: Total Received sMerit by the ranked-up users in the subsection.
avgMerit: Average merit per ranked-up user in the subsection.
stdDevP: Standard deviation associated to the avgMerit.

Example of interpretation:
471 ranked-up users have received sMerit in the Altcoin Discussion subsection. That is 18,39% of all the ranked-up users. Singularly, 77 of these users have ranked-up solely based on the sMerit received in the Altcoin Discussion subsection (that is 16,35% of the 471 users ranked-up merited in this subsection).
On aggregate, the 471 ranked-up users have received 3.504 sMerits in the Altcoin Discussion subsection. That is an average of 7,44 sMerits per user (with a high standard deviation of 10,96 sMerits).

What stands out:
a)   30,89% of ranked-up users have received at least 1 sMerit on a post that has later been deleted. That is a rather high percentage, that makes it more difficult to track merit abuse unfortunately (even though it is not moderated). Nevertheless, only 9,73% of these ranked-up receive all their sMerit on deleted posts (77 people).

b)   The subsections most related to ranked-up members are Russian (28,66%), Altcoin Discussion (18,39%), Ann Altcoins (15,03%) and Bitcoin Discussion (12,65%). Meta is related to 8,98% of ranked-up users, so although meta is a rather well merited section, it is not to date a key section to ranking-up.

c)   Subsections such as Mining (Altcoins) with 2,11% influence, Bitcoin Technical Support (0,86%), Mining (0,74%) and Project Development (0,55%) are the least influential in the overall figure of ranked-up people.

That says something: the most Bitcointalk/technological sections are the sections are the least influential for ranking-up.
That does not mean you cannot do so, don’t read this wrong, but rather that the profile of people on Bitcointalk that have so far ranked-up with the Merit System is not too technological.

d)   Some subsections have a larger degree of people that have received sMerit solely on that subsection: Announcement Altcoins (33,77%) or all those that received sMerit in that subsection, Mining (29,63%) of those ranked-up members merited in the subsection, and Mining Bitcoin (26,32%).
Although the user base is not really too large to draw solid conclusions, it tells us that mining profiles are rather specific and have a rather large fidelity to their subsection, and similarly in Altcoins (although in Altcoins we’ve all seen shady stuff going on and that may well be the reason).
e)   I would not pay too much attention to the AvgMerit really, since the standard deviations are rather high in most cases. This means that ranked-up people awarded merit in a given subsection do so in a widespread fan of sMerit amounts,  differing quite a bit in many cases from the average.

f)   I’ve deliberately left the local boards to be treated last but not least. Roughly, a bit more than half of the ranked-up forum members are related (through merit) to a local board. That I figure is good, and it means that an international forum such as Bitcointalk has contributions from all around and, consequently, people from different countries are ranking-up (slowly).

Nevertheless, if we look at this in detail, there are some locals that numerically count with a large share of ranked-up local members (I’m talking about absolute ranked-up numbers here, not in comparison to the population on each local board). Russian local boards stands out with 734 ranked-up users, followed by the Turkish Local Board (215), the Indonesian (160), and the Chinese (122). They are surely the largest local boards, so the higher quantity of local ranked-up members are theirs (even if in reality the figures are probably rather small, compared to the number of the distinct local posters there).

There’s a whole array of mid/low-level local boards (Croatian, Spanish, Italian, French, German, etc.), and then there’s the nearly impossible boards (Arabic, Dutch, Greek, Indian, Korean, Polish, Romanian and Scandinavian). Again, we do not know to total distinct posters on these boards to compare and see the ratio, but the absolute number is measly and either indicates a grave merit problem, or a potential to boost Bitcointalk in those areas (as in the above mid/low ranked-up level countries really too).

Even between countries, there are large “fidelity” differences. For example, out of the 122 local Chinese that have ranked-up, 88,52% of them have done so being merited only on their local board. The Turkish board follows a similar patter, while the Russian  local board has more than half of its ranked-up members that have been awarded sMerit on other boards too.

The lower the percentage (column %SingleSS), the more that the local ranked-up members have emigrated to the English boards in order to be merited for their contribution there. A certain command of English is required there, so it is logically related to the educational system in each country in terms of learning the English language.

- I’ve assumed that people on local boards are from the local board if they have been merited there at least once. That is true for the most, although there are a few exceptions (19 to be precise) that have been merited on more than one local board. The most extreme case is Leteravian, who has been merited on 7 local boards (often by translating himself his posts into multiple languages).

- Bear in mind that I’ve analysed all the merit for the ranked-up members, not just the merit that took them to their next rank. The latter is a much more tedious task, and the results would probably not differ too much from the above, since most users that have ranked-up are Members with not too much merit above the required baseline.
4  Other / Meta / Received Merit - Top Streaks (merited days in a row) on: August 30, 2018, 04:14:15 PM
1.   Introduction

What I have done on this occasion is determine the merit streaks associated to different users. a Merit streak is a number of consecutive days (with no gaps in between) on which the user is awarded with merit. I've had this in mind for some time, but hadn’t gone forth with the idea since calculating the streaks was not as simple as I thought initially.

The best streaks are often dated back in the earlier days of the Merit System. When a forum member (or a subsection) has more than one streak with the same number of days, the most recent once is inventoried on the lists shown below.

Common column shown are as follows:
   Rank: Current user rank.
   Name: Username.
   UserId: Bitcointalk UserId.
   From: Initial streak date.
   Until: Ending streak date.
   nMerit: Merit involved in the listed streak for the given user.
   nDays: Duration of the streak in days.
   nMsg: Number of distinct posts merited in the streak.
   URL: User URL

Note: I also calculated the merit streaks from the senders point of view, but adding them here just made the post too long and I think the receiver streaks are more interesting really.

2.   Top 50 Receiver Streaks

The following is a list of the top 50 streaks during which forum members have received sMerit (may require horizontal and vertical scroll on some screens):
rank                Name                UserId    from           until          nMerit    nDays     nMsg      URL
Copper Member       nullius             976210    2018-01-30     2018-03-01     518       31        108;u=976210
Legendary           LoyceV              459836    2018-01-25     2018-02-20     225       27        65;u=459836
Legendary           JayJuanGee          252510    2018-01-25     2018-02-19     123       26        73;u=252510
Hero Member         BTCforJoe           557989    2018-03-22     2018-04-13     133       23        27;u=557989
Hero Member         Last of the V8s     479624    2018-03-05     2018-03-26     116       22        48;u=479624
Administrator       theymos             35        2018-01-24     2018-02-12     1485      20        32;u=35
Legendary           Jet Cash            698159    2018-06-26     2018-07-15     95        20        37;u=698159
Staff               achow101            290195    2018-01-25     2018-02-11     121       18        45;u=290195
Full Member         theyoungmillionaire 1180530   2018-04-25     2018-05-11     68        17        22;u=1180530
Full Member         tvplus006           1311641   2018-04-23     2018-05-09     53        17        7;u=1311641
Hero Member         TheQuin             143168    2018-02-19     2018-03-07     44        17        22;u=143168
Hero Member         TMAN                98986     2018-04-19     2018-05-04     127       16        24;u=98986
Hero Member         Last of the V8s     479624    2018-04-14     2018-04-29     65        16        36;u=479624
Full Member         theyoungmillionaire 1180530   2018-06-19     2018-07-04     147       16        10;u=1180530
Full Member         bitmover            1554927   2018-04-05     2018-04-20     61        16        19;u=1554927
Legendary           hilariousetc        397737    2018-08-08     2018-08-23     162       16        24;u=397737
Sr. Member          o_e_l_e_o           1188543   2018-07-15     2018-07-30     59        16        24;u=1188543
Legendary           Jet Cash            698159    2018-01-25     2018-02-08     82        15        30;u=698159
Legendary           LoyceV              459836    2018-08-02     2018-08-16     79        15        32;u=459836
Legendary           The Pharmacist      487418    2018-04-15     2018-04-29     70        15        30;u=487418
Hero Member         Last of the V8s     479624    2018-02-15     2018-03-01     60        15        40;u=479624
Hero Member         Last of the V8s     479624    2018-01-31     2018-02-13     112       14        44;u=479624
Hero Member         Last of the V8s     479624    2018-03-30     2018-04-12     65        14        41;u=479624
Legendary           LoyceV              459836    2018-05-06     2018-05-19     28        14        16;u=459836
Sr. Member          AlyattesLydia       1046135   2018-01-25     2018-02-07     74        14        11;u=1046135
Sr. Member          Co1n                95019     2018-01-29     2018-02-10     88        13        37;u=95019
Sr. Member          xtraelv             897509    2018-07-16     2018-07-28     146       13        23;u=897509
Sr. Member          xtraelv             897509    2018-08-12     2018-08-24     56        13        19;u=897509
Hero Member         HairyMaclairy       181806    2018-03-11     2018-03-23     35        13        22;u=181806
Hero Member         BTCforJoe           557989    2018-03-08     2018-03-19     70        12        17;u=557989
Hero Member         poptop              906023    2018-01-25     2018-02-05     181       12        39;u=906023
Hero Member         TMAN                98986     2018-01-25     2018-02-05     315       12        58;u=98986
Full Member         DdmrDdmr            1582324   2018-06-18     2018-06-29     46        12        13;u=1582324
Administrator       theymos             35        2018-02-24     2018-03-07     108       12        18;u=35
Copper Member       bill gator          370611    2018-01-24     2018-02-04     95        12        11;u=370611
Copper Member       nullius             976210    2018-03-03     2018-03-14     107       12        30;u=976210
Full Member         manji               1310981   2018-04-20     2018-05-01     42        12        20;u=1310981
Legendary           LoyceV              459836    2018-06-09     2018-06-20     43        12        18;u=459836
Legendary           LoyceV              459836    2018-06-26     2018-07-07     33        12        17;u=459836
Legendary           DannyHamilton       60820     2018-01-25     2018-02-05     162       12        26;u=60820
Member              kirreev070          1221497   2018-08-01     2018-08-12     33        12        13;u=1221497
Sr. Member          Piggy               188198    2018-06-25     2018-07-06     152       12        10;u=188198
Sr. Member          joniboini           1275282   2018-03-03     2018-03-14     41        12        15;u=1275282
Sr. Member          explorder           1108331   2018-01-24     2018-02-04     305       12        3;u=1108331
Sr. Member          duesoldi            937020    2018-01-26     2018-02-05     30        11        21;u=937020
Sr. Member          mdayonliner         1432468   2018-05-27     2018-06-06     22        11        14;u=1432468
Sr. Member          ui_zakharchenko     1052653   2018-01-29     2018-02-08     76        11        3;u=1052653
Legendary           DannyHamilton       60820     2018-02-07     2018-02-17     29        11        17;u=60820
Legendary           Sylon               112240    2018-01-25     2018-02-04     99        11        14;u=112240
Legendary           The Pharmacist      487418    2018-05-14     2018-05-24     52        11        23;u=487418

Nullius has the longest streak to date, having received sMerit for 31 days in a row, totalling 518 sMerits during that streak. LoyceV falls short by only 4 days, having a streak of 27 days, followed by JayJuanGee with 26 days. All these three top streaks were achieved during the early days of the Merit System.
Some forum members appear various times on the list with multiple streaks amongst the top 50. Hilariousetc and xtraelv were on an on-going streak at the time of data extraction, and really have a +2 days and +1 additional streak length looking over their merit this week.

Full list per user can be seen here:

3.   Top Receiver Streak per subsection

The focus this time is on the larges streak by Subsection (41 subsections, +1 deleted virtual subsection)(may require horizontal and vertical scroll on some screens).
section                       subsection                         rank           Name                  UserId       from           until          nMerit    nDays     URL
Alternate cryptocurrencies    Altcoin Discussion                 Sr. Member     Ranyar                1023316      2018-02-12     2018-02-18     55        7;u=1023316
Alternate cryptocurrencies    Announcements (Altcoins)           Sr. Member     deeperx               1038794      2018-01-30     2018-02-07     125       9;u=1038794
Alternate cryptocurrencies    Marketplace (Altcoins)             Legendary      Sylon                 112240       2018-01-25     2018-02-03     91        10;u=112240
Alternate cryptocurrencies    Mining (Altcoins)                  Donator        Claymore              306958       2018-02-24     2018-02-28     13        5;u=306958
Alternate cryptocurrencies    Speculation (Altcoins)             Member         Frayz                 1879170      2018-07-02     2018-07-04     8         3;u=1879170
Bitcoin                       Bitcoin Discussion                 Legendary      franky1               65837        2018-04-03     2018-04-08     11        6;u=65837
Bitcoin                       Bitcoin Technical Support          Staff          achow101              290195       2018-01-28     2018-02-05     30        9;u=290195
Bitcoin                       Development & Technical Discussion Copper Member  nullius               976210       2018-01-30     2018-02-10     122       12;u=976210
Bitcoin                       Mining                             Hero Member    HagssFIN              348185       2018-03-20     2018-03-24     24        5;u=348185
Bitcoin                       Project Development                Full Member    CryptyMike            419071       2018-06-14     2018-06-17     16        4;u=419071
Deleted                       Deleted                            Full Member    Alex_Sr               1762404      2018-03-14     2018-03-21     21        8;u=1762404
Economy                       Economics                          Hero Member    Last of the V8s       479624       2018-03-05     2018-03-26     115       22;u=479624
Economy                       Marketplace                        Hero Member    Hhampuz               881377       2018-08-11     2018-08-19     44        9;u=881377
Economy                       Trading Discussion                 Member         ICOEthics             2204241      2018-07-03     2018-07-10     26        8;u=2204241
Local                         Arabic                             Hero Member    samcoin               840621       2018-08-10     2018-08-11     2         2;u=840621
Local                         Chinese                            Member         vagrom                1411205      2018-02-09     2018-02-12     13        4;u=1411205
Local                         Croatian                           Sr. Member     Trofo                 1099980      2018-02-03     2018-02-08     18        6;u=1099980
Local                         Dutch                              Member         Sexy_Sees             1338805      2018-02-12     2018-02-15     6         4;u=1338805
Local                         French                             Full Member    JeremyB               1007192      2018-02-13     2018-02-19     14        7;u=1007192
Local                         German                             Full Member    mole0815              1424178      2018-06-14     2018-06-22     35        9;u=1424178
Local                         Greek                              Full Member    vascrs11              1072972      2018-01-25     2018-01-26     2         2;u=1072972
Local                         Indian                             Sr. Member     Guvn0r                860161       2018-04-09     2018-04-10     2         2;u=860161
Local                         Indian                             Sr. Member     amishmanish           1107844      2018-04-09     2018-04-10     2         2;u=1107844
Local                         Indonesian                         Full Member    manji                 1310981      2018-04-20     2018-05-01     42        12;u=1310981
Local                         Italian                            Sr. Member     duesoldi              937020       2018-01-26     2018-02-05     30        11;u=937020
Local                         Japanese                           Member         hakka                 1649515      2018-05-18     2018-05-22     9         5;u=1649515
Local                         Korean                             Full Member    SolidLiquid           1025214      2018-05-19     2018-05-19     1         1;u=1025214
Local                         Other Languages                    Sr. Member     flekkelek             924671       2018-01-27     2018-01-29     10        3;u=924671
Local                         Philippines                        Full Member    theyoungmillionaire   1180530      2018-06-24     2018-07-04     43        11;u=1180530
Local                         Polish                             Sr. Member     sud                   974532       2018-05-24     2018-05-25     4         2;u=974532
Local                         Portuguese                         Full Member    bitmover              1554927      2018-03-22     2018-03-29     13        8;u=1554927
Local                         Romanian                           Member         HBKMusiK              1246426      2018-02-27     2018-03-01     6         3;u=1246426
Local                         Russian                            Sr. Member     Co1n                  95019        2018-01-29     2018-02-10     87        13;u=95019
Local                         Skandinavisk                       Member         Larsinist             1694762      2018-02-21     2018-02-21     2         1;u=1694762
Local                         Spanish                            Sr. Member     solosequenosenada     80810        2018-01-25     2018-01-28     67        4;u=80810
Local                         Turkish                            Sr. Member     AlyattesLydia         1046135      2018-01-25     2018-02-07     74        14;u=1046135
Other                         Archival                           Hero Member    HCP                   867786       2018-06-25     2018-06-26     2         2;u=867786
Other                         Beginners & Help                   Copper Member  shorena               181801       2018-01-24     2018-01-31     121       8;u=181801
Other                         Meta                               Administrator  theymos               35           2018-01-24     2018-02-12     1444      20;u=35
Other                         Off-topic                          Copper Member  bill gator            370611       2018-01-25     2018-02-04     55        11;u=370611
Other                         Politics & Society                 Sr. Member     o_e_l_e_o             1188543      2018-07-26     2018-07-30     8         5;u=1188543
Other                         Serious discussion                 Legendary      Carlton Banks         64205        2018-07-12     2018-07-16     23        5;u=64205

Long streaks per section/subsection are more difficult to obtain. Last of the V8s holds the record here in the Economics subsection (Wall Observer thread), with a 22 day streak. Theymos holds the second longest streak, being merited for 20 days in a row on Meta, whilst AlyattesLydia was awarded merit for 14 days in a row on the Turkish board. There are quite a few streaks of just a few days, nearly all on the Local boards, which goes to show that even the most merited there have difficulties.

4.   Max Receiver streak per user – distribution per Rank

In order to see if there is a substantial distribution change in the receiver streaks, I’ve aggregated the Max. streak per user and rank into the following table:

The columns indicate the max. receiver streak value (number of days). As I expected for the regular ranks, the higher the rank, the less cases of maximum streak being of only 1 day. For example, Legendries have a maximum receiver streak of 1 day for 65,31% of the users in this segment, while this value is of 92,32% for newbies.
Nevertheless, the Member segment does not follow the trend, as it outperforms the ranks above it by having noticeably more streaks of 2 days in a row as the maximum streak for its segment.
5  Other / Politics & Society / Spain, Catalonia - The yellow ribbon road to social confrontation on: August 27, 2018, 02:51:59 PM
L. Frank Baum’s The Wonderful Wizard of Oz features the yellow brick road as a path that leads anyone who follows it to Emerald City, the capital of Oz, ruled by the Wizard who is venerated by the city and the kingdom. Of course, we all know that he was really a conman that preyed on other’s will to believe, and not upon factual reasoning.

In Spain, Catalonia (Cataluña/Catalunya) is an autonomous region whose capital is Barcelona, and is de facto one of the richest parts of Spain. It also has a local language, Catalan, which is formally a co-official language in Catalonia. As of late, Catalonia is flooded with yellow ribbons left and right. The ribbon is a symbol that represents a protest against the Spanish state for imprisoning a bunch of Catalonian local authorities, as well as forcing some of them to exile in order to avoid being imprisoned for celebrating a referendum to determine the will of the residents of Catalonia in relation to creating an independent republican country, and actually proclaiming the republic a few days later. Nice and romantic.

Of course, there are always two sides to the story… The Catalan authorities (Carles Puigdemont – ex-president, and quite a few of the equivalent to ministers) celebrated last 1st of October 2017 an illegal referendum to determine the will of Catalan locals to create an independent country from Spain. The fact that Spanish law does not allow for such referendums to be held under their constitution did not matter. The referendum took place (amongst some gruesome images of police brutality which were hyperventilated by the media and were rather much an exception under extraordinary circumstances).

The vote was unanimous in favour of independence, and the Catalan authorities took it as a mandate that had to be seen through at whatever the cost. Here again, the other side of the story tells us that basically, only those in favour of the independence actually went to vote, so the result, aside from being illegal, is totally biases.

The fact is that Catalonia is socially and politically fractured, with just under 50% in favour of independence and just above 50% against (whilst the immense majority of Spain is against it).

The Catalan government has managed to play the role of the Wizard of Oz, promising that an independent country is what the Catalans need, and actually managing to amass followers to their cause from all sorts of social classes and political ideologies. The common objective is above everything else, and the Catalan Government has one and one only objective in mind: Independence. If fact, they proclaimed a republic last 10th of October 2017, which lasted for around 8 seconds before declaring it left on standby, until it could be fully developed.
This lead the Spanish government to articulate constitutional article 155, an exceptional rule never applied before, and through which the Spanish government dissolved the Catalan government and held new elections to the Catalan Parliament (with no real change in it’s composition, being the pro-independence faction the ruling one by a tight margin).
In the meantime, the core nucleus of the Catalan government that proclaimed the so called 8 second republic, were either imprisoned or fled the country (and here we could go on about how Europe is joke in terms of common laws, but let’s skip that for now). The referendum and the later events that took place are seen my many as a coup d’état, carried out from within the Catalan institutions.

The Catalan pro-independence society stared the yellow ribbon campaign as a means to express their disconformity with the imprisonments and exiles. Yellow ribbons are displayed everywhere: people wear them on the street, balconies are covered by them (along with pro-independence flags and free political prisoners slogans), fences, roundabouts, town-halls, official government buildings, etc. You name it).
The yellow ribbon has spin-off derivatives such as yellow crosses (to be placed on the beach emulating a graveyard scene, after marching along the streets in procession), yellow sunshades (to be placed on the beaches packed together), yellow hats for summertime holiday traditional celebrations, and so on. Basically, every public act, feast or manifestation of any kind is now politicized with the everlasting presence of the yellow ribbons and their derivatives.

Now, as I’ve stated above, society is currently divided by half on the matter, so these symbols bare a strong resent on the half of the Catalan population which is in favour of remaining part of Spain. The yellow ribbons are heart-felt on both sides: for some it’s a use of their freedom of expression, for the others it’s an offense.

The yellow ribbons have been the centre of multiple social squabbles over the past few months, with fights on and off in relation to ribbons. Just this week, a Russian woman (who lives with a Spanish partner) was punched in the face in Barcelona by a guy that reproached the fact that she was taking ribbons off a fence. There are people that organize groups to clean public places from these yellow ribbons, often with a hood or handkerchief to cover their faces in fear of reprisals from the pro-independents.
Institutions such as town halls and government buildings should really remain neutral on this matter, but they play along and promote the yellow ribbon cause by placing gigantic ribbons (and pro-independence flags) on their buildings. 50% of the population is therefore completely ignored by the institutions in favour of the other 50%.

Quim Torra, current Catalan president and virtual proxy of former president Carles Puigdemont, is one of those characters that clearly hates Spain with all his guts. He’s been attributed tweets and phrases in interviews stating thing such as:

- "No, it is not natural to speak Spanish in Catalonia".
- "We need to confront Spain until it’s last consequences, until the end, without truce and without hesitation".
- "The Spaniards that do not acknowledge Catalan as a language are beasts with a human form".

Actually, Catalan schools by law should have 25% (only!) of the subjects taught in Spanish. In practice, Spanish is used only to teach Spanish language/literature, being all other subject taught in Catalan. Catalan government employees address you normally in Catalan and often do not switch to Spanish if you address them in Spanish. Official documents are in Catalan and normally not translated into Spanish. The list goes on. Catalan language has no issue whatsoever in day to day usage.   

Catalonia is still at what we could call the low end of a social confrontation scale, but things could pick up the pace in the coming months with what the pro-independent are calling a “warm autumn”. There are plans to create situations that will have an international impact (an everlasting aspiration and need is to move this conflict on to an international scale). Local press has pointed out planned actions to collapse Barcelona, by camping on the streets and blocking-off traffic and infrastructure such as trains, ports and access to airports for days on end. This would also affect other major cities and the frontier with France.

The yellow ribbon could turn red at some point if social confrontation scales. Let’s see how events roll-out, but I’m certainly not too optimistic seeing how things are and how they are foreseeably going to scale.
6  Local / Español (Spanish) / [Guía] Cómo reportar de manera efectiva on: August 23, 2018, 08:05:06 PM

Este post es una traducción del post original de Welsh (staff/moderador de las secciones en ingles de Announcements (Altcoins) y Marketplace (Altcoins)) titulado [Guide] Reporting effectively. El post original de @Welsh tiene por objeto dar unas pautas acerca de cómo podemos reportar el incumplimiento de las normas del foro, con el fin de facilitar la labor de los moderadores, además de contribuir a que todos tengamos acceso a un foro más limpio e informativo.

He determinado traducir su post original, con la finalidad de difundir dicha guía en nuestra sección local. En el proceso, me he tomado algunas mínimas libertades en la traducción, respetando al máximo no obstante el contenido original.

Algunos de los puntos indicados en la guía no son de aplicación para aquellos que se circunscriben a nuestro foro local, al versar sobre normas aplicadas a secciones muy específicas del foro en su parte inglesa. He determinado que es mejor dejar dichos apartados en la traducción, de manera que la guía tenga un contenido espejo y sea de aplicación universal en la globalidad del foro. En la traducción, hay algunos saltos en la numeración de los puntos. No es un error, sino que refleja los puntos tal y como están reflejados en el post original de @Welsh, el cual a su vez los ha alineado con los puntos de las normas generales del foro (en inglés).

Dado que la guía es originaria de @Welsh y no mía, entiendo que las posibles solicitudes de cambio que no sea un efecto de la traducción deberían ser dirigidas a @Welsh, a fin de no derivar una versión de la guía aquí que no sea una traducción estricta del post original. No obstante, en este hilo podemos comentar lo que consideréis, y las peticiones de cambio, de haberlas, puedo trasladarlas yo o vosotros mismos a @Welsh a través del hilo de su post original de la guía.

La guía contempla muchas casuísticas que pueden motivar la idoneidad de realizar un reporte, acorde a cada una de las normas que existen. Por mi parte, sólo resaltar que las que se rompen con mayor asiduidad según observo, y que además suelen terminar en baneo (frecuentemente permanente) son:

-   Plagio de un texto (copiar un texto y pegarlo sobre un post con/sin ligeras modificaciones, sin hacer referencia a la fuente de la información original nominalmente ni mediante un link al documento original).

-   Plagio de un post (copiar el contenido de otro post, pudiendo cambiarlo o no ligeramente, sin hacer referencia al post de proveniencia del texto).

-   Spam reiterado (redacción de posts con cero valor añadido, simplemente para cumplir con las cuotas de la campaña de firma y/o para aumentar la actividad).

-   Usar cuentas adicionales (Alts) cuando uno ha sido ya baneado en una de ellas (se banea a la persona, y por ende a todas sus cuentas). La única salvedad es para abrir en Meta una cuenta para ejercer el derecho de réplica al baneo (aunque las probabilidades de revertir la situación son caso cero – pero no nulas si están bien fundamentadas y se aportan evidencias abrumadoras).

-   Participar con varias cuentas (Alts) de manera que contravengan las normas generales (se puede disponer de más de una cuenta, pero con mucha atención a las reglas del foro al respecto).

Traducción del Post original de @Welsh:

En un esfuerzo para estimular la comunidad para que reporte más a menudo, y como consecuencia disponer de un foro más limpio, he decidido crear una “guía” sobre cómo reportar. Espero que también resulte útil para aquellos que ya hayan reportado, pero que buscan mejorar la manera de hacerlo.

Hay varios motivos por los cuales los miembros del foro puede que no reporten, incluyendo, pero no ciñéndose a:
a)   Falta de tiempo.
b)   Desconocer qué información incluir en el reporte.
c)   Estar demasiado preocupado por la tasa porcentual de efectividad de los reportes.
d)   Falta de conocimiento de las guías y reglas del foro.

Tengo la esperanza de que este hilo ayudará a aquellos a los cuales aplican los apartados "b" y "c", al proporcionar una explicación de cómo reportar con ejemplos/marcadores que puedan ser usados a modo de plantilla a la hora de reportar.
Es más, para aquellos a quienes si les importa su tasa de efectividad de reporte, espero que la información proporcionada redunde en que procedan a reportar, en lugar de pasar de hacerlo por si el reporte se marcase como erróneo. Está bien si los usuarios no disponen del tiempo suficiente para reportar. Este hilo no obstante está dirigido a aquellos a los que les gustaría ayudar, pero quizás desconozcan cómo hacerlo.

Voy a intentar alinear este posts a la estructura de lar reglas redactadas por mprep Unofficial list of (official) rules, guidelines, FAQ, de manera que ambas puedan ser referenciadas de manera cruzada al reportar sobre un aspecto en concreto. También he incluido ejemplos, numerados en relación a las explicaciones dadas en este hilo.

Tabla de contenido
¿Cómo debo reportar?
Herramientas adicionales
Consejos generales
Beneficios de reportar


Descargo de responsabilidades: Este post expresa meramente mi política/formato personal, y no está explícitamente refrendado por parte del Foro.

1. Cuando reportes posts que sean in sinsentido/tengan bajo valor, asegúrate de incluir el motivo por el cual piensas que es así.

2. Cuando reportes un post por tener una línea argumental fuera del tema tratado (off topic), incluye información acerca del tema central e indica porqué el post reportado se desvía de él.

3. Cuando reportes un post por trolear, es mejor especificar el motivo por el cual tú crees que es un troleo. Generalmente, un post que trolea también suele argumentar fuera del tema tratado en el hilo.

4. Spam referencial suele detectarse con facilidad. Normalmente, viene seguido por "r=" o con un código único al final del link. No obstante, si el usuario lo ha escondido detrás de una url de marcado como http://<ref link> , sería mejor indicar este hecho.

5. Las urls que te redirigen hacia una web para obtener ganancia publicitaria son fácilmente detectables y sencillas de verificar. Pídele al moderador que verifique el enlace al hacer tu reporte.

6. Cuando nos encontremos con malware o páginas web de phishing, es mejor ser lo más claro  posible en tu reporte, y con el detalle suficiente. Esto evitará que el moderador que trate tu reporte pueda potencialmente verse comprometido también. Al tratar con malware, siempre es mejor incluir en el reporte cualquier escaneo de un antivirus que lo marque positivamente como malware. Una buena página es, donde puedes escanear urls para detectar malware conocido. Si el malware es insertado a través de código de la página web que reportas, entonces indícalo. Una web the phishing puede generalmente indicarse como tal sin más.

7. Mendigar puede normalmente identificarse cuando alguien postea su crypyo-dirección, y pide algún tipo de “donación”. Concretamente, cualquier post que mendigue a fin de obtener una ganancia crypto/monetaria debería ser reportado, y si el post de referencia es largo, incluye una cita del mismo que indique este hecho.
8. Cuando reportes amenazas de muerte, etc., aconsejaría que citases (quote) la amenaza a fin de facilitar su localización.

9.Reportar un post indicando que no está en el idioma pertinente de la sección es suficiente. No obstante, si conoces el idioma del post, puedes indicar a dónde debería ser movido el post reportado. En caso contrario, según observo, estos posts son generalmente borrados.

10. “No es seguro para el trabajo” (NSFW) hace referencia a cualquier imagen que podría ser considerada inapropiada visualizar si estás en el trabajo, o en un enclave público. Si tiene tags en el título normalmente son válidas, y no precisan ser reportadas.

11. Reportar páginas webs ilegales puede ser complicado, debido a las diferencias abismales en la legislación de los diferentes países. No obstante, reporta cualquier cosa que veas que sea considerada ilegal con aplicación jurídica universal.

12. Cuando reportes a alguien por realizar post/hilos duplicados, incluye un link a los otros post a modo de referencia. Suele ser mejor reportar la versión más reciente y menos activa al hacer el reporte.

13. Cuando reportes a un usuario por bumpear un hilo más de una vez en un periodo de 24 horas, asegúrate de incluir cuantas más evidencias mejor. Incluye un link al otro bump, o incluye una versión archivada de la página.

14. Cualquier post que esté ubicado en la sección errónea, tenga relación con Altcoins o no, debe ser reportado. Si el post está en la sección equivocada, entonces especifica en qué sección debería ir. Por ejemplo, si un hilo en Bitcoin Discussion es relativo a Altcoins, entonces indica en qué sección está y a qué sección debería moverse. Un hilo en donde se haga una pregunta relativa al funcionamiento del foro, que estuviese posteado en la sección Bitcoin Discussion, debería ser reportado de manera parecida a: "Sección equivocada. No pertenece a Bitcoin Discussion. Mover a Bitcoin Forum > Other > Meta, dado que está formulando una pregunta relativa al foro".

15. Generalmente, la regla relativa a no hacer regalos en el foro (on forum giveaway rule) es quebrada en hilos de ann/campaña, al ofrecer un incentivo/bonificación para postear en sus hilos con el fin de subir el hilo de posición (bump), dándole más visibilidad, y generando una impresión falsa a aquellos que visitan el hilo. Al reportar, habría que reportar al hilo entero que da los incentivos, y no a los posts individuales que sucumben.
Si un hilo de una campaña de bounty ofrece un incentivo por postear en otro hilo, entonces seguramente es mejor reportar ambos hilos aportando la información pertinente. Normalmente hago referencia (quote) a dónde se está ofreciendo el incentivo. En ocasiones, el incentivo puede estar anunciándose fuera del propio foro, en sitios tales como Twitter, Discord, Facebook o su propia página. Si en tu reporte incluyes un link a una plataforma social o a su página web, incluye un aviso en tu reporte acerca del hecho de que estás referenciando un sito externo al Foro.

16. Cuando reportes a un usuario por tener más de un hilo activo en la sección de Currency Exchange, incluye un link a los demás hilos. Tiendo a reportar los hilos menos activos en este caso. El moderador ya decidirá qué hilos debe borrar.

17. Cuando reportes a usuarios que comercialicen con bienes ilegales, es mejor reportar si es ilegal mundialmente, dado que es muy complicado determinar la ubicación real de la persona implicada y determinar su legislación específica. A no ser que puedas probar que la persona reportada resida en un país en concreto, en cuyo caso puedes incluir este hecho en tu reporte.

18. No reportes a un usuario por el simple hecho de tener varias cuentas en el foro. No obstante, si identificas que están quebrantando las reglas generales del foro relativas a la disposición de múltiples cuentas, o que están saltándose un baneo al usuario, puedes proceder a reportar dichas cuentas si a su vez tienes la certeza y la evidencia de que las cuentas están conectadas.

21. Cuando reportes situaciones de bumps múltiples, es mejor reportar únicamente el bump más antiguo, y referenciar en el reporte de que hay más bumps en el hilo.

22. Los posts que se hubiesen creado con el único propósito de actuar a modo de anuncios en el hilo de otro usuario, deben ser reportados.

24. Cuando reportes a un hilo por incluir un anuncio, asegúrate de que el post sea realmente insustancial y que no resulte de utilidad. Esto puede ser bastante subjetivo, y por tanto deberá intentar incluir una explicación acerca del motivo por el cual consideras que carece de fundamento para que el anuncio figure en el cuerpo del post.

25. Cuando reportes a alguien por evadir la condición de estar baneado, incluye un link a su perfil de usuario, y el post que prueba que se trata efectivamente de la misma persona que ha sido previamente baneada.

26. Cuando reportes a alguien por no cumplir las reglas de las secciones locales, haz referencia a la regla local y explica el motivo por el cual consideras que el usuario ha roto la regla. Por ejemplo, si un usuario ha quebrantado una regla local al realizar preguntas en un hilo que indicaba claramente que no se podría discutir dentro del hilo de una subasta, y que sólo se permiten pujas.

27. Cuando reportes un post que contenga contenido que haya sido traducido automáticamente mediante alguna herramienta, deberías verificarlo usando las herramientas públicas que crees que se usaron, e incluir el link a ellas en el reporte a ser posible. Por ejemplo, si un posts ha sido traducido de manera automática usando Google Translate, debería reportarse e incluir un link a la traducción realizada por dicha herramienta.

29. Cuando reportes un mensaje personal que hayas recibido, intentaría no involucrar a los administradores a no ser que sea un asunto muy importante. Si se trata de que te han enviado spam, puedes dirigirte a los moderadores/moderadores globales. Los Administradores del foro tienen otras tareas entre mano tales como la recuperación de cuentas, por lo que si reportas a ellos agravarás su cola de trabajo cuando en cambio un moderador puede atender a tu problema.
30. Si un usuario ha listado bienes de mercado (Marketplace) en múltiples hilos, entonces incluye un link a dichos hilos.

31. Cuando reportes a un usuario que tenga un avatar que no sea seguro para el trabajo (NSFW), indica que es el avatar el que infringe las normas, y no el post del usuario. Alternativamente, puedes contactar a un moderador mediante un mensaje personal a fin de alertarles de este hecho (este enfoque es quizás mejor en este caso).

32.  Cuando reportes un usuario que haya realizado varios posts consecutivos (multi-posting), que no tengan por objeto reservar posts para el dueño del hilo o bumps, intenta especificar este hecho. Seguramente no es necesario incluir un link a los mensajes en cuestión, dado que probablemente son sencillos de identificar.

33. Cuando reportes un contenido constitutivo de plagio, asegúrate de que no se haya incluido por parte del usuario una referencia a la fuente original de la información antes de reportar. Si no lo ha hecho, incluye tú la fuente original de donde parte la acción de plagio en tu reporte. Hay varias herramientas de dominio público que pueden identificar un texto plagiado, así como puedes realizar búsquedas manuales usando un motor de búsqueda.

1. "A la luna" o "Esto es genial" son generalmente considerados posts de baja calidad. Puedes reportar casos como estos indicando algo del estilo de "Post constitutivo de Spam/bajo valor. No añade nada a la conversación".

2. Un post dentro de un hilo de minería sobre la moderación del foro está fuera del contexto del hilo. Se puede reportar como "Fuera de contexto, el hilo es sobre minería. No obstante, el post tiene relación con la moderación del foro."

3. "Troleando/fuera de contexto <indica la razón por la cual consideras que el post está troleando o fuera de contexto>".

4. "Spam referencial” debería ser normalmente suficiente. Si el usuario ha escondido la referencia en los tags de la url, entonces se puede indicar algo del estilo de “Spam referencial, escondido en un tag de la url para aparentar ser un enlace normal".

5. "Link que requiere visualizar un anuncio a fin de ver el contenido. Por favor verificad el enlace".

6. "Este enlace redirige a un malware. Aquí está el escaneo realizado por totalvirus  <url del escaneo de totalvirus>". Si es una web de phishing, se puede reportar como "Este enlace lleva a una página de phising".

7. "El usuario está mendigando. Ha incluido su dirección bitcoin/altcoin, y está pidiendo a los usuarios que le remitan crypto allí".

8. "Amenaza de muerte/amenaza de daño físico. <referenciar (quote) amenaza>".

9. "El post no está en español en una sección en español". Puedes añadir "Este post está en <idioma>, mover a <foro pertinente>".

10. "Imagen NSFW que carece de avisos al respecto", o "Imagen NSFW embebida en la página", o una combinación de ambas si aplica.

11. "Enlace a una página que es ilegal universalmente".

12. "Post/hilo duplicado: <enlace al duplicado>".

13. "Múltiples bumps dentro del plazo de 24 horas. <enlace a los bumps realizados en menos de 24 horas entre sí>".

14. "Sección equivocada, no pertenece a  <sección>, mover a <sección>".

15. "El post original ofrece un incentivo a los usuarios para postear en su hilo. <referencia (quote) del texto que ofrece el incentivo>". Si el incentivo se ofrece en un sitio externo al foro: "La gente detrás de este hilo ofrece un incentivo a los usuarios por postear en él. Lugar externo: <referencia(quote) al texto/lugar que ofrece el incentivo>".

16. "Este usuario ya tiene hilos activos dentro de la sección de Currency Exchange: <enlace a los hilos>".

17. "Comerciando con bienes ilegales, considerados ilegales en todo el mundo".

21. "Bumps múltiples en este hilo, los cuales no han sido eliminados".

22. "Este post sea ha creado con el único propósito de anunciar un servicio/producto dentro del hilo de otro usuario."

24. "Este post/hilo no garantiza la colocación de un anuncio, dado que no tiene suficiente entidad. <especifica cualquier razón adicional> ".

25. "Este usuario está saltándose el baneo: <enlace al perfil>. Esta es la conexión entre las cuentas del usuario: <enlace a la conexión>".

26. "El usuario ha roto una regla local. <referencia(quote) la regla local>".

27. "Este post está mal traducido, y carece de sentido. Sospecho que se ha generado a modo de traducción automática. Véase aquí una traducción idéntica ".

30. "El usuario ha posteado bienes de mercado (Marketplace) de manera similar en otros hilos: <enlace a los hilos>".

31. "Estoy reportando a este usuario por usar un avatar que es NSFW, no el contenido de este post".

32. "El usuario ha posteado multiples posts seguidos en un mismo hilo, que no son bumps. <link opcional a los múltiples posts seguidos>".

33. "Plagio sin proporcionar una fuente: <enlace a la fuente/post original>".

¿Cómo debo reportar?
Cada hilo/post tiene un enlace a pie a la derecha llamado "Report to moderator". Este enlace se puede clickar, y te llevará a una página que contiene un campo de texto sobre el cual podrás escribir tu reporte. Puedes seguir los ejemplos arriba citados, y añadir cualquier otra información que ayude a clarificar el motivo por el cual estás reportando al hilo/post. El enlace es tal como se muestra en la siguiente imagen:

Herramientas adicionales

La página de Patrol (patrulla) muestra todos los posts recientes de los usuarios con el rango Newbie o Brand New. Esta página resulta bastante útil para localizar hilos/posts que infringen las normas, debido a que muchos de los nuevos miembros del foro desconocen las reglasdel mismo. También ha demostrado ser útil para detectar cuentas de bots.

Report History
Únicamente los usuarios que hayan reportado un cierto número de veces tienen acceso a esta página.
Esta es probablemente una de las características más útiles relacionadas con los reportes. Básicamente, te muestra un historial de tus propios reportes, con un indicativo de si han sido marcados como correctos, erróneos, o están pendientes de ser gestionados.
Esta página se puede usar para ir valorado tus hábitos a la hora de reportar. Usa esta información para mejorar la calidad de tus reportes.
Esta herramienta puede ser accedida a través de la página de "report to moderator" (reporta al moderador). El botón que te da acceso a esta página tiene el siguiente aspecto:

Esto te llevará a una página parecida a ésta:

Esto es la hora en la cual se realizó el reporte.

Este es el tema que ha sido reportado, o el post concreto reportado. Al clickar en este enlace, te llevará al post reportado (a no ser que haya sido borrado).

Este es el usuario que ha sido reportado. En la imagen, los nombre de los usuario han sido difuminados deliberadamente por cuestiones de privacidad. No obstante, los nombres de usuario serán mostrados en tu historial de reporte.

Este es el estado del reporte. Si el reporte ha sido ya tratado, mostrará si el resultado ha sido correcto o incorrecto. Por ejemplo, un reporte correcto será mostrado como "Good", posts erróneos como "Bad",  y los reportes aún no gestionados como "unhandled".

El Modlog es un log relativo a los posts borrados, usuarios baneados, e hilos que han sido eliminados. Se puede utilizar para visualizar cómo se están gestionando estos usuarios, y consultar información relativa a un usuario determinado que estás reportando. En ocasiones, puedes encontrarte que, al consultar el Modlog, el usuario ha tenido varios posts borrados recientemente, por lo que quizás quieras incorporar esta información a tu reporte para fortalecerlo.
Además, puedes consultar el Modlog periódicamente para darte cuenta de cuánto trabajo están haciendo los moderadores en la práctica (mucho).

El Seclog es un log de usuarios que se han “despertado” recientemente (con actividad en el foro) tras un periodo largo de tiempo sin actividad, o bien que han cambiado sus credenciales de acceso recientemente (correo electrónico/contraseña). Esto se puede utilizar para añadir más argumentos a tus reportes. Por ejemplo, si estás reportando una cuenta por spam, puede que quieras consultar el Seclog si tienes la sospecha de que la cuenta del usuario reportado ha sido comprometida, al detectar por ejemplo un cambio en el estilo de narración en sus posts. Puedes incluir la referencia (quote) de este log, y podría dar pie y facilidad para que los moderadores estudien el caso con más argumentos.

  Plagiarism checker
Hay muchos tipos de herramientas que te permiten comprobar si un texto es un plagio, pero encuentro que ésta me funciona muy bien. Por supuesto, puedes hacer búsquedas manuales utilizando un motor de búsqueda. No obstante, esta herramienta permite realizar la labor de una manera más rápida y sencilla.

Consejos generales

Cuando reportes usuarios que estén haciendo spamming/bumping pagado de un hilo determinado, verifica el OP, las redes sociales asociadas, y su propia página web, a fin de verificar si están ofreciendo un incentivo para postear en el hilo, dado que esta suele ser la causa del spam. Si es así, no necesitas reportar cada post constitutivo de spam individualmente. Puedes reportar el hilo entero siguiendo la explicación y el ejemplo del número 15.

Algunos de los ejemplos indicados aquí puede que tengan mayor profundidad de la requerida para la mayoría de los posts que se reportan, y una explicación a fondo no siempre es requerida para los reports más sencillos. No obstante, cuanto más clara sea tu explicación mejor. Esto no quiere decir que un reporte corto y conciso no sea en ocasiones mejor. Generalmente, solamente incluyo explicaciones largas y evidencias en los casos más complejos. Aun así, he tenido algunos reportes marcados como incorrectos, debido a no haber elaborado la explicación con suficiente detalle a la primera. Tras posteriormente haber procedido a indicar los motivos con mayor detalle, algunos de estos reportes acabaron marcados como correctos.
Recuerda, sólo por el mero hecho de haber visto una frase repetida múltiples veces, no quiere decir que el moderador lo haya hecho. Repórtalo si detectas casos como éste.

Cuando uses la página de Patrol, utilizar la búsqueda de tu navegador (Control + F) puede resultar útil para localizar hilos/posts que infringen las normas. Por ejemplo, puedes buscar frases comunes que son copiadas y pegadas, o quizás buscar "r=", lo cual es un identificador habitual para localizar spam referencial.

Casi siempre es mejor usar el enlace de "report to moderator" (informar al moderador) que postear tu denuncia en un hilo públicamente. Hay múltiples razones por lo cual es mejor, pero en general redunda en tener menos spam dentro de la sección Meta, es más sencillo para los moderadores al añadirse los reportes directamente en su cola de trabajo, y adicionalmente protege la privacidad de aquellos reportados.
No todos los posts que infringen las normas deben ser gestionados con dureza. Hay ciertas casuísticas tales como el plagio y el spam referencial que son algo perores que los demás. No obstante, si puedes proteger la privacidad de un usuario, por favor hazlo reportando a través del link “report to moderator”. En ocasiones, abrir un hilo en Meta para reportar múltiples usuarios podría ser beneficioso. Esto suele ser cuando se reporta una gran cantidad de usuarios, y particularmente en casos complejos. Como norma general, si puedes usar el link de “Report to Moderator” hazlo, en lugar de abrir un nuevo hilo.

En ocasiones, tus reportes se quedarán en un estado de no gestionados, al haber sido apartados para que sean gestionados por parte de un miembro del staff de mayor rango. Por ejemplo, un moderador dedicado de una sección determinada podría dejar un caso para que lo gestione un moderador global/administrador, al tener que visualizarse información a la cual no tiene acceso el moderador local.
En otras ocasiones, un reporte puede permanecer como no gestionado al no ser marcado como correcto o incorrecto por parte del miembro del staff. Esto puede deberse a que no se podía determinar con certeza si el reporte era o no correcto. Por ejemplo, puede que reportes un post como spam, y el moderador estar de acuerdo que es esencialmente spam. No obstante, podría haber algún matiz que justificase la existencia de ese post, y se determinase no eliminarlo. No te preocupes demasiado acerca de tus reportes no gestionados, dado que no computan en tus tasas porcentuales de posts marcados como correctos o incorrectos.

Beneficios de reportar

1. Hace que el foro sea más limpio y legible para todos.

2. Puede ayudar a mover hilos a la sección más adecuada, y como resultado redundar en una mejor categorización del foro.

3. Ayuda a los moderadores, al permitirles actuar sobre reportes en lugar de tener que estar activamente buscando hilos/posts que infringe las normas.

-   Post original: [Guide] Reporting effectively.
-   Normas del Foro en inglés: Unofficial list of (official) rules, guidelines, FAQ.
-   Normas del Foro en castellano: Lista no oficial de reglas (sí oficiales) del foro. Guías. FAQ.

Nota Importante:
Las normas redactadas en castellano no están del todo al día respecto de las mismas en inglés, dado que la recopilación de normas en inglés ha ido aumentando con el paso del tiempo, y no se han ido incluyendo en el documento en español por lo que observo. Esto no es un inconveniente solamente presente en nuestro foro local, sino que lo he visto en las traducciones de las normas en otros foros locales.
Entiendo que esta discrepancia no exime del cumplimiento de todas las reglas establecidas en el post original en inglés que contiene las normas, dado que es ése el más actualizado al ser la base de derivación de las traducciones locales.

7  Other / Meta / Analysis - Merited on multiple Subsections and the Correlation Matrix on: August 21, 2018, 10:44:39 AM
1.   Introduction.

A couple of days ago, there was a discussion going on related to whether people are being awarded sMerit solely on a specific section/topic, and how that seems unfair. While many of us would like to be Satoshi alike, the fact is that sMerit is meant to be awarded to any post we find contribute, be it on the topic it may be. It’s up to the awarder’s criteria.
Every individual has his own skillset (some strong, some weak at best), and we do not all converge on them, less of all on being highly knowledgeable on Bitcoin. In a company that produces shoes, only a subset of the employees will have any idea as to how to design them, but everyone knows how to wear them. The same applies here in terms of Bitcoin knowledge, and although it is improvable for all, only a specific set of people will really master it enough to be able to contribute with a depth charge of knowledge.

In fact, as can be seen on the Merit Dashboard (go to the Tab labelled “Section Subsection”), the Bitcoin aggregate section receives only around 9% of all the sMerit that has been awarded). There are multiple reasons behind this fact, but that is not the real objective of this post.

What the discussion got me to wonder is the following:

a)   How many people receive sMerit on how many forum subsection (i.e. how many are capable of being merited on more than one subsection, and who excels on multiple subsections).

b)   For a given forum subsection where people are merited, what other subsections correlate through those same people (a kind of correlation matrix).

2.   Forum members Merited on Multiple subsections.

The idea here is to see a summary of the number of subsections forum members (all ranks considered) have been merited on. By subsection I’m considering the main level of subsections I’ve used on previous occasions (Altcoin Discussion, Announcements (Altcoins), Marketplace (Altcoins), Mining (Altcoins), Speculation (Altcoins), Bitcoin Discussion, Bitcoin Technical Support, Development & Technical Discussion, Mining, Project Development, Deleted, Economics, Marketplace, Trading Discussion, Arabic, Chinese, Croatian, Dutch, French, German, Greek, Indian, Indonesian, Italian, Japanese, Korean, Other Languages, Philippines, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, Russian, Skandinavisk, Spanish, Turkish, Archival, Beginners & Help, Meta, Off-topic, Politics & Society, Serious discussion). There are 41 subsections, 22 of which are local languages.

I’ve first created the distribution for all merited users, and then restricted it to those that have received >= 10 sMerits for comparison reasons.
Posts that have been deleted cannot count in any section, but I’ve also included a count of those that have received sMerit exclusively on deleted posts, which is an area of interest on its own.

Things that standout:

a)   27 people have been merited on 10 or more subsections. That is a very difficult achievement, which implies a good knowledge in multiple areas as well as communication skills. This feat is in the hands of the following:
user_id   Name                          nSubSections
35        theymos                       14
1059082   hugeblack                     14
234771    suchmoon                      13
1554927   bitmover                      13
375981    OmegaStarScream               13
1564795   Heisenberg_Hunter             12
257071    NeuroticFish                  12
459836    LoyceV                        12
155345    gentlemand                    12
194811    vit05                         12
370611    bill gator                    12
1237156   nc50lc                        11
334783    seoincorporation              11
507856    LeGaulois                     11
358020    Quickseller                   11
1112531   Steamtyme                     11
698159    Jet Cash                      11
1069508   aleksej996                    11
143168    TheQuin                       11
1339716   coinlocket$                   10
557989    BTCforJoe                     10
1291828   iasenko                       10
557798    TryNinja                      10
1634314   shahzadafzal                  10
1432468   mdayonliner                   10
101872    Lauda                         10
1738107   Seetheummerallyeah            10

The list with the actual subsections where the above have been merited can be found here: (first tab). Each person has his own mix of subsections that contribute to his total received sMerit with different weight. I’ve included the column PMerit (percentage of Merit) to show this.  
It’s interesting to note that 13 out of the 27 people listed have been merited on a local board. Local boards are rather endogenous when it comes to merit as well see further down.

Edit: Just created a third Tab on the spreadsheet with the Rank and number of merited subsections for all merited users.

b)   The vast majority (74%) of people have only been awarded sMerit in one subsection, and 12,85% have in two subsections. The former amount is logical, due to the large amount of people that have been awarded a single merit.

c)   For those awarded >= 10 sMerits, 55,90% have been on a single subsection, and 20,61% on two.

d)   The total exclusively deleted is 985 people (5,26% of those merited), having 124 of those  received >= 10 sMerits. This set of users have gained every single sMerit on what are now deleted posts!

I guess a list in mandatory here: (second tab)

3.   Subsection correlation matrix.

This has been a toughie. What I’ve done here is, for each subsection, determine the number of forum members that have been awarded sMerit for posts in the subsection. Then, I’ve analysed for each of them, in what other forum subsections they’ve also been merited in.
The idea behind is to see the correlation of sMerit between subsections, based on where the people are being merited. This should tell us the subsection affinity of the merited users. The less exclusive (see later on) a merited subsection is, the more we can see correlations to other subsections on the forum.

Since the number of subsections is large, I have grouped all the Local sections into one, thus simplifying by nearly half the matrix, and on the premise that correlation between subsections is very small. I’ve also brought “Deleted” to the table as a virtual subsection due to its weight.

The result is the following table:

I’ve highlighted the top three percentages for each row (excluding the deleted column). I’ve also got the absolute value table, but the one displayed in percentages is better suited here.

Example of interpretation:

Altcoin Discussion has 2.158 merited people (11,52% of all merited profiles), 944 of which are exclusively merited just in this subsection and no other (43,74% of the 2.158 people).
Out of those merited here, 15,62% have also been merited on Bitcoin Discussion, 15,34% on a Local Board, and 13,44% in the Economics subsection. Only 0,32% have been merited in the Bitcoin Mining subsection. A fact aside is that 22,34% of these people have also been merited on a post that has now been deleted.

Table is best read by rows.

Things that are interesting:

a)   Column nMeritedUsers indicates how many distinct users have been merited in that subsection (not the total sMerit they received), and % Distinct Users the percentage of all merited users.  
It’s interested to see that 38,05% of merited users are merited on local boards, albeit with low sMerit values (seen on previous analysis). On the other end of the scale, Bitcoin Technical Support has only 0,86% of all merited users merited there (archival is lower, but it’s not really a proper subsection).

b)   Column nExclusiveUsers (or deleted) indicates how many of those users have received their sMerit solely on a given Subsection. If the user has also got deleted posts, I do not count these here as a separate subsection, and thus consider that the sMerits are awarded exclusively to a single exclusive subsection.
Column %Subsection specifies the percentage of exclusive users in relation to all the merited users in the subsection.
80,89% of Local merited users are merited exclusively on local boards. Ann Altcoin is also a very closed circle (71,17%) and so are the mining subsections (68,90% mining altcoins and 63,86% mining in the Bitcoin section). On the other hand, subsections belonging to the Other section are less exclusive.

c)   16,36% of merited people have at least been merited on one post that has later been deleted. Out of those, nearly a third has been merited exclusively for what are now deleted posts, as seen before.

d)   Correlations that stand-out (summarized by Section):

-   Altcoin subsections have a strong correlation to local boards, as well as to the other Alternate Cryptocurrencies subsections.

-   Bitcoin subsections correlate more to Marketplace, Bitcoin Discussion and Meta.

-   Deleted virtual subsection correlates most to Local boards as well as Bitcoin and Altcoin discussions.

-   Economics section correlates best to Bitcoin Discussion, Marketplace, Trading and Meta.

-   Local Sections correlate more to Altcoin and Meta (although not much, since they are rather endogenic).

-   Other section components correlate best to Meta, Bitcoin Discussion, and Marketplace.
8  Other / Meta / Analysis – Posts per month average for Merited members on: August 09, 2018, 11:23:13 AM
1.   Introduction

I wanted to see posting habits of forum members (volume wise) in general. In order to do so, we either need the complete posting history (no way I’m going to scrape that), or a couple of database snapshots to compare. The information that I keep track of is all related to members that have at least been awarded 1 sMerit, so that is the base for the following study.

What I’ve done is play around with 3 merited user profile snapshot databases:
-   06/08/2018 (normally it should have been 03/08/2018, but I was away for a few days).
-   06/07/2018
-   08/06/2018
Now using these three snapshots, we can derive some interesting information concerning posting volumes, associated ranks and merit.

On this occasion, the information is presented in tabular mode, since graphics seem more difficult to follow and I have discarded them in favour of tables.

2.   Posting Segment distribution

What I’ve initially done is compare the database snapshots on merited user profiles for 06/08/2018 and 06/07/2018. I wanted to see how much people post on average on a daily basis for the month between the two snapshot dates. After studying the information, I derived the following segments:

01. Very Heavy:      >= 5 posts per day during the last month.
02. Heavy:            >= 3 and <5 posts per day during the last month.
03. Mid:                >= 1 and <3 posts per day during the last month.
04. Low:              >0 and <1 posts per day during the last month.
05. Zero:              0 posts   per day during the last month.
06. Negative:       <0 posts per day during the last month (deleted greater than created).
07. New to Merit:   They appear on the 06/08/2018 snapshot, but not on 06/07/2018 snapshot (therefore, cannot derive incremental posts).

We could argue on the segment definitions, buy I find them adequate after studying the data.The distribution of merited users according to this distribution is as follows:

What’s interesting to see is that there are 198 heavy users making >= 5 posts per day on average (more on that later).
In order to rank-up, on the activity side, we should be creating an average of 1 post per day. Nevertheless, only 20,74% of merited users do that (segments 01, 02 and 03). What’s more, 28,06% have not posted during the last month (holiday break?), and a surprisingly high 17,77% have a decrement their post count during the month. That is quite a lot, even more so considering that we’re talking about merited users.

I guess we wanted to see the list of posters in the "very heavy" user segment, so here it goes (NewPost -> number of posts in a month; NewMerit-> in 1 month):
user_id   name                     rank                NewPost   merit     NewMerit  url
1176794   ChiNgadOr                Full Member         1130      119       0;u=1176794
1068464   Xal0lex                  Staff               954       225       31;u=1068464
1719931   Custterol                Jr. Member          725       2         0;u=1719931
1773383   tumis                    Jr. Member          550       1         0;u=1773383
1302577   Ardipwnz                 Member              546       13        0;u=1302577
1016855   JollyGood                Sr. Member          541       254       1;u=1016855
846936    sabotag3x                Hero Member         537       738       36;u=846936
808310    batang_bitcoin           Hero Member         531       522       0;u=808310
105963    cybergamp                Member              447       10        0;u=105963
1432468   mdayonliner              Full Member         446       239       56;u=1432468
2078      dorianm421               Member              427       10        0;u=2078
105347    piter66                  Member              418       16        0;u=105347
1394080   sergeykravcov177         Member              417       10        0;u=1394080
1616894   perova93                 Member              410       10        4;u=1616894
106029    cdousley                 Member              409       10        0;u=106029
245285    sunce33                  Hero Member         406       505       0;u=245285
1083073   ismart1                  Full Member         391       115       0;u=1083073
1268261   o.ogurlu                 Member              382       12        0;u=1268261
1512010   zelenkova                Member              378       10        0;u=1512010
1838442   Tapai manis              Jr. Member          372       1         0;u=1838442
2036758   CryptAssist              Jr. Member          366       3         0;u=2036758
64507     philipma1957             Legendary           360       1276      23;u=64507
143168    TheQuin                  Hero Member         358       650       24;u=143168
956126    KingScorpio              Sr. Member          354       270       5;u=956126
1265536   dimon_btc11              Member              338       11        0;u=1265536
1112165   Sveta74189               Full Member         330       106       2;u=1112165
459836    LoyceV                   Legendary           329       1651      95;u=459836
1178986   rahul10948               Full Member         326       114       0;u=1178986
625576    hendrakhow               Member              326       11        0;u=625576
819237    gabmen                   Hero Member         319       523       0;u=819237
1533028   denis-z12                Member              308       97        8;u=1533028
1215537   Arrrvin                  Member              304       40        3;u=1215537
1000199   krogothmanhattan         Sr. Member          301       694       35;u=1000199
1412697   vanilaice                Jr. Member          300       2         0;u=1412697
114706    mymenace                 Legendary           297       1057      17;u=114706
1257516   Rosewater Foundation     Full Member         296       194       37;u=1257516
1659648   First77                  Member              289       31        2;u=1659648
1239025   zorchy                   Member              287       10        0;u=1239025
1297193   johnywalkerrr            Member              286       11        0;u=1297193
1202061   chimk                    Full Member         284       174       19;u=1202061
2161892   juraangel                Jr. Member          283       1         0;u=2161892
1464627   cryptohipo               Jr. Member          280       1         0;u=1464627
883221    termion                  Hero Member         279       531       0;u=883221
698159    Jet Cash                 Legendary           276       1091      102;u=698159
1138114   SalmanMJ9                Member              270       12        0;u=1138114
382413    xandry                   Staff               270       1023      1;u=382413
155345    gentlemand               Legendary           267       1198      22;u=155345
511692    BitcoinTurk              Full Member         267       205       8;u=511692
1411023   virendarnagpal           Jr. Member          266       4         2;u=1411023
181806    HairyMaclairy            Hero Member         266       549       54;u=181806
994859    CryptoBry                Sr. Member          266       272       1;u=994859
1333278   mycrypto93               Jr. Member          263       3         0;u=1333278
395583        Sr. Member          262       251       0;u=395583
1417140   sashulya7979             Member              261       10        0;u=1417140
1077525   arun9900                 Full Member         259       101       0;u=1077525
557798    TryNinja                 Hero Member         258       707       35;u=557798
1179426   hasyurt                  Full Member         257       111       3;u=1179426
1067333   micgoossens              Sr. Member          256       520       117;u=1067333
674078    Gothorum                 Sr. Member          256       383       28;u=674078
507856    LeGaulois                Copper Member       255       793       14;u=507856
1339716   coinlocket$              Sr. Member          254       292       19;u=1339716
252510    JayJuanGee               Legendary           250       1303      24;u=252510
1779611   Andy Leto                Member              249       10        0;u=1779611
1118969   JanEmil                  Member              249       27        4;u=1118969
543626    jackg                    Copper Member       245       1082      3;u=543626
1916934   Alfamouse                Member              243       10        0;u=1916934
2157460   iamsediii                Member              241       10        2;u=2157460
554165    South Park               Hero Member         241       502       0;u=554165
934247    Ace44                    Member              240       11        0;u=934247
81995     peloso                   Legendary           236       1045      0;u=81995
225497    kinki                    Jr. Member          236       6         0;u=225497
1766457   easybtcearn2017          Jr. Member          235       1         0;u=1766457
487418    The Pharmacist           Legendary           235       1497      78;u=487418
1035253   nika555                  Full Member         234       102       0;u=1035253
870828    upline                   Sr. Member          233       286       1;u=870828
1188361   cryptossi                Full Member         232       106       0;u=1188361
1568958   shaman11                 Member              230       16        0;u=1568958
1648809   _X_X_X_                  Member              229       26        4;u=1648809
308793    1Referee                 Legendary           228       1155      27;u=308793
1422459   Liternyy                 Member              228       11        0;u=1422459
1440473 Jr. Member          227       1         0;u=1440473
358787    Dudeperfect              Hero Member         227       527       0;u=358787
1681931   phabulu                  Member              227       16        1;u=1681931
1253176   Lisa110386               Member              224       12        0;u=1253176
1982152   lovesmayfamilis          Jr. Member          223       2         1;u=1982152
1352827   SB90                     Member              222       12        0;u=1352827
1760729   neymarjunior50           Jr. Member          220       1         0;u=1760729
1634977   puzzling_rvat            Jr. Member          220       1         0;u=1634977
1117066   Smartprofit              Full Member         219       161       7;u=1117066
1840000   TranslateIntoDutch       Member              219       60        26;u=1840000
761729    gembitz                  Sr. Member          219       270       2;u=761729
1837238   crypmike                 Member              218       49        30;u=1837238
1787849   nfransisca               Jr. Member          218       1         0;u=1787849
479624    Last of the V8s          Hero Member         218       1164      74;u=479624
1630472   Cobrak777                Jr. Member          217       4         0;u=1630472
1061974   phantam                  Full Member         216       106       0;u=1061974
970060    sachdientugoogle         Full Member         216       101       0;u=970060
1606609   Furgon Chino             Member              215       12        9;u=1606609
368438    ccsang                   Full Member         214       103       0;u=368438
1182581   faulerwilli              Full Member         213       109       0;u=1182581
901859    buwaytress               Hero Member         211       636       22;u=901859
379147    pooya87                  Legendary           210       1111      12;u=379147
374061    Kakmakr                  Legendary           209       1106      29;u=374061
1837191   bitnissa                 Jr. Member          209       2         0;u=1837191
1142091   QUASA                    Member              209       20        10;u=1142091
806776    digaran                  Hero Member         209       605       21;u=806776
826292    carlisle1                Hero Member         207       502       0;u=826292
234771    suchmoon                 Legendary           207       1460      71;u=234771
886521    mjglqw                   Sr. Member          206       365       27;u=886521
2022002   minefarmbuy              Member              204       19        11;u=2022002
403303    Pursuer                  Legendary           203       1047      4;u=403303
408246    YuTü               Sr. Member          202       331       10;u=408246
2046647   sunnybeacher             Jr. Member          202       4         0;u=2046647
323499    oni4an                   Sr. Member          201       253       0;u=323499
894070             Sr. Member          201       288       0;u=894070
783422    Slow death               Hero Member         201       586       12;u=783422
960511    nullCoiner               Sr. Member          200       351       29;u=960511
326880    dwminer1                 Hero Member         198       508       0;u=326880
198573    Hueristic                Legendary           197       1042      5;u=198573
1058769   billy.ryoko              Full Member         196       103       0;u=1058769
204821    Buchi-88                 Legendary           195       1028      3;u=204821
1094102   GREENch                  Full Member         195       102       0;u=1094102
1062787   JuliaJi                  Full Member         195       103       0;u=1062787
1045881   FourByfour               Member              194       11        0;u=1045881
1296859   jamzzz123                Member              194       16        0;u=1296859
1335258   NEERAJ ANAND             Member              193       12        0;u=1335258
1084486   sportclub2010            Full Member         192       108       0;u=1084486
1106178   wiredideas               Full Member         192       101       0;u=1106178
1180319   tor676                   Member              191       42        1;u=1180319
1186194   Cryptochel               Full Member         191       106       0;u=1186194
257004    big_daddy                Full Member         190       146       5;u=257004
1980983   Coolcryptovator          Copper Member       190       123       42;u=1980983
62358     Gyrsur                   Legendary           190       1028      9;u=62358
1188543   o_e_l_e_o                Sr. Member          189       391       71;u=1188543
1117299   mpufatzis                Full Member         188       118       0;u=1117299
930744    birbok                   Full Member         188       103       0;u=930744
1274683   iSparta                  Member              187       10        0;u=1274683
1059082   hugeblack                Sr. Member          186       316       2;u=1059082
939701    opium                    Sr. Member          185       265       0;u=939701
359800    Darkoth89                Hero Member         183       505       0;u=359800
149737    BADecker                 Legendary           182       1037      1;u=149737
164749    stompix                  Hero Member         180       638       18;u=164749
3028      Anon136                  Legendary           180       1154      58;u=3028
533006    richardsNY               Legendary           180       1084      7;u=533006
764495    DoublerHunter            Hero Member         180       520       0;u=764495
397737    hilariousetc             Hero Member         179       959       132;u=397737
1731782   Kakady13                 Member              179       10        0;u=1731782
1170376   Andrew_G                 Full Member         179       102       0;u=1170376
325061    pugman                   Legendary           177       1224      34;u=325061
393159    darkangel11              Legendary           177       1047      5;u=393159
803757    BrewMaster               Hero Member         177       617       9;u=803757
947291    Polar91                  Sr. Member          176       345       26;u=947291
1143728   Spazzer                  Member              176       88        24;u=1143728
1082600   kenzawak                 Full Member         175       100       18;u=1082600
901383    audaciousbeing           Hero Member         174       550       3;u=901383
963640    bct_ail                  Sr. Member          173       298       6;u=963640
1147073   Mazda17                  Full Member         173       101       0;u=1147073
1680941   PnP                      Jr. Member          172       3         0;u=1680941
1837296   oerdogan                 Member              172       21        19;u=1837296
1328868   nadosuge                 Member              172       23        1;u=1328868
1137368   nesh1                    Full Member         171       110       0;u=1137368
1201921   firman33                 Member              170       11        0;u=1201921
1555320   Hilde X                  Member              170       38        7;u=1555320
1894120   madnessteat              Member              169       22        1;u=1894120
379487    LFC_Bitcoin              Copper Member       168       1112      15;u=379487
1538848   Zedxxx                   Member              168       20        0;u=1538848
802442    boyptc                   Hero Member         168       511       2;u=802442
1339284   NightLady                Member              168       11        0;u=1339284
554       Elwar                    Legendary           168       1218      46;u=554
867786    HCP                      Hero Member         167       902       65;u=867786
137185    jeremypwr                Legendary           167       1118      92;u=137185
1190616   ANDREW 555               Jr. Member          166       7         2;u=1190616
837148    ethereumhunter           Hero Member         166       501       0;u=837148
1290176   v_i_p                    Member              165       18        2;u=1290176
350580    irfan_pak10              Copper Member       164       1060      0;u=350580
1153568   voinnov111               Full Member         164       102       0;u=1153568
1214555   26FISCH_RU               Member              163       10        0;u=1214555
1370336   lequocvuongpro           Jr. Member          162       1         0;u=1370336
579628    bob123                   Sr. Member          162       492       42;u=579628
931468    recusant2000             Jr. Member          162       2         1;u=931468
1297383   DIXItip4ik               Member              160       29        0;u=1297383
874254    game-protect             Hero Member         160       503       0;u=874254
1193825   mikolsoon                Member              160       12        0;u=1193825
1130307   slackovic                Full Member         160       201       10;u=1130307
1386572   jamesashmore1964         Jr. Member          159       1         0;u=1386572
1333897   Dorbaraco                Member              159       10        0;u=1333897
779106    Barcode_                 Staff               159       540       18;u=779106
84521     Welsh                    Staff               159       1318      22;u=84521
1548994   vipganyan                Copper Member       158       110       0;u=1548994
355683    BluRPie                  Hero Member         158       504       0;u=355683
1755885   DispatchLabs             Jr. Member          158       3         2;u=1755885
334783    seoincorporation         Legendary           157       1131      55;u=334783
833246    BitPotus                 Hero Member         157       527       6;u=833246
51478     mezzomix                 Legendary           157       1075      9;u=51478
2765      morrisby25               Member              156       10        0;u=2765
1382847   HMember                  Member              156       10        0;u=1382847
1222973   cryptobali               Member              155       11        0;u=1222973
1302804   balonka01                Member              155       12        0;u=1302804

To my amazement, the top poster on the list,ChiNgadOr, is from my local board (although he posts in sections I barely visit there such as Ann threads). Second on the lists is Xal0lex, a staff member on the Russian board who does some heavy work cleaning up his local thread. The third person on the list is an Ann thread owner, Custterol.
I recognize some forum members on the list immediately : mdayonliner, TheQuin, LoyceV, krogothmanhattan, Jet Cash, xandry, TryNinja, Gothorum, LeGaulois, coinlocket$, JayJuanGee, The Pharmacist, digaran, suchmoon, o_e_l_e_o, hugeblack, stompix, hilariousetc, pugman, LFC_Bitcoin, Welsh, and seoincorporation. These are known to me mostly due to their posts, and probably also for posting often and therefore being visually acknowledgeable (a bit like a personal brand I’d say).

I though seeing some (top 10 due to post limit restrictions I believe) of the profiles with most deleted posts in the last month could be interesting too. Many of them are bounty/ann related deletions by the looks of where the remaining posts are located. Others are reset accounts (sold or such):
user_id   name                     rank                posts     PostLoss  merit     NewMerit  url
1071531   serneo                   Full Member         664       -1647     101       0;u=1071531
1014315   Mungurul                 Sr. Member          640       -595      254       0;u=1014315
1310923   set08air                 Newbie              17        -437      1         0;u=1310923
1007399   SSowellSVT               Full Member         168       -422      101       0;u=1007399
1212376   dbijoy                   Jr. Member          284       -305      1         0;u=1212376
2189580   anunymint                Brand new           0         -271      127       52;u=2189580
1495332   Pranimbo                 Jr. Member          966       -259      3         0;u=1495332
1411175   cryptographer954         Member              62        -236      10        0;u=1411175
1655669   CoinRanker               Jr. Member          90        -227      2         0;u=1655669

3.   Posting Segment distribution by Rank

If we breakdown the Posting Segment distribution by Rank, we get the following table:

Nothing too remarkable on this breakdown, since distribution by rank also depends on how many members there are per rank, but I’ve highlighted in yellow how the negative post count concentrates on the lower merited ranks as expected.

4.   Posting Segment distribution – 2 consecutive months

The following table shows us how many forum members actually maintain their posting segment for 2 consecutive months, and/or the segment movements that occur. I’ve also added here the total merit gained by each segment combination over the two month period, and averaged to keep it simple but comparable.

Roughly half of the forum members maintain their posting segment for two months in a row, with the exception of the "01. Very Heavy" segment which keeps it up for 73,74% of its forum members, and surprisingly 39,51% of the "06. Negative” segment do too.

The average Merit per segment combination is higher the more posts that are made. This is a chilly conclusion and with a lack of context would be interpreted the wrong way. The base of the analysis is that of users with at least 1 sMerit. The best posters are therefore included here and therefore, it is logical to see more merit given to heavy posters since they have more decent posts that postulate to being merited. This only works in this context, and should not be extended to posting in general on the forum for all users (merited and unmerited).

By the way, I’m a "03. Mid" looking over my last month’s postings, but was "02. Heavy’" the previous month.
9  Other / Archival / Void - Please Delete on: August 09, 2018, 11:21:53 AM
Please delete thread. Post partial when published.
10  Other / Meta / sMerit Senders & Receivers – Weight of top 100 and 200 weekly contributors on: August 07, 2018, 11:14:52 AM
1. Introduction:
The initial Merit spirit I believe is that of a decentralized system, where many members are responsible for meriting other user’s posts. I started to get the feeling that Merit was getting more concentrated over time, in terms of who is awarding it, so I went on to see just how concentrated it was, and if the ratios steepened as time goes by (as it turns out,  they do).

2. General summary:
Total sMerit:   201.035 sMerits have been awarded in total.
Total Txs:         90.737 distinct transactions.
From:              15.980 members have awarded at least 1 sMerit.
To:                  18.292 members have received at least 1 sMerit.

That gives us the broad picture of how many forum members are in the Merit game of awarding or receiving, not too large a scope in relation to all the Bitcointalk number of members, but considering the amount of spam that the forum has, it even seems surprising that 18.292 forum members have been merited.
This is nothing really new so far though, since we’re a few that report this data on a weekly basis. It does serve us though as a context to the following sections.

3. Top 200 Senders
This is where it starts to get interesting. What I’ve done here is, for each natural week (Monday to Sunday), aggregate the amount of sMerit sent by the top 200 sMerit Senders, and calculate the percentage it represents out of the total sMerit awarded for the given week.
Weeks are numbered 4 onwards, relating to the natural calendar week (4 is therefore 22/01/2018 .. 28/01/2018, and so on). I’ve use the week number and not the full week date interval due to a better representation on the charts.

Bear in mind that the top 200 Senders are different each week, and are not a fixed set. For example, I’m computed in the top 200 Senders on 17 of the 28 weeks, but I did not qualify for all the weeks. In the top 200 we’ll likely include all Merit Sources (84 now) as well as other members.

The overall average sMerit that the top 200 Senders have awarded is 58,99% of the total sMerit, but this varies from week to week as can be seen on the following graph:

The vertical bars represent the total sMerit awarded by the weekly top 200 Senders. The line chart represents the % of the total sMerit for the given week. Both of these data numbers figure in the table at the bottom of the graph. The yellow bar is last week, which is incomplete due to data (merit.txt file) being published on Fridays.
What we can see is the evolution: the top 200 Senders started off being behind the mid-forty percent range of total sMerit during the first few weeks. The tendency has slowly evolved and is now days in the 75-80% range. That’s a 30 point increase since the beginning!

4. Top 100 Senders
Likewise, the top 100 Senders (a subset of the above) has the following trend line:

The evolution for the top 100 Senders started off being around 30% of total sMerit during the first few weeks and is now in the 60-65% range. Here again we have the 30 point increase comparing to the beginning.
The overall average sMerit for the top 100 Senders is 45,21% of the total awarded sMerit.

5. Top 200 Receivers
Similarly, the top 200 Receivers has the following trend line:

The top 200 Receivers started off being around 50% of total sMerit during the first few weeks, but has slowly moved into the 60% range and lately boosting a bit into the 70% area.
The overall average sMerit for the top 200 Receivers is 53,67% of the total awarded sMerit.

6. Top 100 Receivers
Likewise, the top 100 Receivers (a subset of the above) has the following trend line:

The top 100 Receivers started off being around 35% of total sMerit during the first few weeks, but has slowly moved into the 40% range and lately boosting a bit into the 50% area or above (partial week though still in yellow).
The overall average sMerit for the top 100 Receivers is 39,35% of the total awarded sMerit.

7. Conclusion
Concluding numerically is simple: As time goes by, there is more concentration of sMerit sent by the top group of sMerit Senders and Receivers, although more pronounced on the Senders side of the scale.
This is likely due to an increasing importance of Merit Sources as times go by. Now I would venture to say that this was not the initial intention of the Merit System, but rather an organic sway from a more distributed system to an increasingly more concentrated system. This I figure puts extra pressure on current Merit Sources, as a large portion of the Merit System now depends heavily on them (bare in mind though that amongst the top 200/100 percent there are also non merit sources too as I said in the previous sections).
Maybe adding more merit sources would be a means to at least having more pairs of eye in the meriting awarding process, even if the total overall amount of sMerit assigned to them doesn’t budge at all.

On the receiver’s side, I find it difficult to conclude objectively. Concentration is rather heavy too, that is obvious. Subjectively nevertheless, I find my Merit Network (those I award sMerit to) growing at a very slow pace, since the members I merit tend to be the best and, once added to the network, new member addition seem difficult due to post quality of others by comparison, or by the spam forest blockage effect.
11  Other / Meta / Bitcointalk – Posts per Day - evolution during past six months on: July 23, 2018, 06:42:43 PM
1. Introduction:

The Merit System has been going now for six months, and I wondered how that correlated to posting and its evolution during those six months. The official forum stats ( indicate that the average posts per day is 8.272, which always struck me as a smallish figure for all the posts we see day to day, and the amount of those that we visually classify as spam. The figure itself seems manageable easily from the merit awarding point of view, even more so considering that spam is likely to be the majority and can therefore be dismissed in a second whilst revising posts to merit.

It turns out (at least from what I can gather), that the number given as average posts per day is really quite off from what other data suggests. Instead of being 8.272 post per day, the last six month give me somewhere around 58.733 posts per day, with around 41.782 post per day during the last month. That is way more than the average states. I figure that the average shown on the official stats shows an average over a longer period of time (perhaps all history of Bitcointalk). Of course I may be wrong, but I’m basing the above on other data available through stats on the forum (using the post counts shown on for a specific date, and comparing that to the same data a month ago, extracted from WayBackMachine

The data per subsection I believe adds up the Child Boards too.

2. Post Distribution per subsection

The overall historical accumulative distribution of posts per subsection is as follows (derived from

We can see that Ann Altcoins accumulates 19,68% of the posts, followed by Marketplace 17,69% and Marketplace (Altcoins) with 12,76% of all historical posts.
One thing to bear in mind is that deleted posts are not considered here (there is no stat on deleted posts), so they are not cannot be accounted for on this analysis. They do create some strange situations, as we’ll see in the following sections.

3. Number of posts and distribution per subsection – 6 month evolution

Using the information derived from for yesterday and retrieving the same statistic from the WayBackMachine at approximately one month intervals (there is no snapshot of the statistic for every single day, so I chose the best suited to aprox. 1 month intervals), we get the following table of data:

The above table is used to derive all the remaining charts and information. The T.Posts shows us the Total number of Post accumulated until that day. I’m not going to focus on this table as it is, but a derived one which is easier to follow. I’ll leave the above as a reference to the data origins.

The above table is much easier to follow. It shows the number of average posts per day per subsection, which is a good indicator to the activity going on in the subsection.

The interpretation is as follows:
Month 1: period of time between 23/01/2018 .. 23/02/2018. The number shows the number of posts per day for that period (calculated substracting the number of posts on the two dates of the interval and dividing by the number of days in the interval).

For example, Bitcoin Discussion Month 1 has an average of 1.806 posts per day. That is calculated by substracting the read on the 23/01/2018 (1.614.537) to that on the 23/02/2018 (1.670.511), and dividing by 31 days between the two dates.
And so on ..

I’ve marked some of the number in yellow, since they are inconsistent for being negative. What it really means I guess is that, for the given subsection and month, there must have been a purge of posts leading to mass deletion or movement to archival. At least that is my guess. This can also affect drops in the numbers, and we cannot know exactly to what degree, but it is a rather good approximation to what is going on.
Nevertheless, since the average posts per day is provided for 6 reads for each subsection, I think we can get a pretty good idea of how it is evolving:

3.1 Bitcoin – Posts per day

Mining is very odd, and it looks like a lot of posts have been deleted or moved to another section. All other sections seem to have a descending posts per day trend.

3.2 Economy – Posts per day

Here again Marketplace is very odd, and looks like it has been purged over the last couple of months. Economics and Trading Discussion are on the rise.

3.3 Other – Posts per day

All sections are on a downward trend. Meta has dropped by half what it was six months ago (the first month of the Merit System I guess). Off-topic’s downfall is very abrupt between the first month and the second, and second to third. Politics & Society takes a dep fall too. Looks like a clean-up too.

3.4 Alternate Cryptocurrencies – Posts per day

Post per day are massive on Marketplace (Altcoins), Altcoin Discussion and Ann, with Speculation (Altcoins) being the only one with an upward trend.

3.5 Local Boards – Posts per day

Most local boards also have a downward trend in terms of posts per day. This trend is rather steep in the Indonesian local board, and the fall on the Chinese seems too large to be real. These are probably affected by many posts/threads being deleted.

All these downwards trends could be due to:
-   More activity on the reporting and deleting front of posts/threads.
-   Less user activity per-se.
-   Less active users (?).
-   Summertime effect (recent month).

All in all, it looks like there are less posts created per day, since the overall average has gone down from 63K to 42K posts per day last month. This really depends on how much deleting has been taken place though.
That is still miles away from the average posts per day on the official stat which is 8,3K posts per day.

4. Merit per Post Ratio

With the previous data, we can derive the average merit per post for all forum Subsections. This may be useful to compare how easy/difficult it is to get merited in one section vs another.
The ratio is constructed simply by dividing the total number of posts by the total sMerits awarded to posts in the section for a given period of time (6 month; last month).
Now obviously this is not the probability of getting merit on a given post or section (as it mixed all sorts of posts with no filter), but from a macro perspective, it could allow us to compare sections based on this indicator.

For example, the Spanish Local ratio is now of 0,033, while the Italian is 0,065 and the Portuguese 0,036. This means that both the Spanish board and the Portuguese board have the same ratio of merit per post, while the Italian is nearly double. Looking further at the data on the table, the Spanish board made nearly twice as many posts as the Italian last month, and got nearly the same amount of merit (thus the ratio is half of the Italian board). Italian Posting and Portuguese are alike though in volume, but ratio is quite different between them.

This has to be taken with care, since it does not account for quality of the posts, how many are spam, etc. It is at least a curious exercise to do.

12  Local / Esquina Libre / Análisis del sMérito en el foro en español on: July 19, 2018, 12:37:45 PM
1.   Introducción.
En la sección Meta de la parte del foro en inglés, hay múltiples análisis del sistema de méritos, algunos con cierta información sobre los foros locales. No obstante, no hay ninguno que baje un nivel adicional y contemple las subsecciones dentro de la sección en español. Paxmao tenía interés en poder ver esta información en mayor detalle, por lo que me he aventurado a recopilar la información principal derivable, asociada al Sistema de Méritos.
Los datos analizados toman como base el fichero de transacciones de mérito oficial, contemplando todas las transacciones hasta el pasado viernes 13/07/2018, por lo que la semana del 09/07/2018 es parcial todavía.

2.   sMéritos Totales
El total de sMéritos otorgados a posts en la sección en español se resume de la siguiente manera:

La fecha mostrada en los gráficos se ha de interpretar como “la semana de”. Así por ejemplo, “02/07/2018” agrega los datos de la semana comprendida entre el 02/07/2018 y el 08/07/2018.
Se observa que la cantidad de sMéritos otorgados en nuestro foro local es muy bajo, e irregular semana a semana. Claro que también hemos de poner de nuestra parte y postear con cabeza y raciocinio, aportando valor al foro.

La tabla siguiente desgrana los datos semanales:

En total, la sección española ha recibido 1.238 sMeritos en toda su historia, mediante 730 transacciones de sMérito (hablamos de sMéritos transaccionados, no de la partida inicial otorgada como consecuencia del Airdrop en el momento génesis del Sistema de Méritos).
Un dato relevante es que tan sólo 92 usuarios han otorgado mérito en el foro español, siendo 225 usuarios distintos los receptores del mismo, con una media de 1,7 méritos por transacción y 5,5 méritos recibidos por usuario.
La tasa media de sMérito por transacción fluctúa, y en las últimas semanas es algo más alto que en meses precedentes.

Hay 634 posts distintos que han sido meritados, con una media de 1,95 méritos por post. No obstante, el 73,50% de los posts meritados reciben tan solo un sMérito, y un 14,67% dos.

3.   sMéritos Totales por Subsección
El total de sMéritos por subsección en español es copado por tres secciones que están casi a la par: Principal (la sección por defecto) con 24,15%, Altcoins (criptomonedas) con el 22,70% y Mercado y Economía con el 22,05%. A destacar Hardware y Minería con tan solo un 2,42% del sMérito total.

Es interesante también comparar la tasa media de sMérito por transacción (TX) entre las diferentes secciones.

4.   sMéritos por Subsección – Evolución Semanal
A continuación, reflejo la evolución semanal de sMéritos por Subsección del foro local en español. Al no meritarse demasiado ninguna Subsección, los posts que destacan pueden mover los gráficos de manera abrupta en una semana determinada.

5.   Análisis adicionales

Adicionalmente, en el Merit Dashboard  tenemos acceso a estadísticas globales que pueden ser filtradas para ver los datos propios de nuestro foro local, o de un individuo. Estas estadísticas son dinámicas y actualizadas cada fin de semana.
El post original (en inglés) con la explicación más detallada es el siguiente: Bitcointalk Merit Dashboard.
Bajo el prisma de nuestro foro local, puede ser interesante consultar:

a)   La pestaña Section/Subsection: Si filtramos por “Subsection” a la derecha (seleccionar únicamente “Spanish”), tendremos acceso a la distribución mensual de sMérito de nuestro foro local (121 en lo que va de Julio 2018, 131 Junio 2018, etc.).

b)   Pestaña Post Summary: Filtrando por “Subsection” tendremos el número de méritos por TX (79,73% de las TX son de 1 sMérito, 11,51% de 2 y así). También podemos ver el número de TX por post meritado (88,80% es meritado únicamente por una TX, y un 8,68% adicional recibe 2 TXs).

c)   Pestaña Ranking: Si filtramos por “Subsection” obtenemos la lista de los que más meritan (Paxmao 404, freemind1 79, etc.), los que más son meritados (120 Gothorum, 83 solonosquedauna, etc.), y los hilos más meritados (105 Nuevo Sistema de méritos en Bitcointalk, etc. – agregados por hilo, no por post).

d)   Pestaña TXs : Filtrando por “Subsection” tendremos acceso a todas las TX de esta subsección.

e)   Pestaña Potential Merit Sources: Filtrando por “Subsection” podremos ver, para todo usuario, a cuántos ha meritado, cuántos méritos ha otorgado, número de TX, media por TX, etc.

En todas las anteriores citadas pestañas del Cuadro de Mandos, hay una barra deslizadora para poder acotar el rango de fechas de las TXs (se puede usar la barra deslizadora moviendo los extremos, o clicar sobre las fechas de los extremos y editarlas manualmente o seleccionarlas desde un calendario. Puede hacer falta ajustar la hora y poner 00:00:00 en la inicial y 23:59:59 en la final).
13  Local / Esquina Libre / Twitter nuevamente en el punto de mira: El timo Nigeriano on: July 12, 2018, 11:54:35 AM
El timo nigeriano convencional consiste en, generalmente, el envío de un correo electrónico a tu cuenta, indicándote que si les ayudas mediante una transferencia para desbloquear una herencia, te devolverán la cantidad aumentada notablemente. Otras variantes directamente te citan como destinatario de la herencia, una lotería o dinero que quieren sacar fuera del país, etc. Personalmente, habré visto alguna de estas variantes tres o cuatro veces que recuerde. Obviamente no piqué, ni lo hace la gran mayoría, pero algún incauto ingenuo, con tintes de avaricia y cierta falta de cultura, pica a la postre, de ahí que sigan insistiendo.

Recientemente, se ha puesto de moda una nueva variante, variando el canal (de correo electrónico pasamos a Twitter) y el objeto referenciado (de dinero a criptomonedas). Aprovechando que twitter es un canal bastante sucinto, ya ni se molestan en darte un motivo que adorne la estafa, sino que directamente te indican que te devolverán incrementada notablemente una cantidad de ETH que les transfieras. La existencia de bots (scambots) les permite generar cantidades ingentes de este tipo de mensajes sin mucha dificultad.

     Giveaway 10 $ETH if people@send me .01 ETH.
     — CryptoCaptainObvious (@CryptoCaptObvi) 11 de julio de 2018

A lo largo de los últimos dos meses, Twitter ha cerrado 70 millones de perfiles falsos/trolls, en un ejercicio de limpieza de cuentas que hizo bajar su valor en bolsa un 9% (gran parte de su activo está en el número de cuentas que tiene, y el proceso de limpieza mermó la cifra sobre los 336 millones de usuarios activos mensuales).

Sería interesante hacer este ejercicio en este mismo foro, Bitcointalk, dado que existe una gran cantidad de cuentas inactivas entre las 2.259.537 cuentas existentes hoy. Claro que sucede lo mismo que con Twitter: cuantas más cuentas tengamos, mayor el valor comercial y de la marca.
@mazdafunsun ha analizado los primeros 2 millones de cuentas de Bitcointalk (ver Truth about bitcointalk users 2.0 y Bitcointalk user analysis ). Se observa que más del 70% de las cuentas creadas son todavía Brand New. Sin mirar si son activas o no (la mayoría por lógica no lo son y/o son creadas por bots), esto nos indica que realmente no somos tantos activos en el foro ni de buen trecho: 600.000 tirando largo, pero no 2.000.000.

Volviendo a nuestro hilo argumental, uno diría que pocos caerían ya en algo tan simple como este tipo de timo, que ni siquiera va adornado de verborrea contextual embaucadora. No obstante, si se hace, es debido a que les sale rentable. Una investigación de Proofpoint indica que encontró al menos un wallet con 21.000 dólares obtenidos a través de este método.

El ejemplo de caso de uso referenciado en el artículo habla de un retorno de 10$ en ETH a cambio de 0,01 ETH (unos 4,31$ a fecha de hoy). Esto querría decir un retorno del 232% (132% real sobre la inversión, a lo cual hay que quitar el coste de la transferencia).

Bajo una perspectiva económica y de casos reales de personas que caen en la trampa, las cifras son probablemente irrisorias. El problema es que esto impacta en la imagen tanto de Twitter como de ETH y de las crypto en general. De hecho, Vitalik Buterin ha pedido a Twitter que aborde estos problemas y frene este tipo de mensajes. A ver si le hacen caso…

Fuente de la información (contrastada con otras noticias):
14  Other / Off-topic / Could Europe’s new copyright directives affect Bitcointalk ? on: June 29, 2018, 09:35:09 AM
I recently posted something similar on my local board, but the board is rather inactive at times and discussion on this topic seems to be remote.
My initial idea was to post this topic on Meta, where Forum structure and rules are discussed, but I refrained since I’m not sure how likely the change of rules that Europe is cooking-up could eventually affect Bitcointalk on the whole.
This week, the European Parliament’s Legal Commission ruled in favour of going forward with the proposal to modify Europe’s copyright laws, adjusting them to the current situation and extending it’s claws on to internet’s digital content platforms.

The change of rules is not fully consolidated, and are therefore not yet to be enforced. But the process could be fully certified in the coming months, a year at the most, giving birth to a new legal framework which is bound to be controversial right from the beginning as well see further along this post.
The Directive of European Parliament and the Council on copyright in the Digital Single Market (see proposes a set of changes that are contrary to the digital freedom as we know it, by monetarizing or prohibiting many of our usual habits on the internet that are at times based of work of others, but that constitute a de facto a part of the internet culture.

I must state right from the beginning, nevertheless, that the new proposed framework of rules is still rather undefined when it comes to filling in the fine print. It shows intention, but does not in any way (yet) specify in full detail how to deploy the proposed set of rules, their economic impact (neither in terms of sanctions nor in terms of royalty payment for copyrights). They also do not detail the exact scope of action (large corporations, small ones, etc.) nor how it applies to global information repositories that are fed by users belonging to multiple nations as is our case on Bitcointalk (thus this post).
The European proposal affects multiple areas (even Big Data, although I will not go into this one any further here), amongst which the following stand out due to their controversy:

Article 11: Protection of press publications concerning digital uses.

To summarize it in short, we may have a rough time to include a link to an article (which is kind of mandatory on this forum, as is often done both for reference and to avoid being accused of plagiarism), or even a quoted extract of copyrighted text.
The implications have an economic base, as from what I’ve gathered, one would need to pay to post the link or use an extract from the text (no indication however as to who would need to pay for it - or the fine - : the platform or the user).

In Spain, back in 2014, a very similar law was set in motion, causing Google News Spain to cease it’s activity on the whole. Enforcements of a kind, if applied severely, could create more than a ripple on our internet habits.
False positives (accusations of copyright infringement that turn out to be unfounded) are potentially an issue, since the first to register the text gets the copyright rights and you only need to be a bit forgetful on these matters for a witty rascal to steal your food from your plate and register it himself, waiting for you to fall on his Monopoly board square, and making you pay for using your own article.
This may be seem over exaggerated, but it’s not an impossible situation, especially when there’s money to be gained (who would have thought that people would throw themselves voluntarily at cars, so as to try to get the insurance compensation right?).

Article 13: Use of protected content by information society service providers storing and giving access to large amounts of works and other subject-matter uploaded by their users.

This one is a true gem. The article in summary goes to say that those platforms that offer services in the area of information societies, must apply filters to the content, avoiding publishing of text, images and videos that have copyright protection.
That’s to say, the classical memes that are based on an clip from a film, series, news, etc., and the static memes based on and image, would all be scrutinized and prohibited/deleted if in breach of copyright (most of the memes are, up to some extent).
The rule’s fine print is not written, so we do not know yet if the target would be the large corporations based in Europe, or all of them (even small local forums for example).
How would this affect European citizens that post on an international platform such as Bitcoin Talk? Should the Wall Observer thread tremble at the loss of European citizen’s contribution?

These European proposals have already found a large opposition, both in public statements from relevant people, and from anonymous citizens. has a petition to stop these rules from being deployed, with over 584K signatories (see,).

Perhaps I’m getting too alarmed here, since the fine print has yet to be written and, therefore, we do not know the full extent of the new rules yet. Nevertheless, what we know so far is no small matter.
This month we have seen the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) been deployed in Europe. While the intentions of the regulation seem to be good for the citizen, the new regulation is rather a fiasco for corporations who overnight had to become “dumb”. Before the regulation change, corporations could easily analyse customers from a global customer centric perspective, offering goods and services to the customer by exploiting information gathered from any of the corporation’s integrating companies. Now, corporations are back to viewing the customer from different separate silos, not being able to share information that was used just a few days back. Anyway, that’s a whole different story on it’s own.

Concerning Bitcointalk, I’m not really sure if there regulations could affect the Forum and to what extent. My first though was that the effect should be close to zero, since Bitcointalk is registered in Panama (according to
Perhaps this is so, and this article would be rendered void, as there would be no implications for Bitcointalk and it´s community.
On the other hand, content generated by Europeans that break the tougher copyright laws, and that is posted on Bitcointalk, would probably be contrary to European Law, so the action of the European citizen could be subject to scrutiny (although being Bitcointalk pseudo-anonymous I doubt that a user could be pursues nominally).

Conceptually, this rule set could splash over other countries like the USA. I don’t think that they will likely clone Europe’s change of copyright rules, but sometimes these things spread in no time. At the very least, corporations with a headquarters on European soil would have to abide the new ruleset.

If the key to keeping in the clear of this tighter set of copyright rules is to move corporate bases away from Europe, we could start to see a migration of corporate headquarters for certain businesses and forums away from European soil. That is something that needs to be pondered heavily by the authorities when spelling out the fine print for the new copyright laws … 
15  Other / Meta / Analysis- sMerits per transaction and sMerit transactions per post-Are they low? on: June 28, 2018, 11:10:56 AM
1.   Introduction
Recently I’ve seen various post refer to the number of sMerits been given out per transaction been low. This is an inherent feature in a system where the number of weekly awarded sMerits is pretty low on overall terms, and has stabilized as of late in the 3,9k-4,4k per week area.
I wondered how the number of sMerits per TX was behaving Forum wide, but was specifically curious as to whether this was roughly the same on all Forum Section/Subsections or not.

I also have the feeling that, regardless of the amount of sMerit been awarded per TX, the actual number of times a posts was been awarded by multiple users was rather low.This would lead to the two factors being combined in practice: low amount of sMerits per TX, and low amount of times a post is actually being merited…. And this is what is going on.
Now whether this is as it should be or not I cannot tell. But let’s speculate: if we were to magically double our sMerit over night or even triple it, how would we use it? Giving more sMerit per TX ? awarding more posts ? allowing ourselves to award sMerit to posts that we consider valuable, but that have already been awarded by some ? 
A noticeable increase in our sMerit accounts could probably change out awarding habits, but since that is just left there for speculation purposes, let’s analyse what reality has to offer…

Note: I’ve added the tabular data to the Merit Dashboard so that it can be filtered by different dimensions (dates, boards, etc.). Data is not graphical there.
This post aggregates all historical data. Anyone interested on narrowing down the date scope can do so on the Merit Dashboard (Post Summary tab).

2.   sMerit awarded per TX
I’ve simplified the cases shown here in order to avoid overcrowding the post with too many graphics. With that in mind, the information is seen from the overall forum’s perspective, and then is broken down by local/non-local boards for TXs that award 1 sMerit and TXs that award more than 5 sMerits (as I found these to be the most representative cases).

2.1 sMerit awarded per TX – Forum overall

Out of the (up to last Friday) 79.335 sMerit transactions (TXs), 69,08% award 1 sMerit, and another 14,29% award 2 sMerits. From there on the percentages decrease, with bumps on multiples of five.

2.2 Non-local boards – TXs involving 1 sMerit

If we take a look at the distribution of sMerit awarding per forum section/subsection, and focus on those TXs that are awarding 1 sMerit, we can see that there are big variations depending on the board that we focus on.
For example, Economics has 81,60% of the TXs being awarded to this board consisting of 1 sMerit. On the other extreme, Politics & Society has 54,23% of the TXs involving one sMerit.
This means that the awarding TXs are of a smaller quantity in Economics than in the Politics and Society. That is a 27,37 point difference between the two extreme board section.

2.3 Non-local boards – TXs involving >5 sMerit

Here too there’s a large gap between the board that has the greatest percentage of >5 sMerits TXs (Off-topic, being 11,19% of all TX on this board) and the almost lowest (Bitcoin Technical Support, with 1,09% of all the sMerit TXs in the board involving > 5 sMerits).

2.4 Local boards – TXs involving 1 sMerit

The Portuguese Local board has 88,15% of the sMerit TXs involving 1 sMerit, while on the Greek board this happens only on 50% of the sMerit TXs (but the absolute number is rather low there). The larger local forums (Russian and Indosenian) are in the 68-69% range.
In other words, the Portuguese board, along with Spanish, Japanese, German and Croatian, constitute the “meaner” boards in terms of sMerit awarded per TX. Of course the second derivative is that this is not some innate cultural feature, but rather more a lack of sMerit to award or a lack of good post to award to.

2.5 Local boards – TXs involving >5 sMerit

Here the distribution gap is also enormous. The Greek board has awarded >5 sMerits in 24,39% of the board’s TXs, while the Japanese only 0,4%. 60% of local boards are under the 5% mark.

3.   Number of times a post is merited

The same case simplification as above applies to keep the number of graphs to a reasonable representative level.

3.1 Number of times a post is merited – Forum overall

Out of the (up to last Friday) 55.893 merited distinct posts, 81,43% of them have only been awarded sMerit once, and an additional 11,40% twice.
We know that circulating sMerit seems rather low, but the fact that a community as large as this one has it’s meritable posts merited by one or two member in almost 93% of the cases is kind of low. It’s like saying the vast majority of the posts are only appreciated by 1 or two people ….

3.2 Non-local boards – Number of posts sMerited 1 time only

Bitcoin Technical Support comes out best, since 69,55% of the merited posts are only merited once (so the remaining 30,45% are merited more than once). The worst case is Politics & Society, where 91,05% of merited posts get awarded just once. That’s over a 20 point gap variation between the two extreme sections.

3.3 Non-local boards – Number of posts sMerited > 5 times

The absolute numbers are pretty low (see the lower row of the data table on the graph). Meta comes out best, with 3,65% of merited posts being awarded sMerit by over 5 people. On the other extreme, Speculation Altcoin has a 0,29% ratio, but even mining is really low (0,48%).

3.4 Local boards – Number of posts sMerited 1 time only

India has the worst ratio (Scandinavian is a real outlier), with 94,55% of merited posts on the board being merited only once. Arabic comes out best as ratio is down to 72,84% of the cases on its local board.

3.5 Local boards – Number of posts sMerited > 5 times

The Spanish board has a really poor ratio, since only 1 post (0,18%) has received sMerit from more than five people. Absolute numbers are so low, that I would only consider the Russian, Turkish, and Indonesian board ratios as representative, with less than 3% ratios but enough absolute base.

16  Local / Esquina Libre / Podrían las nuevas directivas europeas de derechos de autor afectar Bitcointalk? on: June 26, 2018, 11:46:06 AM
Mi primera intención era plantear esta cuestión en el foro inglés, concretamente en Meta que es donde se discute todo lo relativo al foro, su estructura y su normativa. No obstante, creo que es mejor empezar en nuestro foro local, dado que el contexto de este post nos afectará a todos eventualmente de manera más directa (a los europeos, con perdón de nuestros amigos latinoamericanos) aunque hay que ver con en qué grado y con qué reglas de juego exactas.

Esta semana, la Comisión de Asuntos Jurídicos del Parlamento Europeo falló a favor de proseguir con su propuesta de modificación de la normativa europea de derechos de autor, adaptando su contenido a los tiempos actuales y, por ende, ampliando impacto sobre las plataformas digitales de contenidos en internet.

El cambio normativo no es un hecho consolidado, sino un proceso que puede culminar en los próximos meses, máximo un año, con un nuevo marco jurídico nacido para ser controvertido desde sus inicios. Efectivamente, la Directiva del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo sobre los derechos de autor en el mercado único digital (véase propone cambios conceptualmente severos y que contravienen la libertad digital, para volver a canonizar los derechos de autor como alma mater preferente.
Cabe dejar patente desde el inicio el articulado laxo de la propuesta normativa, donde enumera intenciones, pero de ninguna manera específica con detalle la manera de llevar a cabo las medidas propuestas, las implicaciones económicas (tanto en términos de sanción como en términos de pago de derechos de autor), ni el alcance exacto (grandes corporaciones, pequeñas y medianas, etc.). Tampoco he visto cómo afectaría a entornos globales alimentados de contenido por parte de usuarios de múltiples naciones, europeos entre ellos como es nuestro caso, de ahí la motivación de este redactado.

La propuesta europea tiene varias vertientes (incluso para el Big Data en lo cual no voy a entrar ahora), dentro de las cuales destacan por su controversia las siguientes:

Artículo 11: Protección de las publicaciones de prensa en lo relativo a los usos digitales.
En resumidas cuentas, y hablando en plata, podemos estar ante dificultades para poder incluir un enlace a un artículo (por cierto, como es de costumbre y cortesía como he hecho yo arriba) o un extracto entrecomillado. Las derivadas en el fondo serían de naturaleza económica donde, por lo que he entendido, dicha referencia a material con derechos de autor debería pasar por caja (claro que no se especifica si sería la plataforma la que debería hacerlo o el usuario de la misma).
Es una especie de resurrección y extensión a todo Europa de la tasa que se le puso a Google por los enlaces a las noticias en España, y que a finales del año 2014 supuso el cierre del servicio de Google Noticias en España.

Los casos de falsos positivos son potencialmente un quebradero de cabeza, dado que gana el que primero lo registra y sólo falta que no registres algo (un artículo, por ejemplo) para que otro más espabilado se apodere de él y lo registe a la espera de que caigas tú en su casilla de Monópoly, debiendo pagar por haber usado tu propio artículo. Puede parecer exagerado, pero no imposible (sobre todo si hay dinero de por medio; igual que parece imposible que alguien se lance delante de un coche para lograr una indemnización del seguro.. y lo hacen).

Artículo 13: Uso de contenidos protegidos por parte de proveedores de servicios de la sociedad de la información que almacenen y faciliten acceso a grandes cantidades de obras y otras prestaciones cargadas por sus usuarios.
Esta sí que es una joya. El artículo, de manera resumida, pretende que las plataformas de la sociedad de información apliquen filtros a los contenidos (nuestros post habituales serían susceptibles de estar al amparo de este artículo), evitando la publicación de textos, imágenes y videos protegidos por derechos de autor.

Es decir, los clásicos memes que se configuran en base a un extracto de video de una película, serie, noticia, etc., y los estáticos en base a una imagen, serían escrutados y prohibidos/borrados en caso de estar protegidos por derechos de autor en todo o parte.
Claro que tampoco he visto especificado el alcance de esta acción. Las grandes corporaciones de internet con base europea seguro que estarían sometidas a la normativa, pero ¿qué sucedería con un foro más pequeño o local? , ¿Cómo afecta a los contenidos alimentados por ciudadanos europeos en una plataforma internacional como Bitcointalk?

Ante estas propuestas, ya hay una petición en para para este tipo de censura recaudatoria (véase, con ya 491K firmantes y aumentando rápidamente el contador).

Igual nos estamos alarmando demasiado, dado que el articulado fino no está redactado y, al fin al cabo, es el que cuenta. Pero el marco global que ya está validado por parte de la Comisión Europea de Asuntos Jurídicos no es baladí. Tenemos presente los recientes cambios en la ley de protección de datos (RGPD), puesta en marcha hace un ayer un mes.
La RGPD si que tiene una aparente buena intención de cara al ciudadano, pero resulta un fiasco y un mar de lagunas para las corporaciones, que de golpe y porrazo se han vuelto más tontas. Donde antes había amplia Inteligencia de Clientes forjada en base a una visión única del Cliente en el negocio, ahora hay una vuelta a los orígenes y a los silos de información inconexos entre por ejemplo varias compañías de un mismo grupo. Pero esta es otra historia …

En lo relativo a Bitcointalk, no tengo claro el alcance. La primera tentación es el de tildar la implicación (potencial por ahora) como nula, dado que Bitcointalk tiene su sede de registro en Panamá (según
Podría ser que el alcance directo sea nulo, convirtiendo este escrito en inútil por cuanto no serviría para mi objetivo ulterior que es el de determinar su posible implicación en este foro.
Claro que por otro lado, el contenido generado por Europeos que incumplan las normativas en materia de derechos de autor, y que luego es subido a Bitcointalk, conceptualmente contravienen las normas, si bien diría que con poca cabida para la persecución en la práctica mientras Bitcointalk carezca de estructura en Europa y los usuarios tengan una pseudo-anonimización.
Conceptualmente, esta normativa podría salpicar a otros países como los Estados Unidos. No creo que estén por la labor de aplicarlo en su propio suelo (virtual), pero cuanto menos las corporaciones internacionales con sede en Europa deberán pasar por el aro.

En el fondo, si la clave es tener la base operativa fuera de Europa para evitar estos problemas, podríamos ver la migración de negocios y foros europeos impactados a países de fuera para salvaguardar la normativa. Y luego nos lamentaríamos de su fuga, cómo no…

P.D. El campo "subject" podría ser un poco más largo en nuestro foro local (no me cabe el interrogante de apertura del Subject, y me he tenido que saltar un "a"). Nuestro idioma suele traer frases con más caracteres que en inglés leñe ...
17  Other / Meta / Bitcointalk Merit Dashboard on: June 06, 2018, 04:56:19 PM
Merit Dashboard

Edit 14/09/2018:

Link:  BitcoinTalk Merit Dashboard  

Updated Dashboard to reflect the most recent sMerit available data:

Total sMerit:  223.051
Total Txs:      101.844
From Users:   16.706
To Users:       19.453
minDate:       2018-01-24 22:12:21   
maxDate:      2018-09-14 01:55:43

Edit 04/07/2018:
Added a Tab called Reciprocal sMerit which, if used properly, could help to detect Merit Abuse (see my post on this thread: The Dashboard has now grown now quite a bit since the initial version...

The dashboard gives you access to anyone’s complete merit history in the TX tab, surpassing the 120 day limit.
Added this week: Post summary (distribution of sMerit per TX and TXs per post).
Added Recently: De-ranked Users, Potential Merit Sources, User Summary, Section/Subsection, Rankings and WordCloud.

I’ve been considering updating the data of some of my previous analysis. Since the process is rather manual, I thought it would be nice to bring it together into a common Merit Dashboard, in order to keep it all in one place, and to ease the updating process on a more regular basis if necessary. I’ve started off by including what I’ve considered the most relevant information, using a set of tabs to hold the information for a given conceptual vision of the data.
The resulting dashboard is a work in progress, since I will add more features and datasets whenever possible. To mention that I do prefer the colours on my previous analytical posts (black background on the graphs), but for now the dashboard will have a white background since I’m concentrated on content and a little bit less on aesthetics.

The dashboard requires no installation, but it does result to java script (so it must be enabled in order for it to work).

Note: Screen shots show up with certain date information based on my local settings. If this works correctly, the actual Merit Dashboard should work based on your local setings... (dates and number formats, not captions).

The dashboard has the following Tabs:

1.   Global Summary:

Shows a summary of how merit is awarded, broken down by:

-   Week (Monday to Sunday- on previous analysis I may have used Sunday to Saturday since it’s the default in the software I use for data crunching).
-   Day of the Week.
-   Hour (UTC – This is not too important, but some merit awarding varies by date depending for example if the data is UTC, UTC-6 or UTC+6).
-   Weekly Ratios I’ve used before, including total aggregates at the top of the table.

Since the data originated in the public merit.txt file is published on Friday mornings, the data to the most recent week is partial (lacking most of Friday, as well as Saturday and Sunday). The rest of the weeks are complete.

We can see a clear weekly downtrend again since the end of April onwards after a light recovery in the last fortnight of April.

We already knew that Thursday is the most merited day and that UTC 8-20h are the most merited hours of the day.

New weekly users that receive Merit are around the 25%-27% area (so every week roughly one quarter of merited users are merited for the first time -> see %ToNew in the Weekly Ratios).

2.   From/To Ranks

Shows which ranks merit which ranks both in absolute value (number of awarded merits) and relative values (% of awarded merits per “from rank” to each “to rank”).

This is similar to Which Ranks send sMerit to which Ranks - and who ranked up, but now updated.

Comparing current data to the analysis above stated, we can see for example that:
-   Legendaries keep roughly the same awarding proportions overall as they had around end of march, being the most favourable movement increase for Jr. Members (4,37% -> 6,18%).
-   Heroes keep nearly the exact proportions as end of March.
-   Sr. Member have dropped their awarding rate to Sr. Members (23,15% -> 20,56%) and have moved the drop to Members (23,02%->24,46%) and Jr. Members (6,57%-> 7,28%).
-   Full members have dropped a bit on their ratio of awarding full members (31,74%->29,52%), moving the difference to Members (26,69% -> 29,57%).
-   Members awarding to Full Members has moved from 20,26% to 17,15%,  being Members the most favoured increase (42,92%-> 47,07%).
-   Jr. Members now favour less Full Members than before (19,48% -> 14,01%), but increase the Newbies rank (4,22% -> 8,62%).

All in all there are slight changes, but not too significant.

Note that the rank is derived from the current user profile, and not at the time of actual awarding which may have been different (we cannot access the rank at time of awarding, so this is the next best thing we can use).

3.   Received Merit

Shows the overall received Merit breaking it down by the Ranks that send it, month, specific date and user names along with the aggregate quantity they’ve sent.
By default, the data shown is the overall merit, but you can filter by user name/s to delimit the view to a specific user set  (i.e. filter by your own username to see the merit you received).

4.   Sent Merit

Shows the overall sent Merit breaking it down by the Ranks the merit has been sent to, month, specific date and user names along with the aggregate quantity they’ve received.
By default, the data shown is the overall merit, but you can filter by user name/s to delimit the view to a specific user set (i.e. filter by your own username to see the merit you sent).

5.   Ranked-up

This gives us the amount of users that have ranked-up using the new merit system, indicating their starting rank and current rank. This is similar to what I’ve done before numerically in posts. To see a specific set it is easier to filter by (probable) initial rank and current rank.

I’ve omitted including combinations relative to ranks that are not amongst the conventional ranks that need merit to rank-up. There are even some de-ranked cases (omitted), probably caused by purchasing an account and deleting the posts.

6. Ranking-up pipeline

This gives us a global vision of how many users are depending on what (activity, merit, both) in order to rank-up. This only considers users that have been awarded Merit (in at least 1 Merit TX), not those that had a Merit airdrop and have not received any further Merit.

This is similar to Stats on the Rank pipeline - How many are we on the way to ranking up? extension

Comparing the above mentioned analysis (created during mid-April 2018) to current dashboard data, we can see that:
-   We’ve gone from 135 to 219 Heroes that could have ranked-up, but lack Merit.
-   We’ve gone from 297 to 444 Sr. Members that could have ranked-up, but lack Merit.
-   We’ve gone from 1.146 to 1.919 Full Members have not ranked-up due to lack of Merit (by contrast, those lacking both activity and merit have decreased 1.458 -> 911).
-   We’ve gone from 2.032 to 2.711 Members that could have ranked-up, but lack Merit.
-   We’ve gone from 1.914 to 2.460 Members that could have ranked-up, but lack Merit.

In summary, merit is slowing down the ranking process (as we already knew), and candidates awaiting “just” to earn merits in order to rank-up are greater by number.

7.   TXs.

A list of all the Merit Transactions. The idea here is to filter by User From Name or User To name to see all Tx history for a given user/s. This can also be done on the Merit Network.

8.   Merit Network

This should contain and embedded link to Our very own sMerit Network Picture - enhanced with access to all sMerit TXs.

Unfortunately, I can see the embedded webpage fine in development, but not once I view the published Merit Dashboard. Until I find a solution (if there is one, which I’m not too positive about), I’ve placed a button that takes us there.

Dashboard Usage:

Using the dashboard is pretty straight forward. It may be good to mention that:

If you scroll down you’ll find a very useful toolbar that allows you to:
-   (<-) Undo if you apply a filter to the data and cannot revert easily to the previous unfiltered situation.
-   (-> )Redo.
-   (rectangle with a downward arrow) Save as image or pdf.
-   (rectangle) Full Screen.
-   (ESC) Exit Full Screen.

Also, when applying a filter (for example in the Received Merit Tab), you can type in the name and press the plus sign to add the name to the filter (multiple names are allowed), or use the magnifier to search for all name that contain the typed string (and then select the desired names).
To delete a filter you can hover over the filter value until a cross sign appears to delete the item, or use the undo arrow on the toolbar mentioned above.
18  Other / Meta / Is it true that we only send sMerit to our “buddies” ? on: May 30, 2018, 12:25:14 PM
1.   Introduction.

Lately, I’ve seen multiple posts that hint or openly state that sMerit is only been sent to our buddies/friends/¿alts?/same rank/”want merit back from” type of accounts. Is this true?

When you open/read your (online) press during the day, just how many news sources do you actually consult? There are thousands of sources available, but we tend to read those that we enjoy most or are aligned to our views on matters. Once we work out what we like, we tend to make it a habit to read information from a fixed set of sources, and every now and then we may open-up to others and enlarge our circle.
We could take this down a level and state that, within our favoured sources, only a certain amount of sections catch our interest, and within these, articles and columnists.

I think that the above analogy applies to the Forum, were we move around certain sections that become of interest to us, there we favour reading certain topics, and we certainly get hooked to reading posts by specific users and favour their lecture, since we enjoy them, agree/disagree/agree to disagree with them, and ultimately find some interest to what they generally write.

The above conforms our general habit factor, and also relates to our network size factor. It doesn’t mean that we don’t open up to more sources within the forum, but as time goes by the speed of assimilating new members to our network is bound to decrease.
In many cases, our network expansion graph will probably look like a logarithmic function curve: Our network size grows quicker at the beginning, but tends to slow down (not stop) over time. Merit sources may be an exception.

2.   First Approach: Merit sent by rank to rank.

The first approach to resolve our initial question, about merit sent to buddies, would be to see how merit is being distributed from one rank to the other ranks.
We saw this exercise done in the post   Which Ranks send sMerit to which Ranks - and who ranked up .
It’s true that the post is now two months old, but it proved that ranks were not solely concentrating on meriting their own rank or above, but were in fact very active meriting posts belonging to users with a lower rank.
So users are not concentrated on meriting buddies on their own rank (or above), but are really of a broader nature.

3.   Second Approach: Reciprocal Merit
This is the core of this exercise. If the opening statement were to be true, we should find that the vast majority of the users we send merit to also send us some back at some point (reciprocal), although in different quantities. If it is indeed true that we do send sMerit just to our buddies …

3.1   Global Reciprocal Information

The data is to be interpreted as follows:
Rank:                                        Rank
nUsers:                                     Number of users in the Rank that have sent sMerit to another user.
nUsersSent:                              Total number of users that the nUsers have sent sMerit to.
nUsersSentReciprocal:             Number of users out of nUsersSent that have also awarded the nUsers with sMerit over time.
nUsersSentNonReciprocal:       Number of users out of nUsersSent that have not been awarded back sMerit over time to the nUsers.
nMeritSent:                              Total amount of sMerit that the nUsers have sent to the nUsersSent.
nMeritSentReciprocal:             Total sMerit sent to users that have awarded the nUsers with sMerit over time.
nMeritSentNonReciprocal:       Total sMerit sent to users that have not awarded the nUsers with sMerit over time.
Network Size Reciprocal:         % of our network that is merited and from whom we receive merit back at some point.
Network Size Non-Reciprocal:  % of our network that is merited and from whom we don't receive merit back at some point.
Merit Sent Reciprocal:              % of our sent sMerit that goes to reciprocal users.
Merit Sent Non-Reciprocal:      % of our sent sMerit that goes to non-reciprocal users.

1.   By “meriting back” I am not implying that the merit is obtained by a prior merit event. The order of events is not analysed here, just the fact that, at some point in time, they have reciprocally merited each other.

2.   What I’m counting here are transactions of the nature “User A sent to User B “ x sMerits, where User A is one of the nUsers and User B is one of the nUsersSent.

3.   We could also do this exercise from the “Receivers” point of view, but I think it will complicate this even further so I have refrained from posting it.

What the above table shows us is that:

a)   On Average (but who is an average John Doe right?), we send sMerit to 17,14% of users of our network, who have at some point also awarded us with sMerit (reciprocal). Therefore, on average, 82,86% of the people we send sMerit to have not sent us any at any time.

b)   In terms of Total sMerit, we sent 24,13% on average to out reciprocal network, and therefore 75,87% of our awarded sMerit goes to people in our network who have not awarded us with sMerit.

The above varies from rank to rank, but it goes to show that we tend to award way more to people that have not merited us at any time (non-reciprocal) yet that those who have (reciprocal).

3.2   Global Reciprocal Information – By Reciprocal Segment

Being on the global scale, each rank is averaged, therefore withing this average there will be users that have all their sMerit in a network that is 100% reciprocal, all the way down to those that have a 0% reciprocal Network.

I’ve broken it down in the above graph by 20% clusters. This means, for example, that there are 84 Sr. Members that have sent sMerit to people that at some point have all merited them back (100% reciprocal segment), 4 Sr. Members are in the situation of awarding merit to reciprocal users in the range of 80%..100% and so on.
What we are not seeing simultaneously is how much sMerit we’re talking about in each case since I would need to break down each segment further an complicate matters further more.

We can see that the vast majority of us are in the low quintal (0%..20%), and a fair share on the 100% value. These cases are the “fishy zone”, but are on the whole they are not very significant in terms of number of cases vs overall cases.

3.3   Global Reciprocal Information – By Reciprocal Segment and awarded sMerit Segment

The above is a break-down swapping Rank for sMerit Sent group. The average for the groups don’t differ too much from the global averages, although the [40..49] sMerits Sent group does stand out a bit more.
We can also see the extremes differ too for obvious reasons: The [1] sMerit Sent group is the lowest reciprocal group of all, followed by the [500+] sMerits Sent group.

3.4   Top sMerit Senders

I’ve done the exercise of grabbing the 50 sMerit Senders of all times, and these are their ratios:

user_id   name                          rank                NuserSentReciprocalOverSent   NMeritSentReciprocalOverSent
72795     QuestionAuthority             Legendary                18%                               24%
234771    suchmoon                      Legendary                11%                               22%
98986     TMAN                          Hero Member              21%                               52%
140584    EFS                           Staff                    10%                               18%
30747     Vod                           Legendary                20%                               32%
153634    dbshck                        Staff                    8%                                10%
55384     Foxpup                        Legendary                11%                               24%
1192397   paxmao                        Full Member              5%                                12%
382413    xandry                        Staff                    2%                                 2%
507936    DarkStar_                     Legendary                18%                               28%
290195    achow101                      Staff                    23%                               56%
18321     OgNasty                       Donator                  8%                                13%
51173     mprep                         Global Moderator         11%                               29%
24140     qwk                           Donator                  17%                               35%
23092     malevolent                    Staff                    4%                                 3%
252510    JayJuanGee                    Legendary                22%                               35%
569455    BobLawblaw                    Legendary                58%                               91%
347141    BitRentX                      Staff                    20%                               29%
176777    mindrust                      Legendary                10%                                 9%
487418    The Pharmacist                Legendary                23%                               46%
459836    LoyceV                        Legendary                28%                               36%
452769    bones261                      Legendary                11%                               20%
479624    Last of the V8s               Hero Member              46%                               77%
553678    rickbig41                     Global Moderator         11%                               13%
698159    Jet Cash                      Hero Member              16%                               21%
976210    nullius                       Copper Member            54%                               84%
113670    Mitchell                      Staff                    18%                               16%
988740    frodocooper                   Staff                    4%                               9%
520313    Lutpin                        Copper Member            36%                               43%
379487    LFC_Bitcoin                   Copper Member            14%                               36%
33156     vapourminer                   Legendary                3%                                5%
120694    xhomerx10                     Legendary                25%                               47%
115423    Micio                         Legendary                42%                               56%
255065    ebliever                      Legendary                0%                                 0%
346731    minerjones                    Copper Member            29%                               27%
60820     DannyHamilton                 Legendary                29%                               41%
112208    Vlad2Vlad                     Legendary                15%                               12%
181801    shorena                       Copper Member            32%                               36%
308793    1Referee                      Legendary                22%                               16%
35        theymos                       Administrator            33%                               48%
18312     phantastisch                  Staff                    24%                               9%
88912     600watt                       Legendary                32%                               46%
35501     cAPSLOCK                      Legendary                35%                               50%
129726    explorer                      Legendary                29%                               51%
465017    actmyname                     Copper Member            19%                               34%
211419    redsn0w                       Legendary                7%                                 6%
54791     Dabs                          Staff                    10%                               26%
389331    RHavar                        Legendary                43%                               45%
511899    RoomBot                       Legendary                21%                               32%
434984    mhanbostanci                  Legendary                12%                               20%

I’ve added a full list of uses with their ratios here: Bitcointalk Reciprocal aggregates by user 20180531.

I came to the site in early January 2018, and had never had any prior knowledge about it nor it’s members. My ratios are therefore natural organic, with no influence to pre-merit kick-off relationships since I had none.

My ratios are:
user_id     name           rank                NuserSentReciprocalOverSent   NMeritSentReciprocalOverSent
1582324   DdmrDdmr   Full Member                      37%                               58%

What this means is that roughly 37% of the people I send sMerit to at some point have also sent it to me. That leaves a 63% that have not.
In terms of sent Merit, 58% of what I send does go to those members that at some point merited me, but 42% doesn't. I'm also far away from the averages but I believe that my network size is decreasing in terms of groth speed, and thus I tend to merit more my current network.
This seems natural to me and falls into the factors I stated in the introduction.

In conclusion: in general people do not just sMerit their buddies as shown by the averages; far from it.
It is true that one tend's to move in certain parts of the forum and reads certain topics that tend to be what one finds interesting. Those topics may have a larger presence of people that one merits and vice-versa over time, since the topics are of a common interest.

I would consider normal 50% ratios without much of an issue.
19  Other / Meta / Forum Merited Messages- Does size count? on: May 23, 2018, 04:29:38 PM
1. Introduction

I’ve often seen the “size doesn’t matter” as opposed to “size does matter” used when talking about merited posts. I wondered if this was true, and to what degree (in this context). While being at it, I came across other overall merited post features that answered an initial set of questions I wanted to resolve (limited to sMerited posts):

Q1) How often are user images included in posts?
Q2) What about forum images (i.e. smilies, etc.)?
Q3) How about quotes?
Q4) Is the thread’s OP the main merited post in general?
Q5) How many posts prior to Merit System kick-off have been merited, and how far back?
Q6) How close does sMerit awarding occur in relation to the date of the post?
Q7) The size one: What size do merited post have? The longer, the more sMerited?

The information exposed here is done from the global Forum Merited Post’s angle. I’m sure that if we took this analysis down a level (forum Section/Subsection), the profiles would not all concur, but a general view is a good starting point, at least for now.

Dataset baseline:
Data as of 18/05/2018 (and around).
Total Merited Post Base: 45.947 (non-deleted messages).

I’ve decided to show the graphs and drop the data tables on this occasion for a more fluid lecture. I’ve also included extreme cases. These are, as they say, extreme cases, and should not take the focus of the core information shown on the graphs (they are kinky though..)

Disclaimer: Getting hold of this information is unfortunately a pain, and trying to break it down even more due to the HTML tags and specially to the quotes (be them nested or standalone). After sometime, I believe I’ve managed to extract the text from the awarded messages pretty well, excluding the quoted text parts which I consider are part of the context to messages, but do not add “real length” to the message body (therefore I exclude them from the message length).
The algorithm still has some flaws when the post has many objects of different nature (quotes, tables, code, images, etc.). I’m not going to build a 100% robust parser now,  since I consider that even a 95% correct cleanse of the post for word count is good enough at this stage.
Some local languages are more troublesome. For example, Chinese characters often do not have many spaces and therefore the word count can be erratic there. I have not excluded these posts as they are not too many and represent only a small noise in the overall picture.
Also references to urls are counted as a word.  
So, all in all, this is a rather good approximation, but not a 100% exact one.

2. User Images

It turns out that the majority, 88,58% of the awarded posts, do not have user images. 6,61% have only one, 1,43% have 2 images, and 3,38% have 3 or more images.

Note: that I’m counting images here and cannot (nor wish to) retrieve information as to the actual image size. Some a large images with graphs and text, whilst others are mere icons.

Examples of the extreme cases are (most of the time the images do not all load even after refreshing the page):
a)   170 images - A post from August 2015 (services) post awarded with 5  sMerits: Case 1
b)   131 Images -  A post from September 2017 (services) awarded with 27 sMerits: Case 2
c)   118 Images -  A post from March 2018 (mining - harware) awarded with 6 sMerits: Case 3
d)   108 Images -  A post from October 2017 (services) awarded with 9 sMerits: Case 4
e)   106 Images -  A post from September 2015 (mining support – small dog icons count) awarded with 1 sMerit: Case 5

2. Forum Images

Forum images are those icons such as emoticons that reference an address on the forum, and not an external link.
79,17% of awarded posts do not use any forum images, 13,53% use one, 7,31% use two or above. Emoticons are therefore not abused and seem to be kept at bay.

Examples of the extreme cases are:
a)   83 forum images - A post from April 2018 (Economics Speculation) post awarded with 5  sMerits: Case 6   (I’ll skip a few now, since the same author has the top 8 cases in the same forum area).
b)   30 forum images - A post from February 2018 (Altcoin Discussion) post awarded with 1  sMerit: Case 7    (It looks like there are more than 30, but some are ascii characters).
c)   27 forum images - A post from January 2018 (Economics Speculation) post awarded with 1  sMerit: Case 8
d)   24 forum images - A post from February 2018 (Italian Trading) post awarded with 1  sMerits: Case 9
e)   21 forum images - A post from April 2018 (Spanish) post awarded with 2 sMerits: Case 10


Quotes are on the other hand a heavily used feature: 54,59% of the awarded posts, do not use quotes, but the remaining 45,41% do. 3,1% use 5 or more quotes.

Examples of the extreme cases are:
a)   290 quotes! - A post from April 2014 (Altcoin Discussion) post awarded with 7  sMerits: Case 11
b)   84 quotes - A post from April 2018 (Meta) post awarded with 9  sMerits: Case 12
c)   55 quotes - A post from February 2018 (Marketplace Gambling) post awarded with 2  sMerits (heavily nested quotes): case 13
d)   52 quotes - A post from May 2018 (Meta) post awarded with 2  sMerits (by me!): Case 14
e)   50 quotes - A post from March 2018 (Indonesian) post awarded with 2  sMerits: Case 15

4. Post Number

This one really startled me: 32,58% of merited posts are on mega threads (which I tend to ignore altogether), 40,31% if we count post position 201 onwards. Wow! This happens especially in Ann sections and Economy (The Wall Observer is the extreme case).
15% of awarded posts are Ops, but if we add up to post number 20 (which is the first page of a thread) , we get 40,21% of awarded posts. This graph actually does look like a crypto wall:

Examples of the extreme cases are:
a)   Post Nº  409230- A post from May 2018 (Economics Speculation) post awarded with 2  sMerits: Case 16   (There are a trillion in the same section/subsection).
b)   Post Nº 10049 - A post from May 2018 (Ann Altcoin) post awarded with 40  sMerits: Case 17
c)   Post Nº 10018- A post from January 2018 (Russian) post awarded with 47  sMerits: Case 18
d)   Post Nº 9324- A post from April 2018 (Ann Altcoin) post awarded with 50  sMerits: Case 19
e)   Post Nº 8912- A post from January 2018 (Ann Altcoin) post awarded with 50  sMerits: Case 20

5. Post Date

I thought there would be many more posts awarded sMerit from the days prior to the Merit System kick-off (since I has seen many cases when performing previous analytical tasks), but there really are not that many. If we consider that the system started in late February 2018, getting sMerit on posts back to January 2018 is pretty normal.
All in all, 93,89% of awarded posts are 2018 posts, 4,52% are 2017 posts and only 1,59% are posts from 2016. In terms of proportion, old awarded posts are outliers in the overall scheme of things.

Examples of the extreme cases are:
a)   A post from November 2009 (Bitcoin Discussion – Satoshi’s welcome post) post awarded with 751  sMerits: Case 21    (The oldest 5 awarded posts are all Satoshi’s)
b)   A post from January 2010 (Economy - Marketplace) post awarded with 1 sMerit: Case 22
c)   A post from January 2010 (Economy - Marketplace) post awarded with 1  sMerit: Case 23
d)   A post from January 2010 (Economy - Marketplace) post awarded with 1  sMerit: Case 24
e)   A post from May 2010 (Economy – Marketplace -> Pizza case) post awarded with 132  sMerit: Case 25

6. Time between Publishing and Meriting

I really wanted to see this one. It seems that 13,73% are merited within the first hour after posting, and another 10,05% within the second hour.
On a day scale, 56,50% of sMerit awarding occurs within the first 24 hours after posting, and an additional 20,47% gets awarded before the posts reaches an age of a tender week. Even so, 23,03% get awarded after two weeks or more since the post was published.

Note: time should be interpreted as “within the” (within the 1 (first) hour, within the second hour and so on). Also data represents number of Merit Txs, not number of posts.

Examples of the extreme cases are:

The first are all Satoshi’s posts as seen above, so I’ll give them a skip now in the examples.
a)   71222 hours: A post from March 2010 (Economy Marketplace -> must see: 10k bitcoins for 50$ and no one bought them) , awarded with 2  sMerits: Case 26
b)   70708 hours: A post from February 2010 (Economy Marketplace) , awarded with 1  sMerit: Case 27
c)   69941 hours: A post from February 2010 (Economics) , awarded with 2  sMerits: Case 28
d)   59227 hours: A post from July 2011 (Bitcoin Development and Technical Discussion) , awarded with 19  sMerits: Case 29
e)   2256 hours: A post from February  2018 (Altcoin Discussion) , awarded with 105  sMerits: Case 30

7.Post length

I’m measuring post length in words, and clustering them into groups of 100. As I’ve stated before, this part is not perfect since for example URLs get counted as words, no spaces after a full stop may cause in correct exact count, some html tags are a bother, etc. Quoted text has been removed.
On the whole, grouping posts in groups of 100, the data is pretty accurate and way better than no data at all.

It turns out that 65,07% of the sMerited posts have less than 100 words, another 18,41% have between 100 and 200 words, 6,45% between 200 and 300 words, 3,24% have between 300 and 400 words, and only 6,82% are above the 400 word barrier (somewhere near a word page in size).

I was also interested to see if longer posts get more merited, and it seems so. Looking at  the graphs, there’s hardly any difference between posts with up to 100 words (avg. 2,79 sMerits) and post with up to 200 words (avg. 2,76 sMerits), but it does build up from there. The larger the Word Group the less posts there are of the kind, so the less conclusive the related awarded sMerits become.

Nevertheless, the conclusion is not “go and create larger posts”, since the content is what makes the difference in these cases and not the post size per se (and content analysis is another world).

Note: ‘Words’ should be interpreted as within the group of x hundred words (so on the graph, ‘0’ represents between 0 and 99 words, a ‘1’ between 100 and 199 words, and so on).

Examples of the extreme cases are (MS Word and my algorithm don’t always agree on word count due to elements before pointed out):
a)   10.159 words: A post from December 2014 (Altcoin Discussion) , awarded with 20  sMerits: Case 31
b)   8.204 words: A post from March 2018 (Bitcoin Discussion) , awarded with 6 sMerits: Case 32
c)   1 word: A post from February 2018 (Economics Speculation) , awarded with 25 sMerits (for a full stop -> probably deleted text): Case 33
d)   1 word: A post from April 2018 (French) , awarded with 50 sMerits (a crypto address): Case 34
e)   0 word: A post from March 2018 (Russian) , awarded with 1 sMerits (quotes): Case 35
f)   0 word: A post from February 2018 (Economics, Speculation) , awarded with 14 sMerits (image): Case 36
20  Other / Meta / User's sMerit Network size – Data to select possible Merit Sources on: May 16, 2018, 04:20:04 PM
Edit 19/06/2018:

Added this information to the Merit Dashboard (Link:  BitcoinTalk Merit Dashboard), under tab "Potential Merit Sources" so as to allow for a dynamic periodical update of the data, as well as to apply filters to it with recalculation of the ratios (by section/subsection, date period or specific user). Data on dashboard is up to friday 15/06/2018.

1. Introduction

We’ve seen various post related to the Merit Network, both from a user’s perpective (Our very own sMerit Network Picture) and from a global perspective (sncc's Merit network analysis: merit rank distribution and satellites).
The question of how to derive the potential sMerit Sources has come up recurrently, so I thought about digging into the data to see how this could be determined, or at least eased.
The basic principal that I’m using is that potential users should have a track of sMerit awarding in their history. I think that the best criteria is determined by the size of the personal outgoing sMerit Network. That is, the number of distinct users that a certain user has awarded with sMerit over time.
The hypothesis behind is that the more users that one has merited, the better knowledge he has of the underlying principles. The amount awarded is secondary in this case, but also a factor to narrow down candidates.

This can be done from:
a)   A Global perspective: Aggregating all the data for a given user.
b)   A Section/Subsection perspective: Aggregating the data for a given user in a specific section/subsection.

The numbers presented are those that I found, based on the snapshot of data collected 10 days ago (and aligned with the data presented in Forum Metrics - Section/subsection sMerit breakdown.). Since I do not know who the exact 79 sMerit Sources are, I have not taken them off the analysis. Logically, the current sMerit Sources should come up in the data right at the top in most cases.
In addition to determining potential candidates for Merit Sources based on the above criteria, Merit Sources could be added by including moderators to that role, since they are already scouting the forum and parsing posts daily. It depends on whether they consider they can perform this additional task along side current tasks. This idea was nicely suggested by seoincorporation in other posts.

In all cases, the candidates need to be manually screened, and vetoed if necessary (tracking DT, checking merited posts, etc.).

In addition, I’d like to mention that determining the potential sMerit Sources comes in second place to determining where these sMerit Sources should develop their activity. Determining where there is a lack of sMerit Sources, in my opinion, derives from knowing how much sMerit is being given in a given section/subsection, and getting a measure of how many posts go unmerited, all in a given timeframe. The deficit can then covered by placing sMerit sources at work in those areas.

The idea here is to be able to detect potential sMerit Source candidates, not to determine in this exercise where exactly they need to be active since that requires other input variables like I said.

2. Global Perspective
From a global perspective, this is the distribution of the size of the outgoing sMerit Network for all users with at least 1 sMerit sent over their history:

We can see that 26 people have sent sMerit to over 100 distinct users each, 4 people to between 90 and 100 users, and so on.
Only 6,63% of the users have a network with 10 or more awarded users.
On the other extreme, a mass of 7.335 people have sent sMerit to only one user, representing 54,61% of all total sMerit awarders.

I think that this last data is a low key tone in the system (more than half of awarders only awarded one user). Obviously this is related to the amount of sMerit available, but from the big picture’s point of view it doesn’t look great.

So from a global point of view, the users that are candidates to being sMerit Sources would be (again, sMerit Sources will probably be on the lists at the top):
(note: top 100 sMerit network size are provided in this list. Full list in a more user friendly format can be retrieved here:Google Drive sMerit Outgoing Network 20180516)

The idea would be to scout the users on the list in a top down manner, favouring network size, but also using the complementary provided fields as filter criteria. Provided columns are:
User_from: User_id
Name: User alias
Rank: User rank (as of data extraction)
nSentTo: Network size. Number of distinct users that user_from has sent sMerit to.
sMeritSent: aggregate sMerit sent by the user.
nTx: Number of sMerit Transactions.
avgSent: Average sMerit sent per Transaction.
stdDevSent: Standard Deviation of sent sMerits.
cVarSent: Coefficient of Variation (the smaller, the more constant value of merit awarded by the user)

user_from   name                rank                nSentTo        sMeritSent        nTx               avgSent           stdDevSent        cVarSent          NetworkGroup
234771      suchmoon            Legendary           403            1087              738               1,47              1,1               0,74              >100
1192397     paxmao              Full Member         363            571               519               1,1               0,39              0,35              >100
18321       OgNasty             Donator             309            518               414               1,25              1,65              1,32              >100
30747       Vod                 Legendary           261            1054              460               2,29              2,52              1,1               >100
252510      JayJuanGee          Legendary           261            394               386               1,02              0,14              0,14              >100
140584      EFS                 Staff               256            1055              577               1,83              1,85              1,01              >100
98986       TMAN                Hero Member         244            1081              489               2,21              2,35              1,06              >100
33156       vapourminer         Legendary           201            258               253               1,02              0,14              0,14              >100
698159      Jet Cash            Hero Member         198            275               256               1,07              0,36              0,34              >100
459836      LoyceV              Legendary           183            309               294               1,05              0,33              0,32              >100
153634      dbshck              Staff               179            888               455               1,95              2,31              1,18              >100
507936      DarkStar_           Legendary           172            551               261               2,11              2,08              0,99              >100
51173       mprep               Global Moderator    166            444               262               1,69              1,46              0,86              >100
487418      The Pharmacist      Legendary           162            333               253               1,32              0,82              0,63              >100
72795       QuestionAuthority   Legendary           136            1733              153               11,33             8,75              0,77              >100
382413      xandry              Staff               131            486               423               1,15              1,54              1,34              >100
452769      bones261            Legendary           130            284               232               1,22              0,7               0,57              >100
24140       qwk                 Donator             124            485               386               1,26              0,77              0,61              >100
85033       d5000               Legendary           119            160               153               1,05              0,35              0,34              >100
479624      Last of the V8s     Hero Member         116            319               316               1,01              0,1               0,1               >100
379487      LFC_Bitcoin         Copper Member       114            236               209               1,13              0,49              0,43              >100
290195      achow101            Staff               110            504               267               1,89              1,11              0,59              >100
131361      Timelord2067        Legendary           110            192               192               1                 0                 0                 >100
23092       malevolent          Staff               106            330               150               2,2               2,47              1,12              >100
176777      mindrust            Legendary           103            319               128               2,49              4,98              2                 >100
370611      bill gator          Copper Member       102            160               153               1,05              0,27              0,25              >100
120694      xhomerx10           Legendary           98             259               168               1,54              1,98              1,29              (90..100]
55384       Foxpup              Legendary           97             609               315               1,93              1,57              0,81              (90..100]
143168      TheQuin             Hero Member         95             160               150               1,07              0,74              0,69              (90..100]
553678      rickbig41           Global Moderator    94             303               132               2,3               1,96              0,85              (90..100]
54791       Dabs                Staff               90             234               161               1,45              1,53              1,05              (80..90]
68364       Hydrogen            Hero Member         90             141               123               1,15              0,35              0,31              (80..90]
349097      Gleb Gamow          Legendary           89             194               166               1,17              1,07              0,91              (80..90]
520313      Lutpin              Copper Member       89             260               113               2,3               2,87              1,25              (80..90]
169515      EcuaMobi            Legendary           89             196               106               1,85              2,16              1,17              (80..90]
88912       600watt             Legendary           88             231               147               1,57              2,57              1,64              (80..90]
87229       yefi                Legendary           85             217               174               1,25              1                 0,8               (80..90]
124876      STT                 Legendary           84             146               107               1,36              1,62              1,18              (80..90]
175361      DooMAD              Legendary           83             204               134               1,52              0,78              0,51              (80..90]
485285      WhiteManWhite       Legendary           83             95                95                1                 0                 0                 (80..90]
129726      explorer            Legendary           81             232               189               1,23              0,87              0,71              (80..90]
125583      tokeweed            Legendary           81             207               95                2,18              1,6               0,73              (80..90]
60820       DannyHamilton       Legendary           80             267               189               1,41              0,66              0,47              (70..80]
846936      sabotag3x           Hero Member         79             159               146               1,09              0,45              0,42              (70..80]
81839       edgar               Legendary           79             157               122               1,29              0,77              0,6               (70..80]
308793      1Referee            Legendary           79             242               114               2,12              6,82              3,21              (70..80]
976210      nullius             Copper Member       78             318               214               1,49              2,85              1,92              (70..80]

user_from   name                rank                nSentTo        sMeritSent        nTx               avgSent           stdDevSent        cVarSent          NetworkGroup
533006      richardsNY          Legendary           77             135               112               1,21              1,83              1,52              (70..80]
557989      BTCforJoe           Hero Member         75             141               120               1,18              0,5               0,42              (70..80]
787736      marlboroza          Hero Member         73             183               91                2,01              5,11              2,54              (70..80]
41175       infofront           Legendary           72             160               152               1,05              0,46              0,43              (70..80]
239406      Toxic2040           Sr. Member          72             123               114               1,08              0,42              0,39              (70..80]
623643      johhnyUA            Hero Member         72             100               95                1,05              0,27              0,25              (70..80]
533583      Lucius              Legendary           72             142               84                1,69              1,08              0,64              (70..80]
84521       Welsh               Legendary           72             104               83                1,25              0,82              0,66              (70..80]
550439      vlom                Legendary           71             165               83                1,99              2,83              1,42              (70..80]
84866       ibminer             Legendary           69             176               119               1,48              1,11              0,75              (60..70]
906023      poptop              Hero Member         68             198               172               1,15              0,59              0,51              (60..70]
988740      frodocooper         Staff               68             273               167               1,63              1,38              0,84              (60..70]
806776      digaran             Copper Member       68             218               96                2,27              1,65              0,73              (60..70]
434984      mhanbostanci        Legendary           67             180               99                1,82              2,48              1,36              (60..70]
507856      LeGaulois           Copper Member       66             112               87                1,29              0,73              0,57              (60..70]
95019       Co1n                Sr. Member          65             108               102               1,06              0,44              0,42              (60..70]
155345      gentlemand          Legendary           65             131               76                1,72              0,92              0,53              (60..70]
569455      BobLawblaw          Legendary           64             386               204               1,89              3,86              2,04              (60..70]
110785      AGD                 Legendary           64             76                75                1,01              0,12              0,11              (60..70]
255065      ebliever            Legendary           63             221               100               2,21              1,37              0,62              (60..70]
525058      InvoKing            Legendary           63             99                71                1,39              1,96              1,41              (60..70]
6706        RodeoX              Legendary           63             86                69                1,25              0,47              0,37              (60..70]
379147      pooya87             Legendary           61             132               83                1,59              1,63              1,03              (60..70]
557798      TryNinja            Hero Member         61             89                74                1,2               0,57              0,48              (60..70]
114848      Financisto          Hero Member         61             67                67                1                 0                 0                 (60..70]
204821      Buchi-88            Legendary           60             181               124               1,46              1,31              0,9               (50..60]
17501       iCEBREAKER          Legendary           60             210               68                3,09              3,54              1,15              (50..60]
183781      pawel7777           Legendary           59             92                65                1,42              1,01              0,72              (50..60]
65636       babo                Legendary           58             118               117               1,01              0,09              0,09              (50..60]
163641      eternalgloom        Legendary           57             124               63                1,97              1,33              0,68              (50..60]
913593      Juggy777            Sr. Member          57             59                59                1                 0                 0                 (50..60]
511899      RoomBot             Legendary           56             218               83                2,63              5,7               2,17              (50..60]
163318      Torque              Legendary           55             123               120               1,03              0,16              0,15              (50..60]
347141      BitRentX            Staff               55             391               79                4,95              3,42              0,69              (50..60]
28719       jbreher             Legendary           54             160               150               1,07              0,74              0,69              (50..60]
1304130     pandukelana2712     Full Member         54             128               94                1,36              0,84              0,62              (50..60]
313016      owlcatz             Legendary           54             169               79                2,14              2,74              1,28              (50..60]
402366      Betwrong            Legendary           54             121               65                1,86              2,57              1,38              (50..60]
49008       jojo69              Legendary           53             189               125               1,51              2,21              1,46              (50..60]
1275282     joniboini           Full Member         52             152               109               1,39              1                 0,72              (50..60]
1067333     micgoossens         Sr. Member          52             116               108               1,07              0,26              0,24              (50..60]
867786      HCP                 Hero Member         52             106               86                1,23              0,7               0,57              (50..60]
677181      Mometaskers         Hero Member         52             86                59                1,46              0,95              0,65              (50..60]
226681      finist4x            Legendary           52             132               54                2,44              6,67              2,73              (50..60]
443338      CjMapope            Legendary           51             166               57                2,91              1,86              0,64              (50..60]
1023316     Ranyar              Sr. Member          51             80                57                1,4               1,44              1,02              (50..60]
314792      examplens           Legendary           50             70                61                1,15              0,36              0,31              (40..50]
164828      u9y42               Legendary           49             105               87                1,21              0,76              0,63              (40..50]
223006      Karartma1           Legendary           49             172               79                2,18              2,34              1,07              (40..50]
550315      snipie              Legendary           49             189               78                2,42              1,98              0,82              (40..50]

Suchmoon comes at the top of the list, having the biggest outgoing sMerit network in the whole Forum (as of date of data extraction). He has an outgoing network of 403 distinct users, having awarded them 1087 sMerits over 738 Transactions. The average per Transaction is of 1,47 sMerits, although the awarding has a variance of 1,1 sMerits giving us a Coefficient of Variation of 74%.

Paxmao is next in line, with an outgoing network of 363 distinct users, having awarded them 571 sMerits over 519 Transactions. The average per Transaction is of 1,1 sMerits, with a variance of 0,39 sMerits giving us a Coefficient of Variation of 35%.

This means that Paxmao tends to award an amount of sMerit nearer to his average than Suchmoon. This is neither good nor bad, but the Coefficient of Variation could be meaningful in some scenarios in general.

And so on..

2. Section/Subsection Perspective

A section/subsection perspective allows us to see the same output of information as above, but filtered specifically to the section/subsection being analysed (aggregates of data are only those related to the specific section/subsection being treated).
The graphs themselves are not too enlightening, but the data table at the base shows us the goodies.
I'll spare the visual pain of seeing local scrolling lists here, but all the data charted can be retrieved from the full list here (second tab) :Google Drive sMerit Outgoing Network 20180516)

2.1. Alternate Cryptocurrencies

Vapourminer has the largest outward sMerit Network, with 64 Users in his network on the Mining Altcoins board.

If we needed sMerit sources on the Mining (Altcoin) section/subsection, there are 11 candidates with an outward sMerit Network greater or equal to 10 users, so finding one there is difficult due to lack of candidates. Nevertheless, perhaps candidates with a smaller network in the section/subsection, but a large overall one could be shifted to Merit here as a source.

All other sections/subsections are similar except for Ann Altcoins, where there are 45 candidates with a network above 10 users.

2.2. Bitcoin

Project Development has only two native candidates, since all the remaining users have a network that is less or equal to 6 users.
Bitcoin Technical Support is also rather scarce, with only 10 candidates with a network greater o equal to 10 users. Mining has one more candidate above this threshold.
Development & Technical Discussion and Bitcoin Discussion are better off with easy two digit network candidates.

2.3. Economy

Trading Discussion is a bit scarce, but holds 18 candidates with a network greater or equal to 10 users. Marketplace and economics have plenty of candidates above the 10 user network threshold.

2.4. Other

Meta seems well served with candidates. Beginners & Help has just over a dozen above the 10 user network threshold.
On the other hand, politics & Society, and off-topic are rather scarce with candidates, with less than a handful at most.
Archival and Serious Discussion probably don’t need candidates.

2.5. Local Boards

Half the Local boards are a sore sight in terms of candidates. Moving the minimum size threshold further down gives more options, but lower than a network size of 7 or 8 is maybe dangerous terrain due to farms.
Russian, Turkish, Indonesian and Turkish local boards seem to have enough candidates if needed.
Some seem impossible using a sMerit Network criteria, such as the Indian board. If it’s moderated, perhaps the mod could do this job too.
Pages: [1] 2 3 »
Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!