1. IntroductionLately I’ve seen some comments on whether it is easier to earn the first merit on such or such forum section/subsection. This moved me to find the Merit Path for each person. The Merit Path is the set of distinct section/subsections where we get merited in, ordered by the date we get merited in them for the first time. For example, my Merit Path is as follows: (Local) Spanish -> (Other) Beginners & Help -> (Other) Meta-> (Other) Serious discussion -> (Other) Off-topic Therefore, in my case, the Spanish Local board was my starter. I got a few merits there before being merited in the Beginners & Help board. Got a few more merits around those two boards until I got my first merit on Meta, and so on. This is similar (a very simplified version) to what supermarkets do when they analyse our purchasing habits, classify them by sections or product families, and give us vouchers to promote the next section they consider should be of interest to us (which often is not really), where we’ve never made a purchase before, based on the study of similar paths performed by other customers. My objective here is rather more modest though… 2. First stepping stone in the Merit PathSo far, 22.543 people have been sMerited at some point. We know that some of those sMerits have been awarded to what are now deleted posts, so I’ve taken those out of the merit path. Out of these forum members, 1.249 have received all their sMerit on deleted posts, so I will not be taking these into account since there is no derivable merit path. For the remaining 21.294 merited forum members, this is where they have obtained their first sMerit:  What we can see is the following:a) Russian is the section where most people got their first sMerit (17%), followed by Ann Altcoins (16,53%), Altcoin Discussion (8,82%), Bitcoin Discussion (5,86%) and Economics (5,03%).
b) On the lower end, most local boards are very low contributing to the first merit, Serious Discussion is where 0,44% obtain their first merit, followed by Bitcoin Technical Support (0,45%), Bitcoin Project Development (0,51%) and Politics & Society (0,76%). c) When we compare the complete history to the most recent history (first of august onwards), the ratios are rather much the same, but there is a larger spike in proportion on the Altcoin Discussion board (+5,15%) and the Russian board (4,02%). 3. First stepping stone in the Merit Path by RankThe first stepping stone may vary by rank, being some more prone than others to receive their first sMerit in certain section/subsections. To see if this is true, I’ve crossed the above table with current rank (cannot go back to rank at the time of first awarded merit), and turned the numbers into percentages to see the distribution by rank.   Interesting finds:a) The first table (in green) shows us how many forum members from each rank have earned at least one merit. The user base here is that of the 21.294 merited users who have received sMerit on some non-deleted post at some time. For simplicity, I’ve hidden ranks such as Administrator, Donator, Founder, Global Moderator, Staff, VIP and Brand New. In addition, copper ranks are translated to a regular rank. Now what I had to recheck multiple times (since it startled me), is that the number of merited Newbies was so high (2.218 in this subset), along side Jr. Members (7.051 in this subset). Both amount together to 43,53% of merited users (in non-deleted posts). That is way more than I has in mind, although it is true that they tend to be merited with a very small amount of merits compared to the higher ranks. But what is relevant is the volume of these two ranks alone in comparison: out of all the merited users on non deleted posts, 43,53% are actually newbies or Jr. Members. Astonishing!b) Altcoin Discussion is a section where the lower ranks earned their first sMerit in a rather much higher proportion than the higher ranks, albeit the number of higher rank cases is not dismissible. c) On the other hand, the Ann Altcoin section is way more different, being the place where 20,16% of merited Legendaries were awarded sMerit for the first time!d) Surprisingly enough, Newbies merited for the first time in the Mining Altcoins is pretty high (5,59%), and are by comparison pretty high on Bitcoin Development and Technical Discussion (4,15%) and Bitcoin Technical Support (2,39%). Strangely though, many of the merited Newbies in these sections are barely active, so perhaps they are not very concerned with the Merit System and Ranking System at all. e) Economics and Market Place are strong starters for the higher ranks when considering their first received sMerit, and much lower in proportion for the lower ranks. f) The proportion of Legendries merited on Meta for the first time (6,29%) is not too large comparted to the Economy sections above mentioned, and not the best starter for Newbies and Jr. Members compared to other sections. 4. Complete Merit Path CombinationsThis would normally be one of the most interesting sections to analyse. Nevertheless, since the majority of people have received whatever merit they have earned in one unique section, the merit path combinations with more than one step (like the one I used in the Introduction) are rather small in proportion, and do not bear too much statistical significance. Leaving aside those that gain their merit in a unique section/subsection (and that thus have a one step merit path that is shown above), the main combinations are: nUsers Merit Path
60 (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Announcements (Altcoins) , (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Marketplace (Altcoins)
60 (Local) Russian , (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Announcements (Altcoins)
58 (Bitcoin) Bitcoin Discussion , (Economy) Economics
57 (Local) Russian , (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Altcoin Discussion
54 (Economy) Economics , (Bitcoin) Bitcoin Discussion
52 (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Announcements (Altcoins) , (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Altcoin Discussion
50 (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Altcoin Discussion , (Bitcoin) Bitcoin Discussion
44 (Bitcoin) Bitcoin Discussion , (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Altcoin Discussion
42 (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Altcoin Discussion , (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Announcements (Altcoins)
41 (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Marketplace (Altcoins) , (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Announcements (Altcoins)
40 (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Altcoin Discussion , (Economy) Economics
39 (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Announcements (Altcoins) , (Local) Russian
39 (Local) Russian , (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Marketplace (Altcoins)
36 (Economy) Economics , (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Altcoin Discussion
29 (Economy) Economics , (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Announcements (Altcoins)
28 (Other) Meta , (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Altcoin Discussion
27 (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Altcoin Discussion , (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Speculation (Altcoins)
27 (Other) Meta , (Bitcoin) Bitcoin Discussion
26 (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Speculation (Altcoins) , (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Altcoin Discussion
25 (Economy) Marketplace , (Economy) Trading Discussion
24 (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Altcoin Discussion , (Local) Russian
24 (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Marketplace (Altcoins) , (Local) Russian
24 (Other) Meta , (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Announcements (Altcoins)
22 (Local) German , (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Announcements (Altcoins)
22 (Other) Beginners & Help , (Other) Meta
20 (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Altcoin Discussion , (Other) Beginners & Help
20 (Local) Indonesian , (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Altcoin Discussion
19 (Economy) Marketplace , (Bitcoin) Bitcoin Discussion
18 (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Altcoin Discussion , (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Marketplace (Altcoins)
18 (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Announcements (Altcoins) , (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Mining (Altcoins)
18 (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Mining (Altcoins) , (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Announcements (Altcoins)
18 (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Speculation (Altcoins) , (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Announcements (Altcoins)
18 (Other) Meta , (Economy) Marketplace
17 (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Announcements (Altcoins) , (Bitcoin) Bitcoin Discussion
16 (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Announcements (Altcoins) , (Economy) Marketplace
16 (Economy) Economics , (Economy) Marketplace
16 (Other) Meta , (Other) Beginners & Help
15 (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Altcoin Discussion , (Economy) Marketplace
15 (Other) Meta , (Economy) Trading Discussion
14 (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Altcoin Discussion , (Other) Meta
14 (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Announcements (Altcoins) , (Economy) Trading Discussion
14 (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Announcements (Altcoins) , (Local) German
14 (Economy) Marketplace , (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Altcoin Discussion
14 (Economy) Marketplace , (Economy) Economics
14 (Local) Russian , (Bitcoin) Bitcoin Discussion
14 (Local) Turkish , (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Altcoin Discussion
13 (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Altcoin Discussion , (Economy) Trading Discussion
13 (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Announcements (Altcoins) , (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Speculation (Altcoins)
13 (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Marketplace (Altcoins) , (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Altcoin Discussion
13 (Economy) Marketplace , (Alternate cryptocurrencies) Announcements (Altcoins)
In total, there are 1.976 distinct Merit Path combinations. 5. ConclusionsBear in mind that this topic is about where one got merited, not how many sMerits they received. a) There is a fair share of merited people that have been merited exclusively on later deleted posts (1.249 out of 22.543). b) Most merited people have been merited in one unique section/subsection. c) The main section/subsections where people are merited for the first time are Russian, Ann Altcoins, Altcoin Discussion, Bitcoin Discussion and Economics. d) 43,54% of merited users are currently holding one of the lower ranks (Newbie or Jr. Member). e) Ranks have different section/subsections where they got their first sMerit. Being the higher ranks more prone to Ann Altcoins, Economics, Marketplace, Russian and Meta, and the lower ranks to Ann Altcoins, Altcoin Discussion, Bitcoin Discussion, and Altcoin Mining. f) Ann Altcoins is the section that most people got their first merit on, regardless on the rank (Russian board aside).
|
|
|
|
09/01/2019 Atención: Cambios en el sistema de Confianza por Defecto (DT) @theymos parece que acaba de modificar el sistema de confianza por defecto (DT), incluyendo cambios sustanciales, y donde los méritos incluso juegan un rol colateral. Hay que mirarlo con detenimiento (y si alguien quiere reservarse su traducción, adelante…): DefaultTrust changes. El punto más relevante es el #3. Tengo que mirarlo bien cuando pueda, pero lo interesante es seguir el hilo durante los primeros días, dado que se darán respuestas respecto de las dudas que podamos tener al respecto.
En otro post (ver Re: [Encuesta] Acerca de crear dos valiosas nuevas secciones en esta comunidad), comentamos lo que era el DT o nivel de confianza por defecto. La mayoría de nosotros no modifica nuestra lista, por lo que heredamos la que hay defecto. Por tanto, visualizamos con mayor peso las valoraciones realizadas por parte de los miembros que son DT1 y DT2. Lo que es interesante conocer también es que éstos no son inamovibles, y que de hecho una persona puede ser excluida de un nivel de DT determinado. Por ejemplo, una persona de DT2 puede ser eliminada de la lista si la persona de DT1 que la añadió decide que ya no es de su confianza y le elimina, o bien si otros dos o más miembros de DT1 determinan que no es de confianza y le marcan como persona en la cual no hay que confiar. Aunque estas listas de DT son relativamente estáticas en los niveles superiores, de vez en cuando se producen cambios que desorientan un tanto. Recientemente, Lauda ha sido eliminado del nivel DT2, creando un pequeño revuelo y algo de confusión (ver Lauda Not Anymore in DT now | How does DT work?). El efecto práctico derivado parece ser que los reportes de confianza suyos han pasado de ser marcados como “untrusted feedback” (valoración no de confianza) en lugar de “trusted feedback” (valoración de confianza) en el detalle de confianza de las personas a las cuales había marcado con un reporte negativo. Históricamente han habido hilos acerca de la ética y del criterio de ciertos DTs, tachando algunos miembros de sesgados e interesados. En todo caso, si uno no está conforme con la lista DT por defecto, puede crear la suya, aunque si no está activamente haciendo negocios en el foro, es más lío que otra cosa a mi entender. Algunos casos recientes de lo anterior: Do not trust actmyname. Marlboroza is abusing DT power!. User Vod abusing DT position (petty red-rating with provable lies as a reason)Estas acusaciones no obstante aparece normalmente cuando el interesado ha sido marcado en rojo por parte de algún miembro DT, soliendo ejercer su derecho de réplica en Reputación. Como se observa, el sistema no es perfecto y los entresijos tienen un punto de complejidad, pero diría que no es mal sistema y me fío más de la lista DT que tener que ir creando la mía propia en estos momentos.
|
|
|
|
1. Introduction.I was curious as to what the merit per day and merit per post for a forum member looked like these days, and what a projection of their ranking-up dates could roughly look like. While the merit per day indicator is relatively easy to derive, the merit per post and the projection of the dates when one is to rank-up are not. I’ve tried a few approaches and posted here the one that seems better off out of the diverse alternatives I tried. 2. Earned Merit per day.The earned merit per day for a given person is calculated as the coefficient EarnedMerit/nDaysReference, where: EarnedMerit = the sum of all non-airdropped merits. nDaysReference = The number of days between 24/01/2018 until the 28/09/2018 (last data extraction-> early morning-> virtually as if it were the 27/09/2018) that the person has had his account for. Accounts created on or before 24/01/2018 will all have 248 days (number of days the merit system has been running until last data extraction). Newer account will have a smaller value logically (i.e. an account created a month ago will have 30 days in this parameter). Upon further though, I saw that even this simple ratio is not always fair. For example, let’s say we have an account that has been created 1 day ago, and received 15 (suspicious) sMerits. That account would have a EarnedMeritPerDay ration of 15, which would be the top ratio. For that reason, even though I’ve calculated internally the indicator for all accounts, I would omit from any ranking those accounts that have not posted at least 30 posts recently (within the last 4 months *), which seems to cut out most of the extreme cases I had cropping up in the top places. Top 25 EarnedMeritPerDay: user_id name rank EarnedMeritPerDay earnedMerit nDaysAcc. nDaysReference url
35 theymos Administrator 10,988 2725 3154 248 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=35
459836 LoyceV Legendary 4,052 1005 1311 248 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=459836
1582324 DdmrDdmr Sr. Member 4,032 1000 268 248 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1582324
397737 hilariousetc Legendary 3,484 864 1404 248 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=397737
479624 Last of the V8s Legendary 3,218 798 1294 248 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=479624
520313 Lutpin Legendary 2,996 743 1211 248 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=520313
698159 Jet Cash Legendary 2,948 731 1014 248 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=698159
234771 suchmoon Legendary 2,944 730 1702 248 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=234771
30747 Vod Legendary 2,879 714 2649 248 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=30747
487418 The Pharmacist Legendary 2,835 703 1288 248 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=487418
98986 TMAN Hero Member 2,677 664 1995 248 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=98986
290195 achow101 Staff 2,657 659 1660 248 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=290195
897509 xtraelv Sr. Member 2,617 649 750 248 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=897509
1067333 micgoossens Sr. Member 2,484 616 442 248 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1067333
101872 Lauda Legendary 2,48 615 1991 248 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=101872
188198 Piggy Hero Member 2,29 568 1752 248 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=188198
1275282 joniboini Sr. Member 2,238 555 331 248 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1275282
1000199 krogothmanhattan Hero Member 2,109 523 506 248 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1000199
11425 gmaxwell Staff 2,073 514 2704 248 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=11425
569455 BobLawblaw Legendary 2,044 507 1077 248 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=569455
1291828 iasenko Sr. Member 2,012 499 326 248 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1291828
1188543 o_e_l_e_o Sr. Member 1,992 494 359 248 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1188543
557989 BTCforJoe Hero Member 1,883 467 1097 248 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=557989
1560793 sncc Sr. Member 1,774 440 271 248 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1560793
787736 marlboroza Hero Member 1,758 436 945 248 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=787736
Comments: • Satoshi is off the list due to not meeting the 30 recent posts criteria. Another great ratio that is chopped off is @theyoungmillionaire (his ratio is 2,23) , for the same reason. • What surprised me is that, out of the 21.971 all-time merited users, 11.424 has a post count of less than 30 post in the last four months (*). It is not just the Newbies and Jr. Members, since there are plenty of members, full members and other ranks in the same situation. That indicates that just over half of merited people post rather seldom or in bursts. • The full Merit user base distribution for EarnedMeritPerDay is as follows: EarnedMeritPerDay nUsers %
[>=1] 109 0,50%
[0.75 ... 1) 49 0,22%
[0.5 ... 0.75) 128 0,58%
[0.25 ... 0.5) 432 1,97%
[0.1 ... 0.25) 1139 5,18%
[<0.1) 20114 91,55%
If the "required" merit per day is roughly of 1 per day (in order to up-rank at the same rate as before the merit system, just based on activity), then only a small elite is keeping the pace (and many of them are already on the highest rank to date: Legendary). (*) Nº of Recent post within four months is calculated as follows:
- If the account is < 4 months old then total posts are considered.
- If the account is >= 4 months old and account is in backup from four months ago then total nPostNow – nPostBackup
- If the account is >= 4 months old and account is not in backup from four months ago (merited in between for the first time) then (total nPostNow /nDaysAccount)*nDaysIn4Months. Basically, using all-time average per day for the account, and translating that into 4 months.
This is not perfect fot the third case, but it is a decent solution for the most. Nevertheless, there are circumstances that shift the post count form what it really should be in reality, such as deleted posts. 3. Earned Merit per post (last 4 months)The earned merit per post for a given person is more complicated. The ideal would be to have a full user snapshot of the DB from the 24/01/2018 to contrast current posts against. Ideally, all posts prior to that date should not be considered (although arguably backtracked posts were merited in the early days of the Merit System). I also thought that after eight months, people’s received merit patterns may vary rather, especially if we contrast the early months to the rest. In the end, I decided to use the 4 month criteria for this calculation as explained above for posts (*), performing a similar calculus for the number of merits received in the same timeframe (consider all earned merit if account < =4 months old, merit difference from 4 month backup for those in the backup, average of up to 248 days for the rest and multiplied by 4 months). With the above, the top 25 users with most earned merit per post are: user_id name rank earnedMeritPerPost nMeritReferenceCalculation nPostReferenceCalculation url
11425 gmaxwell Staff 6,872 Earned merit in 4 months 4 months https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=11425
35 theymos Administrator 2,979 Earned merit in 4 months 4 months https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=35
958248 etherclassic Member 2,595 Earned merit in 4 months 4 months https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=958248
290195 achow101 Staff 2,355 Earned merit in 4 months 4 months https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=290195
921087 Tukang Becak Hero Member 2,243 Earned merit in 4 months 4 months https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=921087
1026500 rusbitcoinuser Full Member 2,219 Avg Merit in 4 months (all history > 8 month) All History (averaged to 4 months) https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1026500
950218 Dice-Bet Full Member 1,633 Avg Merit in 4 months (all history > 8 month) All History (averaged to 4 months) https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=950218
906023 poptop Hero Member 1,487 Earned merit in 4 months 4 months https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=906023
392563 chandra12 Full Member 1,471 Earned merit in 4 months 4 months https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=392563
952115 ganjaman Sr. Member 1,457 Earned merit in 4 months 4 months https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=952115
206960 1369 Legendary 1,417 Earned merit in 4 months 4 months https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=206960
2143453 1miau Full Member 1,336 Avg Merit in 4 months (all history <= 8 month) All History (averaged to 4 months) https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2143453
1090672 Smart man Sr. Member 1,319 Earned merit in 4 months 4 months https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1090672
1582324 DdmrDdmr Sr. Member 1,269 Earned merit in 4 months 4 months https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1582324
354710 maildir Legendary 1,235 Earned merit in 4 months 4 months https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=354710
1065443 MarcusMillstrom Full Member 1,184 Earned merit in 4 months 4 months https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1065443
1951496 Cryptoshka Full Member 1,179 Earned merit in 4 months 4 months https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1951496
182284 mfort312 Sr. Member 1,148 Earned merit in 4 months 4 months https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=182284
138921 kschneezy Full Member 1,145 Earned merit in 4 months 4 months https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=138921
1555374 NadiaHel Full Member 1,123 Earned merit in 4 months 4 months https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1555374
1464471 spirali Member 1,098 Earned merit in 4 months 4 months https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1464471
55384 Foxpup Legendary 1,094 Earned merit in 4 months 4 months https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=55384
1982698 joulion86 Member 1,067 Earned merit in 4 months 4 months https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1982698
84866 ibminer Legendary 1,064 Earned merit in 4 months 4 months https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=84866
64734 vitruvio Sr. Member 1,053 Avg Merit in 4 months (all history > 8 month) All History (averaged to 4 months) https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=64734
The above has to be taken as a rough reference, but not verbatim since there are factor that influence the results, potentially noticeably, such as deleted posts, merit awarded in the four month window to post created before the window timeframe, etc. 4. Ranking-up datesI also gave it a go at calculating the rank-up dates for forum members that had PostsPerDay>0. Looking at the distribution shown above on merit per day distribution, the majority of the projections are bound to be really far ahead (I mean 91,55% of merited users are being awarded below 0.1 merits per day, so for most, the stopper is merit and not activity in general, as we already know). Basically, I’ve played around with the MeritPerDay ratio and the PostPerDay ratio. Then comparing with each rank’s merit and activity requirement (the minimum 775 for Legendary), I calculated the number of days to get to each rank on account of both concepts. Finally, the date is derived from the maximum number of days of account of both tolls (which ever takes longer to comply- the merit toll or the activity toll). This is really a rough approximate, and not a solid one-to-one forecast, since past month's data is used to project behaviour in a flat linear pattern (and we know that merit generally tends to decrease really). However, the exercise is interesting to perform. Projections - Additional people that will rank-up with the Merit System: year Members Full Members Sr. Members Heroes Legendries
2018 255 25 18 9 4
2019 1105 205 158 91 24
2020 820 241 143 83 45
[2021..2025] 3950 2407 729 453 285
[2026..2030] 178 772 824 431 233
[2031..2035] 82 751 1795 460 246
2036++ 206 5939 9115 12684 14197
For example, the 4 Legendries for 2018 (reaching at least the minimum activity level + 1k merits) would be @Hhampuz, @BTCforJoe, @HCP, and @marlboroza (**). For 2019 we would have as forecasted Legendries: @bill gator, @bob123, @buwaytress, @coinlocket$ (end of 2019), @gawlea, @HairyMaclairy, @HeRetiK, @Iasenko, @joniboini, @killyou72, @krogothmanhattan, @LeGaulois, @Matthias9515, @Micgoossens, @mstfprcn, @o_e_l_e_o, @PHI1618, @Piggy, @sabotag3x, @stompix, @TheQuin, @Tonych, @TryNinja, @xtraelv. Note: (**) Aside, there are also currently 85 Heroes with enough activity (at least 775) and merit to rank-up at some point too.
|
|
|
|
1. IntroductionI wanted to look at the newly promoted forum members from Newbie rank, since the newly instated rule change that took place last Monday (17/09/2018), with data from right up to last Friday (21/09/2018). As to a general context, the number of Jr. Members was around 72.206 (*) (see Statistics of 2,312 million bitcointalk users by @mazdafunsun), out of which around 4.940 were Jr. Members with at least 1 Merit at the time, and therefore conserved their rank. So a total of approximately 67K were demoted (*). (*) Numbers are approximate, since data used to conform the referenced post by @mazdafunsun takes weeks, and profiles change over that period of time. 2. New Era Newbies that have ranked up@Coin-1 identified the list of top senders to newbies since the change of rules this week (see [TOP-200] Members who support newbies - Thanks! ), indicating that 1.637 newbies have been merited this week (not all are demoted previous Jr. Members). @Jet Cash was interested in some sort of classification of the newbies, to distinguish "true newbies from spambies". What I’ve done here is to perform a classification based on the number of posts, to get an approximation to the degree of posting behind the scenes. I cannot distinguish between the number of posts before and after the change of rules, so all are accounted for. I could also have played around with the account creation date, but I didn’t want to over complicate it. This is how things are looking:
RANK ProbableInitialRank nUsers
Member New Era Newbie (50..100] posts 14
Member New Era Newbie (100..200] posts 9
Member New Era Newbie (200..300] posts 3
Member New Era Newbie (400..500] posts 2
Member New Era Newbie >500 posts 1
Jr. Member New Era Newbie (0..50] posts 175
Jr. Member New Era Newbie (50..100] posts 346
Jr. Member New Era Newbie (100..200] posts 434
Jr. Member New Era Newbie (200..300] posts 197
Jr. Member New Era Newbie (300..400] posts 101
Jr. Member New Era Newbie (400..500] posts 68
Jr. Member New Era Newbie >500 posts 142
Newbie New Era Newbie (0..50] posts 140
Newbie New Era Newbie (50..100] posts 4
Newbie New Era Newbie (100..200] posts 1
The above a breakdown of the 1.637 newbies that were later awarded merit this week, showing their current rank, and their initial Rank (Newbie) with an indication as to how many posts they have in their baggage Buy "New Era Newbie" I am considering any newbie that had no merits at the time of the change of rules. The newbie could have been a demoted one from Jr. Member rank, or an already existing newbie. The number of posts serves as a rough indicator to separate these groups. So it turns out that out of the total of 1.637 newbies that were later awarded merit this week, 29 made it straight to Member rank, 1.463 to Jr. Member rank, and 145 remained newbies due to lack of activity (as of last Friday). In general, 41,47% of the now Jr. Members have <= 100 total posts in their baggage (all-time; we cannot tell how many of those were created since last Monday when the new rules stated). The number goes down to 19,24% for cases with <= 50 posts. 3. Complete list of Ranked-up NewbiesI’ve created a google spreadsheet with the complete list of ranked-up new Era Newbies (those 1.637), and shared it here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1KmBvi21XZn6Oxh8c6Vsuax6wxSAhsQWsAzDYfsYOU2E/edit?usp=sharing. For each entry I’ve indicated information about the ranked-up newbie (id, name, profile URL, rank, activity, merit, initial rank, number of received sMerit TXs, etc.) as well as the first meriter of the account (Meriter Id, Name, profile URL, and Rank).
|
|
|
|
1. IntroductionEdit 21/10/2018: I've updated the data shown on the post with this week's data, and archived the previous versions for reference: 28/09/2018: https://web.archive.org/web/20181021125505/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5034149.msg4596988321/09/2018: https://web.archive.org/web/20180928165212/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5034149.msg45969883We now have a complete month of data after the changes made to the ranking rules and the increase in Merit Sources (17/09/2018), and @TomCrypto asked me to update this post. Bear in mind that this week’s data is partial, since it covers up to early hours of the 19/10/2018 (with the entire weekend ahead still to go), so interpreting the data has to be done with caution for the current week (marked in yellow). We also need to consider that the newly appointed Merit Sources got their initial batch of sMerit on the 17/09/2018. The sMerit batch for each Merit Source is not fully topped-up every 30 days since the Merit Source was appointed (i.e. 17/09/2018 -> 17/10/2018), but rather 30 days from the moment each sMerit was sent from the allowance. So for example, if a Merit Source sent 3 sMerits every day from the 17th of September onwards at 10 am, he will get a daily refill of 3 sMerits from the 17th of October onwards at 10 am. The pattern a Merit Source used upon distribution is mirrored a month later in the refill. 2. Awarded sMerit The total weekly merit awarded spiked during the week of the change of rules, only to fall back sharply to the 4,0-4,5K area since then, following patterns similar to June 2018. There are likely a few factors involved such as Merit Sources running out of sMerits soon (Merits Sources have different initial allowances, which may or may not be increased over time), and quite a bit of farm Alt account merit awarding to bring demoted accounts back to their Jr. Rank (both me and @LoyceV created lists on re-ranked Jr. Members during the first days). 3. Senders Senders are progressively settling in the lower 700 area, following a similar pattern seen in July 2018. New Senders shows a similar trend. 4. Receivers Receivers dropped drastically from one week to another after the change of rules, but numbers here are a bit better in comparison than the drop in the other ratios (total sent Merits and Receivers). Specifically, the New Receivers is now in the 350 area, a bit better than other weeks with an equivalent number of sent sMerits, but also with a trend that seems will bring it soon to pre-change of rules week’s values. I’ve still got my doubts on how the Merit Source refills are going to play out, and we won´t really be able to compare properly until next Friday, but it does look like the charts will not spike anywhere near what occurred on the week of the 17th of September 2018. We’ll see, but there may have been more influence on the farm Alt meriting side than one would hope for, and less on the impact of the newly appointed Merit Sources. 5. Receiver’s rank comparison This is the Receivers rank distribution, comparing the first 4 days of the week of the change of rules, to the first four days of this week. As we can see above: - Jr. Member Receivers have lost half of their weight in terms of percentage (dropped six fold in terms of absolute values), whilst still being the rank where most distinct people have received sMerit. - New Receivers that get merited for the first time is still under the Jr. Member’s spell, although they have lost a lot of presence on the whole. In summary, with the still unknown effect that Merit Source refills may have over the coming days, numbers seem to now be what they were three months ago, with a slightly better look in terms of new Receivers that get merited for the first time.
|
|
|
|
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). |
|
|
|
1. IntroductionThis 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 summaryMy 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.
|
|
|
|
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 SubsectionsThe 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.  Columns: 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. Notes: - 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.
|
|
|
|
Edit: Data updated as of 26/04/2019.I was asked recently if I had any update on the merit streaks, and the truth is I had not taken a look into it since I created the OP back in August 2018. I’ve now updated the OP in this thread with the current awarded merit streaks, and while being at it, added it to the Merit Dashboard (last tab called "Received Merit Streaks"). On the Merit Dashboard you can easily filter by user or section/subsection to see all the received merit streaks. The previous version of the OP can be seen here: https://web.archive.org/web/20190430091758/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4981102.0Difficult at it seemed at the time, @nullius’s 31 day merit streak (merited days in a row) has been surpassed by 5 new additional streaks, setting the current record at 90 days! (see below). Note: Days are calculated as they are in the Merit.txt file (UTC).
1. IntroductionWhat 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 StreaksThe 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
Hero Member micgoossens 1067333 2018-10-31 2019-01-28 604 90 253 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1067333
Legendary Last of the V8s 479624 2019-01-06 2019-03-07 232 61 147 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=479624
Legendary suchmoon 234771 2019-01-02 2019-02-07 399 37 153 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=234771
Legendary LoyceV 459836 2019-03-22 2019-04-25 346 35 79 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=459836
Legendary LoyceV 459836 2019-02-17 2019-03-20 309 32 83 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=459836
Full Member nullius 976210 2018-01-30 2018-03-01 518 31 108 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=976210
Hero Member o_e_l_e_o 1188543 2019-01-02 2019-01-30 215 29 76 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1188543
Legendary LoyceV 459836 2019-01-01 2019-01-29 360 29 80 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=459836
Legendary LoyceV 459836 2018-01-25 2018-02-20 225 27 65 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=459836
Sr. Member DdmrDdmr 1582324 2019-02-24 2019-03-22 173 27 46 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1582324
Hero Member o_e_l_e_o 1188543 2018-09-04 2018-09-30 175 27 58 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1188543
Hero Member o_e_l_e_o 1188543 2019-02-21 2019-03-18 218 26 61 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1188543
Hero Member micgoossens 1067333 2019-03-12 2019-04-06 175 26 84 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1067333
Legendary suchmoon 234771 2019-04-01 2019-04-26 157 26 59 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=234771
Legendary JayJuanGee 252510 2018-01-25 2018-02-19 123 26 73 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=252510
Sr. Member ICOEthics 2204241 2019-02-05 2019-03-01 112 25 36 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2204241
Legendary hilariousetc 397737 2018-09-03 2018-09-26 171 24 43 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=397737
Hero Member micgoossens 1067333 2019-01-30 2019-02-21 134 23 66 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1067333
Hero Member BTCforJoe 557989 2018-03-22 2018-04-13 133 23 27 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=557989
Legendary Last of the V8s 479624 2018-03-05 2018-03-26 116 22 48 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=479624
Sr. Member 1miau 2143453 2019-03-02 2019-03-22 175 21 29 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2143453
Sr. Member abhiseshakana 1878246 2019-04-05 2019-04-25 173 21 50 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1878246
Legendary Jet Cash 698159 2018-06-26 2018-07-15 95 20 37 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=698159
Administrator theymos 35 2018-01-24 2018-02-12 1485 20 32 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=35
Hero Member xtraelv 897509 2019-01-18 2019-02-06 74 20 25 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=897509
Administrator theymos 35 2019-01-01 2019-01-19 471 19 39 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=35
Hero Member HairyMaclairy 181806 2018-10-12 2018-10-30 57 19 31 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=181806
Legendary LoyceV 459836 2018-10-14 2018-11-01 96 19 34 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=459836
Legendary Pamoldar 662330 2019-01-28 2019-02-15 91 19 36 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=662330
Legendary hilariousetc 397737 2018-08-08 2018-08-25 177 18 25 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=397737
Sr. Member DdmrDdmr 1582324 2018-09-11 2018-09-28 206 18 35 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1582324
Full Member VB1001 1138727 2018-12-16 2019-01-02 61 18 28 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1138727
Sr. Member mikeywith 2033515 2018-12-14 2018-12-31 131 18 29 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2033515
Staff achow101 290195 2018-01-25 2018-02-11 121 18 45 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=290195
Sr. Member tvplus006 1311641 2018-04-23 2018-05-09 53 17 7 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1311641
Sr. Member mikeywith 2033515 2019-01-02 2019-01-18 136 17 43 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2033515
Sr. Member khaled0111 1012655 2018-12-31 2019-01-16 93 17 19 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1012655
Sr. Member theyoungmillionaire 1180530 2018-04-25 2018-05-11 68 17 22 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1180530
Hero Member TheQuin 143168 2018-02-19 2018-03-07 44 17 22 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=143168
Legendary JayJuanGee 252510 2019-03-02 2019-03-18 46 17 39 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=252510
Legendary LoyceV 459836 2018-11-06 2018-11-22 87 17 31 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=459836
Legendary The Pharmacist 487418 2019-03-05 2019-03-21 116 17 43 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=487418
Legendary Vod 30747 2018-10-30 2018-11-15 64 17 31 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=30747
Legendary TMAN 98986 2018-04-19 2018-05-04 127 16 24 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=98986
Legendary LoyceV 459836 2019-01-31 2019-02-15 127 16 49 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=459836
Legendary LoyceV 459836 2018-09-14 2018-09-29 143 16 34 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=459836
Legendary LFC_Bitcoin 379487 2019-02-22 2019-03-09 61 16 35 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=379487
Legendary Last of the V8s 479624 2018-04-14 2018-04-29 65 16 36 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=479624
Legendary Last of the V8s 479624 2019-03-19 2019-04-03 68 16 45 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=479624
Legendary suchmoon 234771 2018-09-13 2018-09-28 101 16 44 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=234771
has the longest streak to date, having received sMerit for 90 days in a row, totalling 604 sMerits during that streak. Last of the V8s comes second with a streak of 61 days, followed by suchmoon with 37 days. All these three top streaks are rather recent, and surpass those established in the early days of the Merit System. Some forum members appear various times on the list with multiple streaks amongst the top 50. LoyceV for example holds 8 entries in the top 50 merit streaks. Full list of max. streak per user can be seen here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CSonntpRICTBYkLT_8ycIwYCxtKCxbXwBoD8KDkuHPw/edit?usp=sharing3. Top Receiver Streak per subsectionThe 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 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1023316
Alternate cryptocurrencies Announcements (Altcoins) Sr. Member deeperx 1038794 2018-01-30 2018-02-07 125 9 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1038794
Alternate cryptocurrencies Marketplace (Altcoins) Legendary Sylon 112240 2018-01-25 2018-02-03 91 10 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=112240
Alternate cryptocurrencies Mining (Altcoins) Donator Claymore 306958 2018-02-24 2018-02-28 13 5 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=306958
Alternate cryptocurrencies Speculation (Altcoins) Hero Member HairyMaclairy 181806 2019-01-26 2019-01-28 17 3 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=181806
Bitcoin Bitcoin Discussion Administrator theymos 35 2019-01-02 2019-01-07 104 6 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=35
Bitcoin Bitcoin Technical Support Staff achow101 290195 2018-01-28 2018-02-05 30 9 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=290195
Bitcoin Development & Technical Discussion Full Member nullius 976210 2018-01-30 2018-02-10 122 12 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=976210
Bitcoin Mining Legendary philipma1957 64507 2019-02-05 2019-02-13 24 9 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=64507
Bitcoin Project Development Full Member CryptyMike 419071 2018-06-14 2018-06-17 16 4 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=419071
Deleted Deleted Sr. Member Alex_Sr 1762404 2018-03-14 2018-03-21 21 8 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1762404
Economy Economics Legendary Last of the V8s 479624 2019-01-06 2019-03-07 216 61 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=479624
Economy Marketplace Legendary Hhampuz 881377 2019-01-26 2019-02-06 65 12 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=881377
Economy Trading Discussion Sr. Member ICOEthics 2204241 2019-02-05 2019-03-01 111 25 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2204241
Local Arabic Sr. Member mikeywith 2033515 2019-04-15 2019-04-23 20 9 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2033515
Local Chinese Member coin8coin8 1954639 2018-09-17 2018-09-22 10 6 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1954639
Local Croatian Sr. Member Trofo 1099980 2018-02-03 2018-02-08 18 6 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1099980
Local Dutch Member Sexy_Sees 1338805 2018-02-12 2018-02-15 6 4 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1338805
Local French Hero Member asche 1580039 2019-01-10 2019-01-18 29 9 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1580039
Local German Donator qwk 24140 2019-03-27 2019-04-04 31 9 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=24140
Local Greek Full Member vascrs11 1072972 2018-01-25 2018-01-26 2 2 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1072972
Local Hebrew Newbie EndryoBit 2498809 2018-12-17 2018-12-17 1 1 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2498809
Local Indian Sr. Member Guvn0r 860161 2019-04-17 2019-04-18 2 2 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=860161
Local Indonesian Sr. Member abhiseshakana 1878246 2019-04-05 2019-04-25 173 21 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1878246
Local Italian Sr. Member duesoldi 937020 2018-01-26 2018-02-05 30 11 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=937020
Local Japanese Full Member hakka 1649515 2018-05-18 2018-05-22 9 5 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1649515
Local Korean Full Member SolidLiquid 1025214 2018-05-19 2018-05-19 1 1 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1025214
Local Other Languages Sr. Member flekkelek 924671 2018-01-27 2018-01-29 10 3 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=924671
Local Pilipinas Sr. Member theyoungmillionaire 1180530 2018-06-24 2018-07-04 43 11 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1180530
Local Polish Sr. Member Tytanowy Janusz 1925869 2019-04-08 2019-04-14 23 7 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1925869
Local Portuguese Sr. Member bitmover 1554927 2018-03-22 2018-03-29 13 8 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1554927
Local Romanian Member HBKMusiK 1246426 2018-02-27 2018-03-01 6 3 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1246426
Local Russian Sr. Member Co1n 95019 2018-01-29 2018-02-10 87 13 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=95019
Local Skandinavisk Member EddieFx 2368538 2018-12-23 2018-12-23 10 1 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2368538
Local Spanish Legendary seoincorporation 334783 2019-03-29 2019-04-02 7 5 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=334783
Local Turkish Sr. Member AlyattesLydia 1046135 2018-01-25 2018-02-07 74 14 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1046135
Other Archival Legendary Hhampuz 881377 2018-08-11 2018-08-14 26 4 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=881377
Other Beginners & Help Legendary shorena 181801 2018-01-24 2018-01-31 121 8 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=181801
Other Meta Legendary suchmoon 234771 2019-01-07 2019-02-05 247 30 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=234771
Other Off-topic Hero Member bill gator 370611 2018-01-25 2018-02-04 55 11 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=370611
Other Politics & Society Staff Flying Hellfish 79608 2018-11-26 2018-12-01 42 6 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=79608
Other Serious discussion Hero Member o_e_l_e_o 1188543 2018-11-25 2018-11-29 24 5 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1188543
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 essentially), with a 61 day streak. suchmoon holds the second longest streak, being merited for 30 days in a row on Meta, whilst ICOEthics was awarded merit for 25 days in a row on the Trading Discussion 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. Merit Dashboard screenThe implemented Merit Dashboard screen look like this:  The above shows all my received sMerit streaks: - Top left shows all my global streaks, ordered by the number of days implied. In my case, my to streak is of 27 consecutive days receiving sMerit in a row, between the 24/02/2019 and the 23/03/2019. I obtained 173 merits during that streak. - Top right summarizes the number of occurrences of each merit streak. In my particular case, I have 1 27 day streak, 1 18 day streak, 1 16 day streak, 2 15 day streaks, and so on. - Bottom left shows my streaks by forum section/subsection. The image shows that I've been merited 16 days in a row on Meta between the 12/09/2018 and the 27/07/2018. If I were to scroll down further (or apply section/subsection filters), I would be able to see that my max streak is of 4 days in a row on my Spanish local board (the record goes to @Seoincorporation with 5 there), being also 4 days in a row in Beginners and Help. - The botton right summarizes the number of occurrences of each merit streak of mine (since I’ve filter by my profile) by section/subsection. In Beginners & Help for example, my personal record streak is of 4 days in a row (once), having made 3 days in a row eight times, 2 days in a row on 6 occasions, and single days 26 times.
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
Introducción.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) Bitcointalk.org 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 contenidoExplicacionesEjemplos¿Cómo debo reportar?Herramientas adicionalesConsejos generalesBeneficios de reportar
Explicaciones 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 virustotal.com, 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. Ejemplos 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 https://translate.google.co.uk/#auto/ar/Esto%20es%20un%20ejemplo ". 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 Patrol 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". Modlog 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). Seclog 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.
Referencias:- Post original: [Guide] Reporting effectively. - Normas del Foro en inglés: Unofficial list of (official) Bitcointalk.org 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.
|
|
|
|
Update 04/04/2021Data is now accesible here (updated weekly): https://public.tableau.com/views/BitcointalkMeritDashboard/CorrelationMatrix?:language=es&:display_count=y&publish=yes&:origin=viz_share_link
1. Introduction.I’ve updated this OP, which was elaborated in August 2018,.recalculating all the data, and additionally included the merit matrix by rank. All with data is now as of 20/12/2019. In order to allow comparison between then and now, I’ve archieved the old version of the OP here: http://archive.ph/R2owd
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 10% 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 (excluded from the list below, but included in the merit matrix).  Things that standout:a) 158 (27 last time) 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
234771 suchmoon 20
459836 LoyceV 20
507936 DarkStar_ 18
35 theymos 17
300014 DaveF 17
405464 mocacinno 17
257071 NeuroticFish 16
1059082 hugeblack 16
194811 vit05 16
155345 gentlemand 16
1554927 bitmover 16
176777 mindrust 16
897509 xtraelv 16
1291828 iasenko 16
2003859 DireWolfM14 15
93844 legendster 15
1188543 o_e_l_e_o 15
359716 ETFbitcoin 15
101872 Lauda 15
479624 Last of the V8s 15
1052091 CryptopreneurBrainboss 15
1275282 joniboini 15
1564795 Heisenberg_Hunter 15
131333 wwzsocki 15
18321 OgNasty 15
120694 xhomerx10 15
334783 seoincorporation 15
1067333 micgoossens 14
1082600 kenzawak 14
557798 TryNinja 14
1112531 Steamtyme 14
375981 OmegaStarScream 14
33156 vapourminer 14
1237156 nc50lc 14
370611 bill gator 14
886521 mjglqw 14
23092 malevolent 14
1580039 asche 14
452769 bones261 14
358020 Quickseller 14
257004 big_daddy 14
1852120 fillippone 14
317618 nutildah 14
2033515 mikeywith 14
65837 franky1 14
507856 LeGaulois 14
1179651 sheenshane 14
6706 RodeoX 13
765632 bL4nkcode 13
877396 AdolfinWolf 13
533583 Lucius 13
2143453 1miau 13
698159 Jet Cash 13
64507 philipma1957 13
914465 crwth 13
366632 Royse777 13
1210969 JSRAW 13
112493 Pmalek 13
458393 harizen 13
980501 Artemis3 13
1012655 khaled0111 13
351569 tmfp 13
30 BitcoinFX 13
54791 Dabs 12
849090 tomahawk9 12
525056 BitMaxz 12
171896 Stedsm 12
1107844 amishmanish 12
898928 Theb 12
163641 eternalgloom 12
164749 stompix 12
1446224 r1s2g3 12
121796 alani123 12
338591 Thirdspace 12
553037 jhenfelipe 12
99837 HeRetiK 12
984384 Baofeng 12
487418 The Pharmacist 12
1180530 theyoungmillionaire 12
1432468 mdayonliner 12
1292764 tranthidung 12
1903546 LoyceMobile 12
787736 marlboroza 12
1582324 DdmrDdmr 12
579628 bob123 12
1169179 BitCryptex 12
62955 odolvlobo 11
543626 jackg 11
143168 TheQuin 11
345771 Thekool1s 11
904524 ChiBitCTy 11
252510 JayJuanGee 11
1069508 aleksej996 11
198573 Hueristic 11
547435 LTU_btc 11
1453007 RivAngE 11
379147 pooya87 11
859197 posi 11
803757 BrewMaster 11
153656 TheNewAnon135246 11
841337 shield132 11
136484 figmentofmyass 11
1247226 logfiles 11
55384 Foxpup 11
1164833 Direwolve735 11
2423488 Upgrade00 11
30747 Vod 11
1574226 mu_enrico 11
1022860 qwertyup23 11
878630 TheUltraElite 11
741872 poptok1 11
2561166 PrimeNumber7 11
1410401 dkbit98 11
1162397 Parodium 10
783422 Slow death 10
1980983 Coolcryptovator 10
1920993 elda34b 10
954316 TravelMug 10
1096237 tbct_mt2 10
162680 squatter 10
84521 Welsh 10
1235090 akhjob 10
782831 akamit 10
1107222 Don Pedro Dinero 10
1099056 TheWolf666 10
1459810 bitperson 10
1153977 LUCKMCFLY 10
1634314 shahzadafzal 10
1738107 Seetheummerallyeah 10
901859 buwaytress 10
771962 Raja_MBZ 10
1938519 butka 10
1010454 Samarkand 10
1022241 bkbirge 10
99165 Searing 10
557989 BTCforJoe 10
187618 guybrushthreepwood 10
337097 iluvbitcoins 10
763588 Jating 10
379487 LFC_Bitcoin 10
111872 Deathwing 10
2363935 YOSHIE 10
66060 kingcolex 10
1015954 aundroid 10
79608 Flying Hellfish 10
662330 Pamoldar 10
965440 aoluain 10
1520746 hd49728 10
821995 hatshepsut93 10
85033 d5000 10
1920923 anu1908 10
339364 European Central Bank 10
1267993 Leteravian 10
1339716 coinlocket$ 10
1972523 Naida_BR 10
60820 DannyHamilton 10
1143164 LogitechMouse 10
867786 HCP 10
The list with the actual subsections where the above have been merited can be found here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CFMvMD4lDMnnkxWl9p02k0ZoJW044eRY4EGEqkYd-8I/edit?usp=sharing (second 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. I've now extended this information (on the Google Sheet) to all merited profiles, not just those listed here. b) The vast majority (73,53%) of people have only been awarded sMerit in one subsection, and 12,10% 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, 50,01% have been on a single subsection, and 20,74% on two. d) The total exclusively deleted is 1.801 people (5,62% of those merited), having 206 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: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CFMvMD4lDMnnkxWl9p02k0ZoJW044eRY4EGEqkYd-8I/edit?usp=sharing (third 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 ( All ranks):  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 3.870 merited people (12,08% of all merited profiles), 1.796 of which are exclusively merited just in this subsection and no other (46,41% of the 3.870 people). Out of those merited here, 16,28% have also been merited on Bitcoin Discussion, 15,87% on a Local Board, and 14,86% in the Economics subsection. Only 0,90% have been merited in the Bitcoin Mining subsection. A fact aside is that 22,97% of these people have also been merited on a post that has now been deleted (or off-limits). 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 35,77% of merited users are merited on local boards, albeit with low sMerit values (seen on previous analysis). On the other end of the scale, Serious Discussion and Project Development have only 1,39% 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. 77,90% of Local merited users are merited exclusively on local boards. Ann Altcoin is also a very closed circle (70,80%) and so are the mining subsections (64,53% mining altcoins and 61,13% mining in the Bitcoin section). On the other hand, subsections belonging to the Other section are less exclusive. c) 16,37% 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. The merit matrix delimited to Legendary rank:  The merit matrix delimited to Hero rank:  The merit matrix delimited to Sr. Member rank:  The merit matrix delimited to Full Member rank:  The merit matrix delimited to Member rank:  The merit matrix delimited to Jr. Member rank:  Note: I've omitted the merit matrix for some standard ranks (Brand New, Newbies) and non-standard ranks (Administrators, etc.).
|
|
|
|
1. IntroductionI 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 distributionWhat 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 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1176794
1068464 Xal0lex Staff 954 225 31 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1068464
1719931 Custterol Jr. Member 725 2 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1719931
1773383 tumis Jr. Member 550 1 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1773383
1302577 Ardipwnz Member 546 13 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1302577
1016855 JollyGood Sr. Member 541 254 1 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1016855
846936 sabotag3x Hero Member 537 738 36 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=846936
808310 batang_bitcoin Hero Member 531 522 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=808310
105963 cybergamp Member 447 10 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=105963
1432468 mdayonliner Full Member 446 239 56 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1432468
2078 dorianm421 Member 427 10 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2078
105347 piter66 Member 418 16 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=105347
1394080 sergeykravcov177 Member 417 10 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1394080
1616894 perova93 Member 410 10 4 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1616894
106029 cdousley Member 409 10 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=106029
245285 sunce33 Hero Member 406 505 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=245285
1083073 ismart1 Full Member 391 115 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1083073
1268261 o.ogurlu Member 382 12 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1268261
1512010 zelenkova Member 378 10 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1512010
1838442 Tapai manis Jr. Member 372 1 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1838442
2036758 CryptAssist Jr. Member 366 3 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2036758
64507 philipma1957 Legendary 360 1276 23 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=64507
143168 TheQuin Hero Member 358 650 24 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=143168
956126 KingScorpio Sr. Member 354 270 5 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=956126
1265536 dimon_btc11 Member 338 11 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1265536
1112165 Sveta74189 Full Member 330 106 2 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1112165
459836 LoyceV Legendary 329 1651 95 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=459836
1178986 rahul10948 Full Member 326 114 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1178986
625576 hendrakhow Member 326 11 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=625576
819237 gabmen Hero Member 319 523 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=819237
1533028 denis-z12 Member 308 97 8 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1533028
1215537 Arrrvin Member 304 40 3 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1215537
1000199 krogothmanhattan Sr. Member 301 694 35 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1000199
1412697 vanilaice Jr. Member 300 2 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1412697
114706 mymenace Legendary 297 1057 17 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=114706
1257516 Rosewater Foundation Full Member 296 194 37 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1257516
1659648 First77 Member 289 31 2 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1659648
1239025 zorchy Member 287 10 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1239025
1297193 johnywalkerrr Member 286 11 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1297193
1202061 chimk Full Member 284 174 19 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1202061
2161892 juraangel Jr. Member 283 1 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2161892
1464627 cryptohipo Jr. Member 280 1 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1464627
883221 termion Hero Member 279 531 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=883221
698159 Jet Cash Legendary 276 1091 102 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=698159
1138114 SalmanMJ9 Member 270 12 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1138114
382413 xandry Staff 270 1023 1 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=382413
155345 gentlemand Legendary 267 1198 22 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=155345
511692 BitcoinTurk Full Member 267 205 8 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=511692
1411023 virendarnagpal Jr. Member 266 4 2 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1411023
181806 HairyMaclairy Hero Member 266 549 54 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=181806
994859 CryptoBry Sr. Member 266 272 1 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=994859
1333278 mycrypto93 Jr. Member 263 3 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1333278
395583 aidit45@gmail.com Sr. Member 262 251 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=395583
1417140 sashulya7979 Member 261 10 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1417140
1077525 arun9900 Full Member 259 101 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1077525
557798 TryNinja Hero Member 258 707 35 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=557798
1179426 hasyurt Full Member 257 111 3 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1179426
1067333 micgoossens Sr. Member 256 520 117 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1067333
674078 Gothorum Sr. Member 256 383 28 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=674078
507856 LeGaulois Copper Member 255 793 14 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=507856
1339716 coinlocket$ Sr. Member 254 292 19 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1339716
252510 JayJuanGee Legendary 250 1303 24 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=252510
1779611 Andy Leto Member 249 10 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1779611
1118969 JanEmil Member 249 27 4 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1118969
543626 jackg Copper Member 245 1082 3 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=543626
1916934 Alfamouse Member 243 10 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1916934
2157460 iamsediii Member 241 10 2 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2157460
554165 South Park Hero Member 241 502 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=554165
934247 Ace44 Member 240 11 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=934247
81995 peloso Legendary 236 1045 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=81995
225497 kinki Jr. Member 236 6 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=225497
1766457 easybtcearn2017 Jr. Member 235 1 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1766457
487418 The Pharmacist Legendary 235 1497 78 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=487418
1035253 nika555 Full Member 234 102 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1035253
870828 upline Sr. Member 233 286 1 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=870828
1188361 cryptossi Full Member 232 106 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1188361
1568958 shaman11 Member 230 16 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1568958
1648809 _X_X_X_ Member 229 26 4 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1648809
308793 1Referee Legendary 228 1155 27 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=308793
1422459 Liternyy Member 228 11 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1422459
1440473 rajnipatel1983@gmail.com Jr. Member 227 1 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1440473
358787 Dudeperfect Hero Member 227 527 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=358787
1681931 phabulu Member 227 16 1 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1681931
1253176 Lisa110386 Member 224 12 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1253176
1982152 lovesmayfamilis Jr. Member 223 2 1 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1982152
1352827 SB90 Member 222 12 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1352827
1760729 neymarjunior50 Jr. Member 220 1 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1760729
1634977 puzzling_rvat Jr. Member 220 1 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1634977
1117066 Smartprofit Full Member 219 161 7 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1117066
1840000 TranslateIntoDutch Member 219 60 26 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1840000
761729 gembitz Sr. Member 219 270 2 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=761729
1837238 crypmike Member 218 49 30 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1837238
1787849 nfransisca Jr. Member 218 1 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1787849
479624 Last of the V8s Hero Member 218 1164 74 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=479624
1630472 Cobrak777 Jr. Member 217 4 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1630472
1061974 phantam Full Member 216 106 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1061974
970060 sachdientugoogle Full Member 216 101 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=970060
1606609 Furgon Chino Member 215 12 9 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1606609
368438 ccsang Full Member 214 103 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=368438
1182581 faulerwilli Full Member 213 109 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1182581
901859 buwaytress Hero Member 211 636 22 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=901859
379147 pooya87 Legendary 210 1111 12 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=379147
374061 Kakmakr Legendary 209 1106 29 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=374061
1837191 bitnissa Jr. Member 209 2 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1837191
1142091 QUASA Member 209 20 10 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1142091
806776 digaran Hero Member 209 605 21 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=806776
826292 carlisle1 Hero Member 207 502 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=826292
234771 suchmoon Legendary 207 1460 71 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=234771
886521 mjglqw Sr. Member 206 365 27 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=886521
2022002 minefarmbuy Member 204 19 11 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2022002
403303 Pursuer Legendary 203 1047 4 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=403303
408246 YuTü.Co.in Sr. Member 202 331 10 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=408246
2046647 sunnybeacher Jr. Member 202 4 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2046647
323499 oni4an Sr. Member 201 253 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=323499
894070 MineCoin.org Sr. Member 201 288 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=894070
783422 Slow death Hero Member 201 586 12 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=783422
960511 nullCoiner Sr. Member 200 351 29 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=960511
326880 dwminer1 Hero Member 198 508 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=326880
198573 Hueristic Legendary 197 1042 5 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=198573
1058769 billy.ryoko Full Member 196 103 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1058769
204821 Buchi-88 Legendary 195 1028 3 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=204821
1094102 GREENch Full Member 195 102 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1094102
1062787 JuliaJi Full Member 195 103 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1062787
1045881 FourByfour Member 194 11 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1045881
1296859 jamzzz123 Member 194 16 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1296859
1335258 NEERAJ ANAND Member 193 12 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1335258
1084486 sportclub2010 Full Member 192 108 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1084486
1106178 wiredideas Full Member 192 101 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1106178
1180319 tor676 Member 191 42 1 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1180319
1186194 Cryptochel Full Member 191 106 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1186194
257004 big_daddy Full Member 190 146 5 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=257004
1980983 Coolcryptovator Copper Member 190 123 42 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1980983
62358 Gyrsur Legendary 190 1028 9 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=62358
1188543 o_e_l_e_o Sr. Member 189 391 71 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1188543
1117299 mpufatzis Full Member 188 118 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1117299
930744 birbok Full Member 188 103 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=930744
1274683 iSparta Member 187 10 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1274683
1059082 hugeblack Sr. Member 186 316 2 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1059082
939701 opium Sr. Member 185 265 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=939701
359800 Darkoth89 Hero Member 183 505 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=359800
149737 BADecker Legendary 182 1037 1 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=149737
164749 stompix Hero Member 180 638 18 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=164749
3028 Anon136 Legendary 180 1154 58 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=3028
533006 richardsNY Legendary 180 1084 7 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=533006
764495 DoublerHunter Hero Member 180 520 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=764495
397737 hilariousetc Hero Member 179 959 132 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=397737
1731782 Kakady13 Member 179 10 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1731782
1170376 Andrew_G Full Member 179 102 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1170376
325061 pugman Legendary 177 1224 34 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=325061
393159 darkangel11 Legendary 177 1047 5 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=393159
803757 BrewMaster Hero Member 177 617 9 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=803757
947291 Polar91 Sr. Member 176 345 26 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=947291
1143728 Spazzer Member 176 88 24 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1143728
1082600 kenzawak Full Member 175 100 18 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1082600
901383 audaciousbeing Hero Member 174 550 3 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=901383
963640 bct_ail Sr. Member 173 298 6 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=963640
1147073 Mazda17 Full Member 173 101 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1147073
1680941 PnP Jr. Member 172 3 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1680941
1837296 oerdogan Member 172 21 19 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1837296
1328868 nadosuge Member 172 23 1 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1328868
1137368 nesh1 Full Member 171 110 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1137368
1201921 firman33 Member 170 11 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1201921
1555320 Hilde X Member 170 38 7 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1555320
1894120 madnessteat Member 169 22 1 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1894120
379487 LFC_Bitcoin Copper Member 168 1112 15 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=379487
1538848 Zedxxx Member 168 20 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1538848
802442 boyptc Hero Member 168 511 2 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=802442
1339284 NightLady Member 168 11 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1339284
554 Elwar Legendary 168 1218 46 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=554
867786 HCP Hero Member 167 902 65 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=867786
137185 jeremypwr Legendary 167 1118 92 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=137185
1190616 ANDREW 555 Jr. Member 166 7 2 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1190616
837148 ethereumhunter Hero Member 166 501 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=837148
1290176 v_i_p Member 165 18 2 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1290176
350580 irfan_pak10 Copper Member 164 1060 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=350580
1153568 voinnov111 Full Member 164 102 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1153568
1214555 26FISCH_RU Member 163 10 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1214555
1370336 lequocvuongpro Jr. Member 162 1 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1370336
579628 bob123 Sr. Member 162 492 42 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=579628
931468 recusant2000 Jr. Member 162 2 1 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=931468
1297383 DIXItip4ik Member 160 29 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1297383
874254 game-protect Hero Member 160 503 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=874254
1193825 mikolsoon Member 160 12 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1193825
1130307 slackovic Full Member 160 201 10 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1130307
1386572 jamesashmore1964 Jr. Member 159 1 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1386572
1333897 Dorbaraco Member 159 10 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1333897
779106 Barcode_ Staff 159 540 18 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=779106
84521 Welsh Staff 159 1318 22 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=84521
1548994 vipganyan Copper Member 158 110 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1548994
355683 BluRPie Hero Member 158 504 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=355683
1755885 DispatchLabs Jr. Member 158 3 2 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1755885
334783 seoincorporation Legendary 157 1131 55 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=334783
833246 BitPotus Hero Member 157 527 6 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=833246
51478 mezzomix Legendary 157 1075 9 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=51478
2765 morrisby25 Member 156 10 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2765
1382847 HMember Member 156 10 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1382847
1222973 cryptobali Member 155 11 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1222973
1302804 balonka01 Member 155 12 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;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 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1071531
1014315 Mungurul Sr. Member 640 -595 254 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1014315
1310923 set08air Newbie 17 -437 1 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1310923
1007399 SSowellSVT Full Member 168 -422 101 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1007399
1212376 dbijoy Jr. Member 284 -305 1 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1212376
2189580 anunymint Brand new 0 -271 127 52 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2189580
1495332 Pranimbo Jr. Member 966 -259 3 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1495332
1411175 cryptographer954 Member 62 -236 10 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1411175
1655669 CoinRanker Jr. Member 90 -227 2 0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1655669
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 monthsThe 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.
|
|
|
|
|
Please delete thread. Post partial when published.
|
|
|
|
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 SendersThis 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 SendersLikewise, 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 ReceiversSimilarly, 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 ReceiversLikewise, 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. ConclusionConcluding 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.
|
|
|
|
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 ( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=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 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php for a specific date, and comparing that to the same data a month ago, extracted from WayBackMachine https://archive.org/web/). The data per subsection I believe adds up the Child Boards too. 2. Post Distribution per subsectionThe overall historical accumulative distribution of posts per subsection is as follows (derived from https://bitcointalk.org/index.php):  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 evolutionUsing the information derived from https://bitcointalk.org/index.php 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 RatioWith 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. 
|
|
|
|
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 TotalesEl 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 SubsecciónEl 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 SemanalA 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 adicionalesAdicionalmente, 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).
|
|
|
|
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): https://www.elconfidencial.com/tecnologia/2018-07-12/timo-nigeriano-internet-criptomonedas-twitter_1591189/ |
|
|
|
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 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52016PC0593) 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. Change.org has a petition to stop these rules from being deployed, with over 584K signatories (see https://www.change.org/p/european-parliament-stop-the-censorship-machinery-save-the-internet?utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink&utm_campaign=share_petition,). 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 https://whois.net). 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 … |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
