Truth about bitcointalk users 2.0

[mazdafunsun]

In this post I have done position analysis on Bitcointalk users in range from id=1'000'000 to id=2'000'000. Users with this range of id's were registered from 2017/05/11 to 2018/04/03.

Without further ado, Here is the distrubution of postions of second million bitcointalk users

• Brand New   733503   73,35%
• Newbie         212864   21,28%
• Jr. Member    33395     3,34%
• Member        13682     1,36%
• Full Member  6334       0,63%
• Sr.Member     222        0,02%
• Hero               0            0%
• Legendary      0            0%

How we can see there is no Hero and Legendary users, this is not surprising since these positions requires high level of activity .

P.s. If you have any ideas on what kind of information you would like to see, let me know.

Here is the link to first part: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3333773.msg34863787#msg34863787

[Quickseller]

You should exclude the brand new users from your stats. They are likely to be spam bots that are banned.

[TheQuin]

You should exclude the brand new users from your stats. They are likely to be spam bots that are banned.

That is quite some stat in itself, 73.35% of new accounts got nuked.

I agree that the other percentages would give a better representation with those having been removed from the figures first.

[Vod]

You should exclude the brand new users from your stats. They are likely to be spam bots that are banned.

That is quite some stat in itself, 73.35% of new accounts got nuked.

I agree that the other percentages would give a better representation with those having been removed from the figures first.

Ah dishonest Quicksy...  

Speaking as someone who actually knows what they are talking about, most of the new users have not made any posts at all, and have not been banned or nuked.

I could pull up exact figures as needed, since I maintain a full list of the modlog.

[TheQuin]

I could pull up exact figures as needed, since I maintain a full list of the modlog.

That would be interesting. Does your data go back to 2017/05/11 as that's what the OP was using?

[Vod]

I could pull up exact figures as needed, since I maintain a full list of the modlog.

That would be interesting. Does your data go back to 2017/05/11 as that's what the OP was using?

It goes back to 2016/12/13 thanks to taptoshi, who is no longer active on the forum.  

Unfortunately the modlog has no dates.   I can start collecting the date now when I scrape it from the log file, but past records are not timestamped.  I could guesstimate the date range based on the ID number like the OP though.

[TheQuin]

It goes back to 2016/12/13 thanks to taptoshi, who is no longer active on the forum.  

Unfortunately the modlog has no dates.   I can start collecting the date now when I scrape it from the log file, but past records are not timestamped.  I could guesstimate the date range based on the ID number like the OP though.

That's a decent sample size. I guess the exact date isn't that important, I was just interested in what sort of percentage of new accounts do get nuked in recent times as opposed to years ago.

[mazdafunsun]

You should exclude the brand new users from your stats. They are likely to be spam bots that are banned.

That is quite some stat in itself, 73.35% of new accounts got nuked.

I agree that the other percentages would give a better representation with those having been removed from the figures first.

I am thinking that i willl make a post with full position distrubution from id 1 to date some time in future .
I will make a better representation regarding the positions who actualy contrubute to the forum, but the " Brand New" postion and perecentage also should be noted since it is a huge part of statistcs.

It goes back to 2016/12/13 thanks to taptoshi, who is no longer active on the forum. 

Unfortunately the modlog has no dates.   I can start collecting the date now when I scrape it from the log file, but past records are not timestamped.  I could guesstimate the date range based on the ID number like the OP though.

That's a decent sample size. I guess the exact date isn't that important, I was just interested in what sort of percentage of new accounts do get nuked in recent times as opposed to years ago.

I agree, this could indeed be interesting to see.
At this point i think that best I can do is how many of Brand New positions are banned and how many are spam accounts.

[EternityFirst]

You should exclude the brand new users from your stats. They are likely to be spam bots that are banned.

That is quite some stat in itself, 73.35% of new accounts got nuked.

I agree that the other percentages would give a better representation with those having been removed from the figures first.

It seems to me, you, peolpe, overloocking one substantional circumstance in you research regarding Brand New members. Thing is, you often can`t register and not get a ban at once even from you own IP adress, espesially if you are a TOR user. But sometimes (as was in my case) you just randomly get some point of evel (like, about 10 or smth) and can`t post a thing till you pay some fee, less than comission. So, naturally most of new users don`t know about IP ban feature untill they try to register and in most cases, unsuccessfully. So, here comes another acc or two or three, and most of them are pictured green in that diagram. They`re just dead accounts, nobody will ever post from `em, that`s why this number of Brand News.
If you want real numbers, you should get a quantity of IP banned accs and exclude such ones from calculations.

[TheQuin]

It seems to me, you, peolpe, overloocking one substantional circumstance in you research regarding Brand New members. Thing is, you often can`t register and not get a ban at once even from you own IP adress, espesially if you are a TOR user. But sometimes (as was in my case) you just randomly get some point of evel (like, about 10 or smth) and can`t post a thing till you pay some fee, less than comission. So, naturally most of new users don`t know about IP ban feature untill they try to register and in most cases, unsuccessfully. So, here comes another acc or two or three, and most of them are pictured green in that diagram. They`re just dead accounts, nobody will ever post from `em, that`s why this number of Brand News.
If you want real numbers, you should get a quantity of IP banned accs and exclude such ones from calculations.

Do you mean they only find out about the evil IP after the account has been created? If so that would explain the numbers as the botnets would have created most of those accounts and never been able to use them.

[EternityFirst]

It seems to me, you, peolpe, overloocking one substantional circumstance in you research regarding Brand New members. Thing is, you often can`t register and not get a ban at once even from you own IP adress, espesially if you are a TOR user. But sometimes (as was in my case) you just randomly get some point of evel (like, about 10 or smth) and can`t post a thing till you pay some fee, less than comission. So, naturally most of new users don`t know about IP ban feature untill they try to register and in most cases, unsuccessfully. So, here comes another acc or two or three, and most of them are pictured green in that diagram. They`re just dead accounts, nobody will ever post from `em, that`s why this number of Brand News.
If you want real numbers, you should get a quantity of IP banned accs and exclude such ones from calculations.

Do you mean they only find out about the evil IP after the account has been created? If so that would explain the numbers as the botnets would have created most of those accounts and never been able to use them.

Yes, that`s exactly what I mean. And it`s not necessary botnets (though it may be one of reasons), real new users are getting banned too. As I understand it`s aboun dynamic IPs that most providers use in Eastern Europe, for example. Whole node get marked as evil one if even one user uses TOR or trying to make some troubles.

[TheQuin]

Yes, that`s exactly what I mean. And it`s not necessary botnets (though it may be one of reasons), real new users are getting banned too. As I understand it`s aboun dynamic IPs that most providers use in Eastern Europe, for example. Whole node get marked as evil one if even one user uses TOR or trying to make some troubles.

The evil IP works by giving a score to IP addresses. Every time an account is banned the IP address used gains some evil points and all addresses near that address also get a smaller number of points added. Once the score gets to a certain value a fee is required, the higher the score the higher the fee.

I'm only guessing about how much of this is due to botnets but they are prevalent in Eastern Europe (Russia and Ukraine in particular) so I think they'll account for a large part of this and also will have affected innocent users of the same ISPs.

[mazdafunsun]

It seems to me, you, peolpe, overloocking one substantional circumstance in you research regarding Brand New members. Thing is, you often can`t register and not get a ban at once even from you own IP adress, espesially if you are a TOR user. But sometimes (as was in my case) you just randomly get some point of evel (like, about 10 or smth) and can`t post a thing till you pay some fee, less than comission. So, naturally most of new users don`t know about IP ban feature untill they try to register and in most cases, unsuccessfully. So, here comes another acc or two or three, and most of them are pictured green in that diagram. They`re just dead accounts, nobody will ever post from `em, that`s why this number of Brand News.
If you want real numbers, you should get a quantity of IP banned accs and exclude such ones from calculations.

The research as you call it, is not mean to analyse activity of these users.
My goal was just to show the distrubution of positions and yes the mojority are " Brand new " users, from which a good part is spambots another part are banned users and if i have to guess - almost all of them are not activ memebers.

There is potential for deeper analysis here.

[EternityFirst]

Yes, that`s exactly what I mean. And it`s not necessary botnets (though it may be one of reasons), real new users are getting banned too. As I understand it`s aboun dynamic IPs that most providers use in Eastern Europe, for example. Whole node get marked as evil one if even one user uses TOR or trying to make some troubles.

The evil IP works by giving a score to IP addresses. Every time an account is banned the IP address used gains some evil points and all addresses near that address also get a smaller number of points added. Once the score gets to a certain value a fee is required, the higher the score the higher the fee.

I'm only guessing about how much of this is due to botnets but they are prevalent in Eastern Europe (Russia and Ukraine in particular) so I think they'll account for a large part of this and also will have affected innocent users of the same ISPs.

Thanks for clearing out evli IP mechanism 
I think somewhere about South-Eastern Esia and Africa this problem is big too. But professional acc breeders (don`t know if there is a special term for such peolpe  ) can resolve their difficalties easily and average users - not so much. But again, if you are interested in future technologies, you should be able to solve such problems and if you`re not  - pay a fee and be happy. That is the logic, I think. It may not feel nice to be obliged to pay for somebody`s bad moves, though.

[DdmrDdmr]

I'm assuming you’ve scrapped most of the user profile of those 2M account. If so, it could be interesting to see a few other things with just that information, without having to cross the files with anything else. Things such as distributions by:

-Number of posts: for example ->  0,1,2,3,4,5,5-10, more. This is rather more specific for the immense amount of newbie accounts, and would allow us to see when they stop (after how many posts).

- Last Active :grouped by some sort of criteria  such as -> last 30 days, 30-90, 90-180, 180-365, > 365.  That would give us an idea, for each rank, how many are active. The “active” measure with this definition is not of a Boolean nature, but rather more like a “state”.

Of course, that is your prerogative if you see it fit and think it can throw-in some more information.

Thanks for the info so far. I’ve already referenced it twice today on separate posts to strengthen my point of view on two different matters.

[EternityFirst]

It seems to me, you, peolpe, overloocking one substantional circumstance in you research regarding Brand New members. Thing is, you often can`t register and not get a ban at once even from you own IP adress, espesially if you are a TOR user. But sometimes (as was in my case) you just randomly get some point of evel (like, about 10 or smth) and can`t post a thing till you pay some fee, less than comission. So, naturally most of new users don`t know about IP ban feature untill they try to register and in most cases, unsuccessfully. So, here comes another acc or two or three, and most of them are pictured green in that diagram. They`re just dead accounts, nobody will ever post from `em, that`s why this number of Brand News.
If you want real numbers, you should get a quantity of IP banned accs and exclude such ones from calculations.

The research as you call it, is not mean to analyse activity of these users.
My goal was just to show the distrubution of positions and yes the mojority are " Brand new " users, from which a good part is spambots another part are banned users and if i have to guess - almost all of them are not activ memebers.

There is potential for deeper analysis here.

Hi! I got that, I just thought if we want to get a fair statistics - we should exclude number of IP banned accounts, because, as for me, most of them (who are real users, not bots) could create new one`s and therefore we are counting same people several times. If you don`t like this suggestion - OK, It was your own initiative to get this nubmers anyway. It just seemed, that old forum users may not got the whole picture so I took a shot on explaining some specailties.

Good job and interesting infirmation, by the way.

[EternityFirst]

I'm assuming you’ve scrapped most of the user profile of those 2M account. If so, it could be interesting to see a few other things with just that information, without having to cross the files with anything else. Things such as distributions by:

-Number of posts: for example ->  0,1,2,3,4,5,5-10, more. This is rather more specific for the immense amount of newbie accounts, and would allow us to see when they stop (after how many posts).

- Last Active :grouped by some sort of criteria  such as -> last 30 days, 30-90, 90-180, 180-365, > 365.  That would give us an idea, for each rank, how many are active. The “active” measure with this definition is not of a Boolean nature, but rather more like a “state”.

Of course, that is your prerogative if you see it fit and think it can throw-in some more information.

Thanks for the info so far. I’ve already referenced it twice today on separate posts to strengthen my point of view on two different matters.

That wold be interesting, totally agree about number of posts. Although, there are new accounts of old members who are thying to restore their main accs. I`m assuming, as soon as they get restored, Newbie accounts get abandoned after few posts.

[shilpyh]

Great statistics. It is enough good. But for merit system next time it will not be possible for next 11 month. On next 11 month there will be all brand new, newbie and jr. member. There might have less than 1% off all higher than jr. member.

[Quickseller]

You should exclude the brand new users from your stats. They are likely to be spam bots that are banned.

That is quite some stat in itself, 73.35% of new accounts got nuked.

I agree that the other percentages would give a better representation with those having been removed from the figures first.

That percentage is unlikely to be only nuked accounts however nuked accounts likely make up a decent chunk of “brand new” accounts.

I suspect that a very large percentage of those accounts are inaccessible to their owner for one reason or another. If someone is proxy banned they may create a new account on a different IP instead of paying the fee, someone might have forgotten their password and just created a new account.

[LoyceV]

You should exclude the brand new users from your stats. They are likely to be spam bots that are banned.

That is quite some stat in itself, 73.35% of new accounts got nuked.

Many of them are just "prepared" to start a spam session, I see many Newbies spammers who didn't register recently.

I could pull up exact figures as needed, since I maintain a full list of the modlog.

I'd love to have a full list of all banned userIDs! I've asked to add a "Rank: Banned" before, but it was never implemented.