How recognized are you in the bitcointalk world?

[Vod]

(OMG - this is not a post about merit!  This is a post about Activity and Trust as well)   


I believe the three main pillars of a bitcointalk profile are Merit, Activity and Trust (MAT). 

Since I already rank everyone based on those attributes, I thought I would make a new attribute and call it "Recognition".

Everyone is scored 1-1000 for each pillar.  If you are not ranked you are scored 1000.  The totals are added up, and divided by three.

The result, a number from 1 to 1000 (lower is better), is your average ranking in this community - according to these three pillars anyway.  Personally, I was quite stunned at the results.  :/

https://bpip.org/report.aspx?r=mostrecognized

[1714961871]

1714961871

[1714961871]

1714961871

[1714961871]

1714961871

[1714961871]

1714961871

[1714961871]

1714961871

[LoyceV]

I recognize the first 17 names. #18 posts on Mining/Hardware, and indeed, I don't go there.
Around Rank 100, I still recognize most of the names.
From (about) Rank 400 downwards, I recognize less than half the names.

I'd say the fastest way up this list is gaining trust, high Activity is only for people who have been here longest.

For consideration:
If you're counting the initial (airdropped) Merit, which was based on Activity, aren't you double counting Activity?

[Steamtyme]

I am faceless. No one can recognize me like a fly on the wall.

Interesting to see the first non legendary at 132. Again with activity being a factor it's no surprise. I didn't recognize most of the names but the ones that stood out were escrows, campaign managers, and very active sellers.

Pretty neat metric to look at. First time I checked out your site. Nice to get a different style topic rolling in meta

Editted

[The Sceptical Chymist]

There are quite a few names in the top 100 that I recognize but don't see posting much anymore.  This doesn't surprise me, given how bad the forum has become, and they're not exactly sig campaigners who are earning money here.  Some of the names I don't recognize at all and I'm assuming they made a name for themselves early on and haven't been active, or they post in sections I don't visit.  There are a lot of people in the collectibles and mining sections that I'm not familiar with.  It's amazing how provincial I've become, even on the internet.  Hell, even on a single website!

Nice compilation, Vod.

[pugman]

Idk if this is an issue or not, I don't see a lot of names,after doing Ctrl+F,like say hilariousetc or HCP and the highest rank I see is 921 ?

Interestingly at least 725 members that are most "recognized" are Legendary members.

Vod, the new site looks pretty cool and is user friendly. Nice job.

[seoincorporation]

  It's amazing how provincial I've become, even on the internet.  Hell, even on a single website!

Yeah, that`s what precisely came to my mind at the first look. I used to spend all my time in the tech discussions boards, and now I´m engaging with the forum and actually caring for it. The people differ a lot from board to board!! It`s like moving from one village to another!!

I do love Vod`s work. Awesome, man, thanks. Also, it is interesting to see how many accounts are "sleeping" right now. As said, probably is due to the bad state of the forum, but I prefer to think that, somehow, they are spreading the "Bitcoin word" just in another side

Thanks, Vod. I`ve come to understand how my social life works in here, and also it looks like a pretty awesome tool for forum investigations too.

[jackg]

Yay I beat Jet Cash! (actually didn't expect my name to be on that list though)...

This is quite interesting to see how all of the staff are near the top but aren't all there (and cyrus also isn't taking the number 2 slot as I'd expect).

Interestingly at least 725 members that are most "recognized" are Legendary members.

I'm guessing this is due to both the activity and merit parts. And also, you're more likely to gain trust if you're here for a longer amount of time.

In person, if someone sees you often enough and gets to know you then you start to be able to trust them and it's similar with the online world. If you see someone continuously here and posting well then you'll begin to trust them also (I think) - especially with individual interactions with people.

@Vod if this list gets reupdated continuously, it'll be interesting to see how much it'll change in the coming months - maybe we could get a monthly snapshot on an archive site as a comparison?

[The Cryptovator]

I have remember probably I had mail you about something similar. I was suggest for a list of most active user. Anyway you made more than I expect.

Great job. Easily can find any user information.

[TheBeardedBaby]

Great feature, but there's something wrong with the list.
Positions in the left column does not correspond to the those in the right column. See below.
https://imgur.com/gallery/fqWXO2X

[vit05]

There is one newbie on the list. deftnerd. IRL Adam Brown.

He has only 8 posts, no merit. Last time he logged was on October 09, 2017. But he received a lot of green trusts from his topic, where he sold steam codes

[eddie13]

There is one newbie on the list. deftnerd. IRL Adam Brown.

He has only 8 posts, no merit. Last time he logged was on October 09, 2017. But he received a lot of green trusts from his topic, where he sold steam codes

That's not really even that much trust..

Is Vod's code biased towards trust from Theymos?
It also counts untrusted feedback? Counts age beyond 10 months?
Or just a glitch..

[selezneve]

There is one newbie on the list. deftnerd. IRL Adam Brown.

He has only 8 posts, no merit. Last time he logged was on October 09, 2017. But he received a lot of green trusts from his topic, where he sold steam codes

Consider that as an exception.

Even the most carefully designed algorithm will pick some of such users based on some particular activity or advantage associated with that member. Him getting lot of trsut through the way you mentioned strengthens the fact why one should not judge a  member only based on trust.

[lukeburchill]

there was a typo:
Thank you to jackg and iasenko for techincal troubleshooting.  (https://bpip.org/sponsor.aspx > Donations to the Project )

[Jet Cash]

I think it's the avatars that are recognised, rather than the member. Blows you out if you use your avatar for bounty promotion. It means you don't have a unique identity.

I was thinking of starting a "who's avatar is this? " contest, but I think I'll let somebody else do it.

[OgNasty]

I was thinking of starting a "who's avatar is this? " contest, but I think I'll let somebody else do it.

That would be fun. Sort of like a ‘How well do you know Bitcointalk’ quiz.

[Jet Cash]

That would be fun. Sort of like a ‘How well do you know Bitcointalk’ quiz.

Go for it.

 At the moment I'm looking at the possibility of accepting Bitcoin dust for charitable donations, so I won't be able to do it.

[digaran]

I don't accept this to be correct, people can game, merit, trust and activity, we even have 2 well-known trust farmers/abusers here.

[Steamtyme]

I think it would have been the activity/rank metric that kept nullius off the list.

I see some trust and a lot of earned merit but not enough to overcome the lack of activity.

[pugman]

I think it would have been the activity/rank metric that kept nullius off the list.

I see some trust and a lot of earned merit but not enough to overcome the lack of activity.

I am surprised that nullius isn't there but this guy(newbie) is: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=95463. nullius has more activity, same trust(sort of), and more merit than him. Vod did you take potential activity into count?

[LoyceV]

I am surprised that nullius isn't there but this guy(newbie) is: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=95463. nullius has more activity, same trust(sort of), and more merit than him.

It's based on the average of 3 different rankings. nullius is 628th most trusted, but doesn't even show up on most Activity and most Merit(ed). I think the airdropped Merit shouldn't count, that would put nullius a lot higher. Now many Legendary accounts fill the top 1000 because of the initial Merit, just like old accounts fill the Activity already.

[STT]

Nifty site, useful reference for finding peoples on Bitcointalk.   I was thinking recognition would also rely on threads started and popularity of those threads.  Its possible someone who codes but doesnt really talk much could be a very significant figure in crypto even on the forum where they dont post that much but people talk alot about what they did on the thread started to launch their software, website or protocol etc.
  Also its possible some are notorious but not especially respected while still recognised

[Quickseller]

I don’t think “recognized” is the most appropriate way to name this attribute. Maybe activity³ would be better. All of the attributes are a measure of how active a user is in various ways.

Legendary members, or those who were legendary as of this past January have a significant advantage in this ranking as they started with 1000 merit so in general they will have a better merit ranking

To better measure “recognition” I would suggest measuring the number of transactions a user has for trust (global not just DTN), merit and activity. Ideally you would also measure the number of times someone is mentioned in posts, however I don’t know that you have captured the content of posts.

[whywefight]

even I was inactive for a long time I am still at #272. That made my day

[Vod]

LoyceV and ETFbitcoin make a good point.

Merit is influenced by activity.  The more activity a person had, the more initial merit they were given.

This turns my three pillars into two. 

I am going to change the front page to show Most Merited and base the recognition calculation on only the merit you have been given by other members.

[vphasitha01]

Another great work by VOD and how do you find time to do this kind of things. I have banned(due to some misunderstanding) yesterday and unbanned today by "theymos", but still your data not updated and still shows that I'm auto-banned. My activity also not updating in your site. So is there any timeframe to update those details or those details are updating in real time? or if a person got banned, does the system got stopped for that user? VOD unban me from your webpage

[Jet Cash]

I'm 611, and I'm glad that means nobody recognises me. Does that mean I get a lot more freedom to move around?

[jackg]

I'm 611, and I'm glad that means nobody recognises me. Does that mean I get a lot more freedom to move around?

No because you're going to move up:

LoyceV and ETFbitcoin make a good point.

Merit is influenced by activity.  The more activity a person had, the more initial merit they were given.

This turns my three pillars into two. 

I am going to change the front page to show Most Merited and base the recognition calculation on only the merit you have been given by other members.

You've earnt 500+ merit so you'll be a lot higher when the new protocol comes into place.

[Vod]

I'm 611, and I'm glad that means nobody recognises me. Does that mean I get a lot more freedom to move around?

Like jackg said, it changed.  You are now 257TH most recognized.  

Nullius is now on there, at rank 161.

I expected my rank to drop, but it actually went UP to 2nd place!

The front page now lists Most Merited, which means how many merit you have received from other people.

I know some people are going to think I am playing with this stat, but you can verify it easily.  Just sum up the ranks for each attribute (Merited, Activity and Trust), add 1000 if an attribute doesn't have a rank - and divide by 3.

https://bpip.org/report.aspx?r=mostmerit
https://bpip.org/report.aspx?r=mostmerited

[Jet Cash]

I don't recognise most of the members in the first few hundred. Maybe I should look around Bitcoin Talk a bit more. Also, I put nullius on ignore. I thought he was just here for a bit of ego massaging, and not for the benefit of the forum, but obviously I haven't read most of his later posts, so perhaps I misunderstood his motives.

[jackg]

Am I calculating wrong?

https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=jackg

(410+375+1000)/3=595?

I might be using the wrong statistics here but if not, I guess a lot of others might be wrong also...

Edit 1: Nevermind, I was using most posts instead...

Edit 2: (410+1000+1000)/3=803.333...? So I guess there's still an error?

[Vod]

Edit 2: (410+1000+1000)/3=803.333...? So I guess there's still an error?

Your recognition score is 803.333..... that does not put you in the top 1000 (recognition RANK)

Let me make some changes to the profile page to make this clearer.

[jackg]

Edit 2: (410+1000+1000)/3=803.333...? So I guess there's still an error?

Your recognition score is 803.333..... that does not put you in the top 1000 (recognition RANK)

Let me make some changes to the profile page to make this clearer.

Ah yes, I forgot people can get the same scores ...

[Jet Cash]

You need to get an avatar jackg, so that we can recognise you.

[Vod]

Another great work by VOD and how do you find time to do this kind of things. I have banned(due to some misunderstanding) yesterday and unbanned today by "theymos", but still your data not updated and still shows that I'm auto-banned. My activity also not updating in your site. So is there any timeframe to update those details or those details are updating in real time? or if a person got banned, does the system got stopped for that user? VOD unban me from your webpage

System is not finished yet, but once you are autobanned or nuked your profile will no longer be parsed.  UNLESS you go into your archive profile and click on "Unarchive this profile".  If there are new posts, then the Autobanned and Nuked flags should disappear.  

[Welsh]

even I was inactive for a long time I am still at #272. That made my day

I've also been inactive for a few months in the past.

I expected my rank to drop, but it actually went UP to 2nd place!

I smell corruption within the system

I don't recognise most of the members in the first few hundred. Maybe I should look around Bitcoin Talk a bit more. Also, I put nullius on ignore. I thought he was just here for a bit of ego massaging, and not for the benefit of the forum, but obviously I haven't read most of his later posts, so perhaps I misunderstood his motives.

I guess it's using statistics rather than actual viewpoints of the public. So the data is always going to be a little skewed.

[vphasitha01]

If there are new posts, then the Autobanned and Nuked flags should disappear.  

Actually it isn't. Because I have already posted few posts, but your system doesn't recognized those. Posts, genaral information and security/moderator logs are still not updated.

[jackg]

If there are new posts, then the Autobanned and Nuked flags should disappear.  

Actually it isn't. Because I have already posted few posts, but your system doesn't recognized those. Posts, genaral information and security/moderator logs are still not updated.

Yes it does. The update button allows you to click to update your profile.

[vphasitha01]

If there are new posts, then the Autobanned and Nuked flags should disappear.  

Actually it isn't. Because I have already posted few posts, but your system doesn't recognized those. Posts, genaral information and security/moderator logs are still not updated.

Yes it does. The update button allows you to click to update your profile.

Oh yeah now it's updated  (btw I didn't press the update button)

[ibminer]

396, I'm moving up in the world..... fish don't fry in the kitchen, beans don't burn on the grill, it took a whole lotta tryin' just to get up that hill!

Great job on the new report(s) Vod!

...sometimes people just want to go where everybody knows their name. 
I'm in a musical mood today.

I don’t know that you have captured the content of posts.

Is this a fear of yours or a general observation? 

[vit05]

There is one newbie on the list. deftnerd. IRL Adam Brown.

He has only 8 posts, no merit. Last time he logged was on October 09, 2017. But he received a lot of green trusts from his topic, where he sold steam codes

One new newbie on top 1000 with this change.
nessie.io:
Posts:   8
Activity:   8
Merit:   148

He received 148 merits in this topic: Nessie.io - Exchange with Seamless Access to Digital Wallet & Gaming Services

50 from Dogedigital
20 from AcoinL.L.C

[BTCforJoe]

How often will this recognition list be updated? Does it display a running total within the last x amount of days? I'm assuming that it still takes the weighted average from the historical registration date of the user displayed, amiright?

I'd be curious to see a year-to-date chart for 2018 that takes stats from January 1 of this year until the current date... Maybe the same for each previous year. Historical data charts for this recognition would be something I'd be interested in seeing.

Then you could do a "Most recognized member of the year" award

[Steamtyme]

Well Nulius made the list now. 161
 Miss so many things on mobile.

Definitely recognizing some others such as atriz at 496 and someone at 821.

Being hear almost a year I definitely recognize more of the names on the list. I also had to scroll through twice to find myself around the middle @ 479

[Tszunami98]

I think ''Who owns an old account'' is a better name then ''Recognition''.

[Vod]

How often will this recognition list be updated? Does it display a running total within the last x amount of days? I'm assuming that it still takes the weighted average from the historical registration date of the user displayed, amiright?

I'd be curious to see a year-to-date chart for 2018 that takes stats from January 1 of this year until the current date... Maybe the same for each previous year. Historical data charts for this recognition would be something I'd be interested in seeing.

Then you could do a "Most recognized member of the year" award

Recognition and Merit are updated every minute.  Posts, Activity and Trust are updated when your profile is parsed.

Historical trust won't be tracked for a couple more weeks, and posts will take a bit longer - different priorities.  Obviously we can't have a year-to-date for merit (hence recognition) before it was created this year.  

[vphasitha01]

One new newbie on top 1000 with this change.
nessie.io:
Posts:   8
Activity:   8
Merit:   148

He received 148 merits in this topic: Nessie.io - Exchange with Seamless Access to Digital Wallet & Gaming Services

50 from Dogedigital
20 from AcoinL.L.C

Yeah this is called ANN marketing and I have already created a thread regarding this issue also. I'm believer(unfortunately most of them aren't) of not awarding any sMerits for the posts in ANN sections.

Link>>>Is This the New Way of Marketing in ANN threads?

[BayAreaCoins]

Vod, you just clicked shit and mathed until you got #2. 

But according to this, I suck!

[Vod]

Vod, you just clicked shit and mathed until you got #2. 

It took almost six months of analysis to calculate what formula would give me the best rating. 

[Steamtyme]

It took almost six months of analysis to calculate what formula would give me the best rating. 

Six months... my faith in Vod begins to waiver when a task takes any longer than 6 days.

[crwth]

Awesome. Especially with searched feature. I searched myself and I saw the imposter trying to be me. I remembered when I was just a new member of the forum, someone created an account with same name and with just a period at the end. Trying to change my BTC address registered in a campaign. What a scam.

[LoyceV]

It took almost six months of analysis to calculate what formula would give me the best rating. 

You should add points for anybody with an upper case V in their name

[vphasitha01]

It took almost six months of analysis to calculate what formula would give me the best rating. 

You should add points for anybody with an upper case V in their name

How about adding points for anybody with an upper case "v" as their first letter of name

[Foxpup]

It took almost six months of analysis to calculate what formula would give me the best rating. 

You should add points for anybody with an upper case V in their name

And an 'o' as the second letter of their name.

[mdayonliner]

I am surprised that nullius isn't there but this guy(newbie) is: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=95463. nullius has more activity, same trust(sort of), and more merit than him. Vod did you take potential activity into count?

How did you find out this guy?  
Interesting.

@Vod, I am actually finding it hard to understand this MAT calculation. May be I will need another six months to understand it  
Your list does not have Vitalik Buterin. How come sirius ranked 912?  

By the way, the effort was nice. Good job on the bpip project.

It took almost six months of analysis to calculate what formula would give me the best rating.  

You should add points for anybody with an upper case V in their name

And an 'o' as the second letter of their name.

may be an "m" at the first letter and the member has to be Full member or above  


Give me a break! I am actually 377^th ranked. I did not expect THAT! 

[Blazed]

Top 20 Bitcointalk celebrity here...I will signing autographs next week. Just check my fan page for details!

[SaltySpitoon]

Top 20 Bitcointalk celebrity here...I will signing autographs next week. Just check my fan page for details!

Interested in doing a joint venture there? My neighbor will be selling girl scout cookies as well, so that could draw people in.

[Blazed]

Top 20 Bitcointalk celebrity here...I will signing autographs next week. Just check my fan page for details!

Interested in doing a joint venture there? My neighbor will be selling girl scout cookies as well, so that could draw people in.

Have your people call my people and set it up.

[inPRIVACYweBELIEVE]

So, for me the calculation is...

Code:

$Merit = 10;
$Activity = 16;
$Trust = ∞; // this coder have no clue what is this 

$myRank = (10+16+∞)/3;
$myRank = ∞/3;
$myRank = ∞;

printf ($myRank);

So ya, I can understand why I am not on the list 

The most unrecognized dude in the hood 


-------------------------------

Top 20 Bitcointalk celebrity here...I will signing autographs next week. Just check my fan page for details!

Interested in doing a joint venture there? My neighbor will be selling girl scout cookies as well, so that could draw people in.

Have your people call my people and set it up.

Who is offering event management here? 

[jackg]

So, for me the calculation is...

Code:

$Merit = 10;
$Activity = 16;
$Trust = ∞; // this coder have no clue what is this 

$myRank = (10+16+∞)/3;
$myRank = ∞/3;
$myRank = ∞;

printf ($myRank);

So ya, I can understand why I am not on the list 

The most unrecognized dude in the hood 

That is so wrong (sorry it just is).
It's your rank on those.
How high you come at earning merits + how much activity you have + how high you come for having trust (divide by three).
If anything isn't ranked on the site you treat it as being a thousand.
So far yours is 1000 so you're off the list (as you're not ranked in the top 1000 for anything although I sense you will be).

Top 20 Bitcointalk celebrity here...I will signing autographs next week. Just check my fan page for details!

Interested in doing a joint venture there? My neighbor will be selling girl scout cookies as well, so that could draw people in.

Have your people call my people and set it up.

Who is offering event management here? 

Me

[Steamtyme]

Top 20 Bitcointalk celebrity here...I will signing autographs next week. Just check my fan page for details!

Interested in doing a joint venture there? My neighbor will be selling girl scout cookies as well, so that could draw people in.

Is this going to be a thread where people get to pay for your signed messages from a staked address.  

I'll keep an eye on the digital goods board, maybe an auction for both together.

Better investment than a shitcoin.

Edit: Wait for it... trading cards.

[DarkStar_]

Edit: Wait for it... trading cards.

We'll tokenize the trading cards by creating a Ethereum smart contract and a shiny ICO to go with it!

[TheBeardedBaby]

Edit: Wait for it... trading cards.

We'll tokenize the trading cards by creating a Ethereum smart contract and a shiny ICO to go with it!

Sounds a bit like the Crypto All Stars cards, that came s few months ago and the whole crypto-trading Twitter world went crazy.

[botany]

I am ranked 252.
Not bad at all, for somebody who doesn't trade on this forum. 

[Vod]

Edit: Wait for it... trading cards.

We'll tokenize the trading cards by creating a Ethereum smart contract and a shiny ICO to go with it!

Sounds a bit like the Crypto All Stars cards, that came s few months ago and the whole crypto-trading Twitter world went crazy.

I actually think bitcointalk trading cards could be a cool idea. 

[Steamtyme]

We'll tokenize the trading cards by creating a Ethereum smart contract and a shiny ICO to go with it!

Why do I feel like someone has been working on this all day. Can't wait for the bounty.

I actually bet there would have been a dozen mockups, if they felt the merit were flowing.

*snip*

That's neat I had no idea. I love how a bunch of them bought their own cards to boost the numbers.

I actually think bitcointalk trading cards could be a cool idea.  

But should we use Satoshi's high school or college photo for the rookie card. I also want there to be a piece of pink concrete called gum in the pack.

[chiyenbtre]

For consideration:
If you're counting the initial (airdropped) Merit, which was based on Activity, aren't you double counting Activity?

If new ranking system implememented and based on the suggestion of @LoyceV, it should only take earned merits into considerations.
Automatically allocated merits at the launch day of merit system makes non-sense. Why? Because the allocated merits based on activity-count and the potential new ranking system should avoid overlaps between activity counts and merit counts.
Contributions of forum users should mainly base on earned merits, not total merits - which include both allocated merits and earn merits.

[vphasitha01]

For consideration:
If you're counting the initial (airdropped) Merit, which was based on Activity, aren't you double counting Activity?

If new ranking system implememented and based on the suggestion of @LoyceV, it should only take earned merits into considerations.
Automatically allocated merits at the launch day of merit system makes non-sense. Why? Because the allocated merits based on activity-count and the potential new ranking system should avoid overlaps between activity counts and merit counts.
Contributions of forum users should mainly base on earned merits, not total merits - which include both allocated merits and earn merits.

I don't agree with your suggestion. We cant measure the contribution of forum users only looking at their earned merits. Even though Merit system introduced recently, that doesn't mean members who are active (active and contributed as well) way before the implementation of Merits weren't contributed to the forum at all. We can't take that part entirely from the total picture.

Instead of that suggestion, I would like to suggest if we can put a weighting factor for initial (airdropped) Merits when taking account into the calculations of contribution rank would be fair.

My suggestion is 0.75(Weighting factor) for earned merits and 0.25(Weighting factor) for initial merits.

[krogothmanhattan]

Was todl i am on a list...had to check it out.

And I am at 42!  

Nice job Vod. Will keep this on my to check list.

Didnt know there were such things! Cheers!

[chiyenbtre]

You maybe right at this point!
However, the most important point is:
I believe that old forum users will not care about this.
Why?
Because if those guys are real constructive users, not pseudo-constructive ones, they will surely earn lots of merits in the future (and actually got hundreds of merits months after the start day of the system).
If months after the start day of merit system, Hero or Ledgendary members can not earn any merit or just very limited merits, what does it mean?
It means that those guys are very lucky ones, who fortunately ranked up to highest ranks in the forum via the old ranking system.
I called they are at somewhat extent, effortlessly high-ranked members.

I don't agree with your suggestion. We cant measure the contribution of forum users only looking at their earned merits. Even though Merit system introduced recently, that doesn't mean members who are active (active and contributed as well) way before the implementation of Merits weren't contributed to the forum at all. We can't take that part entirely from the total picture.

It's not a bad idea.
If you want to take both earned and allocated merits, weights are essential things.
So, next question, which weights should be allocated (yeah, automatically allocated weights) based on their ranks and their allocated merits?

Instead of that suggestion, I would like to suggest if we can put a weighting factor for initial (airdropped) Merits when taking account into the calculations of contribution rank would be fair.

Your suggested weights look good because it allocates bigger impacts on earned merits. However, I think the allocated merits should have much smaller weights than yours.

My suggestion is 0.75(Weighting factor) for earned merits and 0.25(Weighting factor) for initial merits.

[krogothmanhattan]

Edit: Wait for it... trading cards.

We'll tokenize the trading cards by creating a Ethereum smart contract and a shiny ICO to go with it!

Sounds a bit like the Crypto All Stars cards, that came s few months ago and the whole crypto-trading Twitter world went crazy.

I actually think bitcointalk trading cards could be a cool idea.  

That is an idea someone should really consider doing.

I am sure my fellows in the collectables section would be interested.

If somone does wanna consider doing it they can always create a poll in collectables and see what the feedback says

[godlike123]

(OMG - this is not a post about merit!  This is a post about Activity and Trust as well)   


I believe the three main pillars of a bitcointalk profile are Merit, Activity and Trust (MAT). 

Since I already rank everyone based on those attributes, I thought I would make a new attribute and call it "Recognition".

Everyone is scored 1-1000 for each pillar.  If you are not ranked you are scored 1000.  The totals are added up, and divided by three.

The result, a number from 1 to 1000 (lower is better), is your average ranking in this community - according to these three pillars anyway.  Personally, I was quite stunned at the results.  :/

https://bpip.org/report.aspx?r=mostrecognized

I am still new on this forum and i would like to learn more on how to invest on bitcoin and to earn on it. I heard that one can earn great in bitcoin by taking advantage on its volatility. I guess that would be easy if i join on and buy bitcoin.

[mymenace]

There is one newbie on the list. deftnerd. IRL Adam Brown.

He has only 8 posts, no merit. Last time he logged was on October 09, 2017. But he received a lot of green trusts from his topic, where he sold steam codes

That's not really even that much trust..

Is Vod's code biased towards trust from Theymos?
It also counts untrusted feedback? Counts age beyond 10 months?
Or just a glitch..

Future proves past

[LFC_Bitcoin]

I’m 118th

That’s pretty cool, I expected to be a lot lower.

[Vod]

However, the most important point is:
I believe that old forum users will not care about this.

I received a PM similar to this, saying older users were getting shafted by removing original merit from the equation.

Most Recognized stat shows how recognized the users are today.  Those users that are more active on this forum today are more recognized than the builders of bitcoin yesterday.

If there was historical information from years ago the list would be different, and of course this list does not represent the Bitcoin world - just this forum.

[Steamtyme]

And I am at 42!  

IMO that's the coolest spot on any numbered list exceeding 41.

Should a card exist your name would have to be written as
Krogath "the answer" manhattan

See question- Life, The universe and Everything.

[krogothmanhattan]

And I am at 42!  

IMO that's the coolest spot on any number.bered list exceeding 41.

Should a card exist your name would have to be written as
Krogath "the answer" manhattan

See question- Life, The universe and Everything.

Lol...and i would definitely be a buyer of that card too!

I do hope someone makes them. I am the ultimate bitcoin collector 

[Parodium]

Number 578, not too bad. My quest for world domination is making good progress.

For your next project how about a ranking list based on the cumulative number of their thread views? Would be interesting to see who has racked up the most thread views.

For each member you could also calculate their discussion power by dividing the cumulative thread comments into cumulative thread views. This could also be used to catch thread boosters, any suspicious member with too high a ratio might warrant further investigation.

[Quickseller]

Legendary members, or those who were legendary as of this past January have a significant advantage in this ranking as they started with 1000 merit so in general they will have a better merit ranking

(2 posts later)

I am going to change the front page to show Most Merited and base the recognition calculation on only the merit you have been given by other members.

However, the most important point is:
I believe that old forum users will not care about this.

I received a PM similar to this, saying older users were getting shafted by removing original merit from the equation.

http://archive.is/oRIC6

Hey, thanks for taking my advice regarding your project into consideration.

I would appreciate it if you gave me credit for my inspiration. Maybe you could add something along the lines of to each page on your website:
Some ideas on this project were inspired by Quickseller

Thanks.  

edit: you can also write how much you look up to me in your website. (obviously this is a lot)

edit2: I am 172nd in most recognized.

[inPRIVACYweBELIEVE]

Me

Booked! When I become one you will definitely get hired  

So far yours is 1000 so you're off the list

No, it's ∞, ∞ and ∞ which makes 3∞/3 = ∞  
I am just kidding mate.

although I sense you will be

Yeah, hope someday I will. Thank you for the positive expectation.

Update: Surprise to see that you are not on the list!!

[LoyceV]

For your next project how about a ranking list based on the cumulative number of their thread views? Would be interesting to see who has racked up the most thread views.

Having many thread views isn't necessarily a good thing, this would put the creators of Spam Megathreads and threads spammed with Bump Bots on top.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Edit: Wait for it... trading cards.

I'd buy those.  That would actually make a pretty neat collectible for bitcoiners and would be a nice snapshot of this little piece of bitcoin culture.  Instead of pictures of the people, you'd have to use avatars or something, but it could work.

Reminds me of those "snitch cards" they put out in prisons, with pictures of unsolved murder victims on them.  Someone had a deck of those at work, and apparently they're pretty collectible and can be found for big bucks on eBay.

Edit:  OK, not big big bucks, but way more than your average deck.

I'll wait for the scammer's version of it. Would be awesome!

I'd buy those too!

[whywefight]

I'll wait for the scammer's version of it. Would be awesome!

[LFC_Bitcoin]

Edit: Wait for it... trading cards.

I'd buy those.  That would actually make a pretty neat collectible for bitcoiners and would be a nice snapshot of this little piece of bitcoin culture.  Instead of pictures of the people, you'd have to use avatars or something, but it could work.

Reminds me of those "snitch cards" they put out in prisons, with pictures of unsolved murder victims on them.  Someone had a deck of those at work, and apparently they're pretty collectible and can be found for big bucks on eBay.

Edit:  OK, not big big bucks, but way more than your average deck.

I’ll swap you my Loyce, JayJuanGee & Lauda for your Vod?

[ibminer]

--nonsense about 2 posts later, it's my idea - give me credit, archived!--

Thanks for the archive, one less step for me.  

Quickseller at post #23: http://archive.is/oRIC6#selection-10510.1-10526.6

The 2nd post of this thread could have certainly been better inspiration for Vod to adjust the merit calculations:
http://archive.is/oRIC6#selection-1543.0-1545.116

If that's not enough, the 21st post (2 posts before yours):
http://archive.is/oRIC6#selection-9489.86-9489.130

Seems like plagiarism to me??  

[mymenace]

However, the most important point is:
I believe that old forum users will not care about this.

I received a PM similar to this, saying older users were getting shafted by removing original merit from the equation.
Most Recognized stat shows how recognized the users are today.  Those users that are more active on this forum today are more recognized than the builders of bitcoin yesterday.
If there was historical information from years ago the list would be different, and of course this list does not represent the Bitcoin world - just this forum.

I think it is fantastic, a great guideline

@Vod great work

[OgNasty]

Number 578, not too bad. My quest for world domination is making good progress.

For your next project how about a ranking list based on the cumulative number of their thread views? Would be interesting to see who has racked up the most thread views.

For each member you could also calculate their discussion power by dividing the cumulative thread comments into cumulative thread views. This could also be used to catch thread boosters, any suspicious member with too high a ratio might warrant further investigation.

Congrats on your progress.

I like your ideas. The more stats the better!

[hopenotlate]

Good job with your site. If I were you I'd have messed up with the stats and calculation to overcome Theymos in  the leaderboard  

Btw if someone still didn't point out there are a couple of typos in  privacy page

[pugman]

Number 578, not too bad. My quest for world domination is making good progress.

For your next project how about a ranking list based on the cumulative number of their thread views? Would be interesting to see who has racked up the most thread views.

For each member you could also calculate their discussion power by dividing the cumulative thread comments into cumulative thread views. This could also be used to catch thread boosters, any suspicious member with too high a ratio might warrant further investigation.

Top 10 most viewed threads:

Thread _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _______________________________________________________________________________ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _	Views
Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion	20347083
[ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency	9274895
Claymore's Dual Ethereum AMD+NVIDIA GPU Miner v11.9 (Windows/Linux)	6216973
OFFICIAL CGMINER mining software thread for linux/win/osx/mips/arm/r-pi 4.10.0	5757320
Der Aktuelle Kursverlauf	5203226
[205+PH] KanoPool kano.is 0.9% fee 6.3 BTC giveaway  US,UK,JP,NYA,DE,SG	5161470
64Blocks ░▒▓ The Social Game! ▓▒░ 0.01 mBTC Every 12 Hours!	4341785
[4+ EH] Slush Pool (slushpool.com); Overt AsicBoost; World First Mining Pool	4329036
[XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untrace able cryptocurrency	4247068
ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It	3875726

Source: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=stats
To make things easier, go to each board, and sort them out based on views. For example:

Threads in Bitcoin Discussion from Highest Number of views to Lower: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=1.0;sort=views;desc

Edit: Messed up the table. Got to learn basics of HTML. Hold on. Figured it out. 

Don't quote my post. 

[suchmoon]

Big mistake including me at #23. My ego will now bloat to occupy all positions between #15 and #30.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

How often does it update & WTF does parsed mean?

[ibminer]

How often does it update & WTF does parsed mean?

Is this what you are looking for?

Recognition and Merit are updated every minute.  Posts, Activity and Trust are updated when your profile is parsed.

(Profiles are parsed by using the "Update profile" link on the profile page of the account)

As for what "parsed" means, wikipedia probably summarizes it best:
"A parser is a software component that takes input data and builds a data structure."

[Quickseller]

--nonsense about 2 posts later, it's my idea - give me credit, archived!--

Thanks for the archive, one less step for me. 

Quickseller at post #23: http://archive.is/oRIC6#selection-10510.1-10526.6

The 2nd post of this thread could have certainly been better inspiration for Vod to adjust the merit calculations:
http://archive.is/oRIC6#selection-1543.0-1545.116

If that's not enough, the 21st post (2 posts before yours):
http://archive.is/oRIC6#selection-9489.86-9489.130

Seems like plagiarism to me?? 

You appear to be operating on the assumption that they are different than me. Have you sufficiently ruled that out?

Regardless, Vod has a habit of following my posts fairly closely, so he probably did make the decision to upgrade the formula after reading the suggestion from QS. I don’t see any other reason why he would announce the change exactly 8 hours, 29 minuets, 45 seconds after I brought up the point.

[jackg]

You appear to be operating on the assumption that they are different than me. Have you sufficiently ruled that out?

Self plagiarism is a form of plagiarism, it's probably worse because then it's just copy and pasting.

Regardless, Vod has a habit of following my posts fairly closely, so he probably did make the decision to upgrade the formula after reading the suggestion from QS. I don’t see any other reason why he would announce the change exactly 8 hours, 29 minuets, 45 seconds after I brought up the point.

Talking about ourselves in third person now are we?

How often does it update & WTF does parsed mean?

Is this what you are looking for?

Recognition and Merit are updated every minute.  Posts, Activity and Trust are updated when your profile is parsed.

(Profiles are parsed by using the "Update profile" link on the profile page of the account)

As for what "parsed" means, wikipedia probably summarizes it best:
"A parser is a software component that takes input data and builds a data structure."

Also yes, the profiles are updated whenever the "update profile" link is pressed or when they are automatically updated (they will be automatically updated in a queue unless the profile is in archived mode).

[ibminer]

You appear to be operating on the assumption that they are different than me. Have you sufficiently ruled that out?

Yes, I've sufficiently ruled out that "they" are not you. Clearly you didn't even look at my archive links.
You are welcome to prove me wrong though. Until then, it wasn't your idea.

Regardless, Vod has a habit of following my posts fairly closely, so he probably did make the decision to upgrade the formula after reading the suggestion from QS. I don’t see any other reason why he would announce the change exactly 8 hours, 29 minuets, 45 seconds after I brought up the point.

Regardless of why Vod did it, this thread clearly shows you trying to claim credit for another members idea, which is plagiarism.
Again, you are always welcome to prove this otherwise.


EDIT: (above for clarity, below for suchmoon - and to try and not derail this thread too much with additional posts)

I like where this is going. What's the over-under for Quicksy's permaban?

Well, if we are going to go by the logic that Quickseller's himself is using:

Regardless, Vod has a habit of following my posts fairly closely, so he probably did make the decision to upgrade the formula after reading the suggestion from QS. I don’t see any other reason why he would announce the change exactly 8 hours, 29 minuets, 45 seconds after I brought up the point.

I don’t see any other reason why Quickseller would come up with his idea exactly 1 hour, 2 minutes and 53 seconds after LoyceV last brought up the point...

I think the airdropped Merit shouldn't count, that would put nullius a lot higher. Now many Legendary accounts fill the top 1000 because of the initial Merit, just like old accounts fill the Activity already.

Legendary members, or those who were legendary as of this past January have a significant advantage in this ranking as they started with 1000 merit so in general they will have a better merit ranking

It seems no matter whether I use my own logic or Quicksellers, odds are pretty good it's plagiarism, by definition. Just calling it like I see it.

[suchmoon]

I like where this is going. What's the over-under for Quicksy's permaban?

[legendster]

I was thinking of starting a "who's avatar is this? " contest, but I think I'll let somebody else do it.

That would be fun. Sort of like a ‘How well do you know Bitcointalk’ quiz.

I'd be amazed if someone recognized my original legendster avatar that i put on occasionally these days (cough signature campaigns cough) but had it on for like forever between 2013 and 2017.

You should go ahead with this @jetcash and couple this with your English tutorial and netiquette courses

[jeffthebaker]

Maybe there should be an average between "Merit" and "Merited" in the recognition calculations? There should be some reward as a longstanding member...

I'm not biased... I swear...

[Vod]

Maybe there should be an average between "Merit" and "Merited" in the recognition calculations? There should be some reward as a longstanding member...

I'm not biased... I swear...

Activity is the reward for being a longtime member.  Just registering and doing nothing does not help you get recognized.

[Quickseller]

Regardless of why Vod did it, this thread clearly shows you trying to claim credit for another members idea, which is plagiarism.
Again, you are always welcome to prove this otherwise.

That is nonsense. Multiple people can have the same idea, as great minds often think alike. Further, nowhere have I claimed to be the first to publish this idea, but rather, it was, and remains to be my assertion that Vod made the change in his formula as a direct result of reading my post, and agreeing with my statement.

You appear to be operating on the assumption that they are different than me. Have you sufficiently ruled that out?

Self plagiarism is a form of plagiarism, it's probably worse because then it's just copy and pasting.

You are wrong. It is in fact very common for people to make the same statement multiple times.

Regardless, Vod has a habit of following my posts fairly closely, so he probably did make the decision to upgrade the formula after reading the suggestion from QS. I don’t see any other reason why he would announce the change exactly 8 hours, 29 minuets, 45 seconds after I brought up the point.

Talking about ourselves in third person now are we?
[/quote]No, I was talking about Vod reading a post from my QS account.

Since no one has bothered to address this issue, I will explain it:

There are 8 hours in a typical work day, and Vod works really hard to discredit me, even though he knows deep down I am almost always right. For the minutes, 2 less than 9 is 7, and there are 7 natural wonders in the world, and Vod is wondering when I will post next and about what. Also, 2 plus 9 is 11, and there are 11 characters in "Quickseller". Also, 4 plus 5 is 9, it takes 9 months to have a baby, and Vod often acts like a baby when dealing with me. 

[hilariousetc]

Was todl i am on a list...had to check it out.

Todl? A new bitcointalk meme may have just been born.

That is an idea someone should really consider doing.

I am sure my fellows in the collectables section would be interested.

If somone does wanna consider doing it they can always create a poll in collectables and see what the feedback says

Yeah, I like it. Maybe we should crowdfund it to get some cards professional printed. Satoshi could be the rarest card of them all  .

Why do I feel like someone has been working on this all day. Can't wait for the bounty.

I actually bet there would have been a dozen mockups, if they felt the merit were flowing.

Haha. You know it. I'd happily throw some merit at that for some good designs.

[athanz88]

Wow how come I never find this gem before? This is an interesting list you made based on the score you calculate Vod. Marvelous work you have done for this, i bet it took you a lot of times. To be number 401 in this list is such an honor for me, thanks for that, and i will try to climb my way up.

For this perfect work, can i add something Vod? Maybe it is a good idea if we can sort the data per category, like ascending and descending of registration date, since we can see other things like "do older account is more recognized or not" etc.

Thanks for your time reading this. Let me know your answer about my suggestion. I take any comments.

[edwardceng]

Vod : is it possible at https://bpip.org/ to display lists of DT members and their history of trust?
maybe there are some casual members like me who are curious to know the number of DT members in this forum.

thanks

Edit

You can find all DT-members here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust
It's doesn't show the history though, only the current DT-members.

my bad, I just knew that but I still ask bpip to display it, so it doesn't need to log this forum to see it

[LoyceV]

Vod : is it possible at https://bpip.org/ to display lists of DT members and their history of trust?
maybe there are some casual members like me who are curious to know the number of DT members in this forum.

You can find all DT-members here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust
It's doesn't show the history though, only the current DT-members.

[chiyenbtre]

You can find all DT-members here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust
It's doesn't show the history though, only the current DT-members.

highly appreciated your guide to get current DT-members in the forum.
By the way, I would like to know and expect you or others can help me: How to check the locations, IP address of forum users?
I am not a IT guy, and have not learnt about deeply knowledge, skills on those issues.
Please help me when you have spare time.

[LoyceV]

I would like to know and expect you or others can help me: How to check the locations, IP address of forum users?

So basically you want to DOX forum users? That's not appreciated here!

[Ferrytale1]

It's still basically based on your activity and longevity.
It has a certain degree of neutrality though.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

I would like to know and expect you or others can help me: How to check the locations, IP address of forum users?

That’s borderline of deserving negative trust. Why the hell do you need to know locations & IP addresses of posters here. Disgusting post to be honest.

[Vod]

Vod : is it possible at https://bpip.org/ to display lists of DT members and their history of trust?
maybe there are some casual members like me who are curious to know the number of DT members in this forum.

thanks

Edit

You can find all DT-members here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust
It's doesn't show the history though, only the current DT-members.

my bad, I just knew that but I still ask bpip to display it, so it doesn't need to log this forum to see it

I'm currently working on trust and trust history.  It will be in the next release of my parser.

[YOSHIE]

I am still a Newbei, so I don't know exactly how much is admitted in Bitcointalk,
But what is clear in Meta is that many members have good quality from posts or words,
A person cannot judge himself, surely others judge him,
Hurt and keep trying the best and best for everyone.

[xtraelv]

This is my thousandth post - literally. Does that make me more recognized ?

[bill gator]

This is my thousandth post - literally. Does that make me more recognized ?

Not on Vod's list, but in my heart, where it matters.

I'll wait for the scammer's version of it.

"Most Infamous", I can see it now. Would be quite an amusing read.


Might it give the calculations another Pillar if you consider the trust received from Non-DT members if those members have received Trust from DT members? Certainly the Trust from a Trusted Non-DT member has some weight in Recognition and should be thrown into the mix somehow. I've run the numbers and this is a solid chance at a quick boost to my rank; all I have to do is convince you it's a good idea. I missed the autograph signing and now I'll never get my Baseball Cap signed.

Also, would it be silly to suggest weighing the categories? I don't believe Activity should be considered equal to Trust, for example.

Was a little late to the thread, but still an interesting concept. I am ashamed of how many names I recognize on this list, even into the 600's.

[suchmoon]

Also, would it be silly to suggest weighing the categories? I don't believe Activity should be considered equal to Trust, for example.

It's not that it's equal to trust - it's based on where you rank compared to others. Activity is easy to obtain but it's easy to obtain for everyone.

[bill gator]

Yes, I understand that, but what I am saying is that your rank in comparison to other in terms of Trust is much more significant than your rank in comparison to others in terms of Activity (For recognition purposes). I don't know if I'm explaining that correctly, or maybe I am misunderstanding the calculations. It seems like your Rank for Trust and your Rank for Activity are considered equally towards the end result, and I believe this should be weighed differently. Does that make sense?

[Vod]

Yes, I understand that, but what I am saying is that your rank in comparison to other in terms of Trust is much more significant than your rank in comparison to others in terms of Activity (For recognition purposes). I don't know if I'm explaining that correctly, or maybe I am misunderstanding the calculations. It seems like your Rank for Trust and your Rank for Activity are considered equally towards the end result, and I believe this should be weighed differently. Does that make sense?

It makes sense to me, but I disagree with the suggestion. 

Recognition is based on three pillars.   MAT - Merit, Activity, Trust

M) How well they contribute to the community (quality of what they post)
A) How active and involved they are (quantity of what they post)
T) How respected and trusted they are (popularity/morality of their actions)

I agree with you that Merit and Trust are more difficult to gain than Activity, but I am not calculating based on these values directly - I calculate based on how you rank in comparison to others.  It should be equally as easy to gain activity for every member of the forum.

I want to avoid manipulating the score any more than taking the average of your rank on the three pillars.

[suchmoon]

Yes, I understand that, but what I am saying is that your rank in comparison to other in terms of Trust is much more significant than your rank in comparison to others in terms of Activity (For recognition purposes). I don't know if I'm explaining that correctly, or maybe I am misunderstanding the calculations. It seems like your Rank for Trust and your Rank for Activity are considered equally towards the end result, and I believe this should be weighed differently. Does that make sense?

I get what you're saying but I don't think that e.g. trust or merit should have more weight in recognition. A person could be shitposting and/or untrustworthy but still quite recognizable if they're hyperactive (e.g. Quickseller #162) and that's fair.

[LoyceV]

I agree with you that Merit and Trust are more difficult to gain than Activity

It depends on how you look at it: Activity is indeed easy to gain, but going up in Activity Rank is very difficult. I'm at Activity Rank 971 now, and the only way for me to go up, is if users with a higher rank don't post anything for 14 days in a row (or delete enough old posts to lose Activity). And unlike Merit and Trust, which basically depend on what I post and how I behave, there's nothing I can do to "beat" other users' Activity Rating.

[bill gator]

there's nothing I can do to "beat" other users' Activity Rating.

You could strangle every individual that has a higher rank than you, not necessarily to kill or maim, but just severely enough to leave them incapacitated for 14-days (give or take). Wouldn't that give you a better chance at moving up the Activity rating Ranking? Not a suggestion, but uhh, I wouldn't say there's "nothing" you can do.

the only way for me to go up, is if users with a higher rank don't post anything for 14 days in a row

You say this as if it is an unlikely scenario. Every activity period increases the chances that those above you will miss an activity period. Once they do, you have an opportunity to gain some traction. This happens very regularly, vacations, disinterest, account sales, illness, etc. The list of reasons that would cause inactivity are endless.

[OgNasty]

Sometimes you wanna go where everybody knows your name, and they’re always glad you came.

https://youtu.be/lQpL5ZLQHyw

[BayAreaCoins]

Sometimes you wanna go where everybody knows your name, and they’re always glad you came.

https://youtu.be/lQpL5ZLQHyw

Sometimes you just want people to know the size of your epeen!

https://youtu.be/TNgWQfOd-1M

[jademaxsuy]

(OMG - this is not a post about merit!  This is a post about Activity and Trust as well)   


I believe the three main pillars of a bitcointalk profile are Merit, Activity and Trust (MAT). 

Since I already rank everyone based on those attributes, I thought I would make a new attribute and call it "Recognition".

Everyone is scored 1-1000 for each pillar.  If you are not ranked you are scored 1000.  The totals are added up, and divided by three.

The result, a number from 1 to 1000 (lower is better), is your average ranking in this community - according to these three pillars anyway.  Personally, I was quite stunned at the results.  :/

https://bpip.org/report.aspx?r=mostrecognized

You are one of the recognized bitcointalk user in this forum i have voted you in a poll thread where you are one of the choices appeared. There are many known bitcointalk user account here what does their job quite good and envy on them because they had it already while i am still in the process of learning and one thing is that i am not really that good poster since my english is really that bad.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

A person could be shitposting and/or untrustworthy but still quite recognizable if they're hyperactive (e.g. Quickseller #162) and that's fair.

I agree.  I also think if a deck of cards was ever produced with bitcointalk members on their faces, QS should be one of the jokers.  Maybe Spoetnik could be the other, but he abandoned the forum a while ago if I'm not mistaken.

Anyway, the criteria seem reasonable.  There's really no other way to measure forum recognition if you want to do so at least somewhat quantitatively.   One flaw in this is that Satoshi is ranked #40 as I write this.  He probably should get grandfathered in and pegged at #1 or #2 or something.  I get that he hasn't been active in years, but damn.

[suchmoon]

A person could be shitposting and/or untrustworthy but still quite recognizable if they're hyperactive (e.g. Quickseller #162) and that's fair.

I agree.  I also think if a deck of cards was ever produced with bitcointalk members on their faces, QS should be one of the jokers.  Maybe Spoetnik could be the other, but he abandoned the forum a while ago if I'm not mistaken.

Anyway, the criteria seem reasonable.  There's really no other way to measure forum recognition if you want to do so at least somewhat quantitatively.   One flaw in this is that Satoshi is ranked #40 as I write this.  He probably should get grandfathered in and pegged at #1 or #2 or something.  I get that he hasn't been active in years, but damn.

Maybe something like "mentions" should be a factor, i.e. how many times your name is mentioned in other people's posts. Not easy to implement though.

[Welsh]

I agree.  I also think if a deck of cards was ever produced with bitcointalk members on their faces, QS should be one of the jokers.  Maybe Spoetnik could be the other, but he abandoned the forum a while ago if I'm not mistaken.

Anyway, the criteria seem reasonable.  There's really no other way to measure forum recognition if you want to do so at least somewhat quantitatively.   One flaw in this is that Satoshi is ranked #40 as I write this.  He probably should get grandfathered in and pegged at #1 or #2 or something.  I get that he hasn't been active in years, but damn.

Okay, lets crowdfund this deck of cards idea. Would be interesting.

Yeah, I guess it is based on Bitcointalk though. If it was Bitcoin then sure. But, I guess a lot of people haven't even read Satoshi's posts. I know I have, and a few other people would of read every single one, but I guess he's no longer that impactful in the current Bitcointalk.

Maybe something like "mentions" should be a factor, i.e. how many times your name is mentioned in other people's posts. Not easy to implement though.

Theymos to be #1 closely followed by Lauda, and Vod.

[Jet Cash]

Well if you are creating characters for a card deck, then I am traditionally the Knave ( Page ) of Batons.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Okay, lets crowdfund this deck of cards idea. Would be interesting.

I would love to do this, but I'd be useless for anything but a contribution.  I don't know anything about producing cards or even crowdfunding for that matter, though I can't imagine doing the latter would be all that complicated.  Do you know of anyone who'd be able to design and manufacture playing, tarot, or trading cards?  I've seen a lot of weird bitcoin-related items when I've visited the Collectibles section, so I would think somebody might be able to do it.

This probably needs its own thread.  I just think that it would be an extremely neat thing to have to look back at bitcointalk years from now.  You have to admit that the forum is an important component of the bitcoin world, as Satoshi himself was a founding member and many influential bitcoiners use or have used the site.  Many bitcoin collectibles exist, but I don't think I've ever seen any bitcointalk memorabilia.

[LoyceV]

Do you know of anyone who'd be able to design and manufacture playing, tarot, or trading cards?

Some (Chinese?) webshops can produce this, ArtsCow.com for example charges $13.99 for producing just one set.
The design will have to be a community effort, and no, I can't help with that

[bill gator]

I know a couple of extremely talented artists if we are serious about getting some cards made. The artists I know are not members of the community, so I am unsure if that is a demerit. It might be more wholesome to keep the design and manufacturing within the community, but I am unsure how feasible this actually is. If cards are made they should be limited to the most renown, definitely not more than the original 151 Pokemon, maybe some expansion packs can be released in the future.

If nobody else has big plans for this kind of thing I would certainly be interested in heading the project. I wouldn't be able to do it alone, but it is something I'm seriously interested in.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

I’m 118th

That’s pretty cool, I expected to be a lot lower.

Just had a quick look & I’m now into 85.



Edit - The playing card idea sounds cool

[eddie13]

Here are some of my previous works..

We'll tokenize the trading cards by creating a Ethereum smart contract and a shiny ICO to go with it!

Errrr.... You could do it on Bitcoin with Counterparty..

This Bitcoin signed message proves that I created the above assets, how many of them I still own, others I own, and my trade history on the Counterparty Decentralized Exchange, all on the Bitcoin blockchain. eddie13 9/24/2018
1vvSrTFiQY7akwbsv3iYPPe9mR3DsEbff
H2ifpy6/gQIDD6uI3LOFXKee2X/Hql7fsMiy1I1S+VcALfhzg9LpIYaihss9DgUrP0W2x60FmwnwycLJqbDvwKM=

https://xchain.io/address/1vvSrTFiQY7akwbsv3iYPPe9mR3DsEbff

I'm not much of an artist but I think this stuff is pretty nifty and fun..

If a smart coder made a copy of this...  rarepepewallet.com/

Then we could all make our own card, register our own assets, list them on the DEX, buy/sell/trade with eachother, and send eachother cards to our BTC addys..
Pretty much just copy that project..  
That site also functions as the DEX, you can place your DEX orders from the site..

[bitmover]

Hello Vod.

Nice job.

I found a typo :
https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=bitmover

Merited History    RECIEVED   SENT

[krogothmanhattan]

Niice background you placed VOD but it is hard to decipher the list. I prefer it the original way...just my two satoshis

[bitmover]

yes it can recognizing a person that connected in bitcoin through email adds.If you share your email address to others.

Lol.

These kind of users cry about having zero merit.

He didn't even read anything. He thinks we are talking about find real life identification?

What is the incentive for this kind of user to post now ? They don't have a signature... Soon he will realize he won't get merits and will stop posting (hopefully)

[TheBeardedBaby]

I guess he can easily recognise me with my beard and my baby face. Then I have to be a bit higher in the recognition list

[JayJuanGee]

I guess he can easily recognise me with my beard and my baby face. Then I have to be a bit higher in the recognition list

Didn't I read that consistently wearing an avatar (and presumably the same avatar) helps with longer term recognition?  Perhaps in this thread?

When I joined the forum (February 2014), the adding of avatars was disabled, seems like such disabling persisted well into 2015, yet once avatars were re-enabled, I placed my current avatar, and have kept it in place. 

From time to time, I had considered changing my avatar; however, I had also thought that my consistent avatar is a means for my posts to be more easily recognized without even looking at my user-name (for good or bad), and provides a bit of convenience to readers and perhaps to myself when it becomes a bit easier to interact with some members because they already have some familiarity with some of the content and style of my post history (which they sometimes get wrong, too, but seems like recognition causes at least a kind of starting point in any dialogue that might take place, even if such dialogue starts with me attempting to correct the seeming misconceptions.. hahahahaha).

[paxmao]

I think that your systems works. As I descend in the list I recognise much less users. I admit that I have not come across a few on the top.

[KonstantinosM]

My name is not even on the list. I guess, it's because I haven't done any trades on the forum to gain a trust rating yet.


Does anyone here recognize me?

[TheBeardedBaby]

Quick Recognition Statistics >
From 1000 most recognized profiles there are :

217.......... Inactive users
2.............. VIPs
3.............. Brand new
21............ Donators
19............ Staff members
3.............. Global Moderators
23............ Cooper Members
3.............. Newbies
3.............. Jr. Members
10............ Members

Haven't count the Full/Sr./Hero/Legendary but I can do it if anyone is interested.

[r1s2g3]

Does anyone here recognize me?

Sorry KonstantinosM .

Who are you???

[JayJuanGee]

Quick Recognition Statistics >
From 1000 most recognized profiles there are :

217.......... Inactive users
2.............. VIPs
3.............. Brand new
21............ Donators
19............ Staff members
3.............. Global Moderators
23............ Cooper Members
3.............. Newbies
3.............. Jr. Members
10............ Members

Haven't count the Full/Sr./Hero/Legendary but I can do it if anyone is interested.

I don't know if Copper member is a status that is indicative of hardly anything, except that the member paid a small fee in order to be able to by-pass some of the newbie restrictions (and perhaps merely to just contribute financially to the forum).  Breaking down by rank does seem to be one of the most interesting categories.

My name is not even on the list. I guess, it's because I haven't done any trades on the forum to gain a trust rating yet.

Does anyone here recognize me?

Even though you have been a forum member for more than 16 months longer than me, and even though I merited one of your posts a couple of weeks ago, I had not recognized you upon sight of your username.

By the way, my profile is 95th most recognized, and so far, I never sent nor received a trust rating, even though trust is supposed to be one of the "recognition" criteria, my recognition seems to have risen due to the other criteria.... and I don't even have a "v" or an "o" or a "d" in my username... Go figure?

[TheBeardedBaby]

~
I don't know if Copper member is a status that is indicative of hardly anything, except that the member paid a small fee in order to be able to by-pass some of the newbie restrictions (and perhaps merely to just contribute financially to the forum).  Breaking down by rank does seem to be one of the most interesting categories.

The problem is that the Copper Membership replaces your current rank in your profile page, so when parsed it gets only the Copper Membership as a rank information. This is a bit pity. As I know the only place to see your actual Rank when wearing the CM is on the post page under your Avatar, but this info is not parsed.

Edit >
Most merited inactive members 90 in total >

Code:

1	satoshi 💤	        1216
2	nullius 💤	        755
3	pitipawn 💤	478
4	Ajpa94 💤	        250
5	TheBobyHunter 💤	244
6	laszlo 💤	        190
7	niknik1966 💤	151
8	Tomatocage 💤	150
9	nessie.io 💤	148
10	aliyagiz207 💤	142
11	fengxia 💤	        130
12	Moloch 💤	        124
13	Hal 💤	        122
14	Dr.Mann 💤	119
15	Gleb Gamow 💤	118
16	nickbelski 💤	117
17	gallisiardi 💤	116
18	alia 💤	        113
19	LastJedi 💤	        112
20	dinofelis 💤	109
21	dumbdragon 💤	104
22	Dice-Bet 💤	101
23	doudou1110 💤	100
24	Bolt Brownie 💤	100
25	Baltazaar 💤	96
26	allowance1219 💤	96
27	SeverusSnegg 💤	94
28	colacat1111 💤	        93
29	btcminer6212 💤	91
30	choubao0514 💤	        90
31	cannycassiopeia 💤	90
32	oneforall 💤	90
33	BarkingHawk 💤	90
34	jl777 💤     	89
35	kschneezy 💤	86
36	Bitcoiner12 💤	84
37	warningsigns 💤	82
38	Battlestar_Coin 💤	78
39	monero 💤	        77
40	Payne976 💤	72
41	keepboxm 💤	70
42	b4h4mu7 💤	65
43	conspirosphere.tk 💤	64
44	Blue Tyrant 💤	62
45	Steepdev 💤	60
46	fanatic26 💤	60
47	Craige288 💤	60
48	Vitalik Buterin 💤	59
49	curiosity81 💤	59
50	HodorHodl 💤	58
51	belcher 💤  	58
52	unknownids 💤	55
53	bcmine 💤  	55
54	CryptonikaTrade 💤	55
55	btcnerdie 💤	54
56	decred 💤   	53
57	bytemaster 💤	52
58	grandefuturo 💤	52
59	BiPolarBob 💤	52
60	mrbenjie 💤	51
61	BlindMayorBitcorn 💤	51
62	negeroy 💤  	51
63	gruve_p 💤	51
64	monocolor 💤	51
65	cho99 💤	        51
66	CornHub 💤	50
67	Kda2018 💤	50
68	vanessa81 💤	50
69	_church 💤	        50
70	BigBoozie 💤	50
71	lfloorwalker 💤	50
72	D3Pool 💤	        50
73	Arysum 💤	        50
74	Aleksabit 💤	50
75	mthcl 💤	        50
76	Karodozo 💤	50
77	plucking23 💤	50
78	iCEBREAKER 💤	49
79	yangS 💤    	49
80	rasputincoin 💤	48
81	Sunderland 💤	48
82	superjeyy 💤	47
83	Annon001 💤	46
84	Joe-Niner 💤	45
85	BitcoinFX 💤	45
86	iudica 💤	        45
87	coblee 💤	        44
88	Ermancyp 💤	43
89	nonnakip 💤	42
90	freebutcaged 💤	41

[bitmover]

By the way, my profile is 95th most recognized, and so far, I never sent nor received a trust rating, even though trust is supposed to be one of the "recognition" criteria, my recognition seems to have risen due to the other criteria.... and I don't even have a "v" or an "o" or a "d" in my username... Go figure?

Even though you do not have a trust rating, your activity and merit ranting are quite high.

This recognition is calculated using trust, merit (earning) and activity.

I got a higher recognition than I expected as well, with low activity and zero trust.

[ibminer]

https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=ibminer
99th most merited... nooo  

As the desire for merit intensifies, and my merit rank naturally dwindles due to lack of activity, I don't expect to be in the top 100 for long. So at this time, before I fall off the top 100 list, I'd like to thank all my merit fans who supported me through my time of meritorious posts. And, to theymos for creating the merit system. Without you all, this obviously wouldn't have been possible!   I'd of course like to thank my family for putting up with the hours of time spent here, and I'd like to thank Vod for creating the BPIP ranking system in the first place.

I will now take a bow, and move about my day graciously.  

[Vod]

https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=ibminer
99th most merited... nooo  

As the desire for merit intensifies, and my merit rank naturally dwindles due to lack of activity, I don't expect to be in the top 100 for long. So at this time, before I fall off the top 100 list, I'd like to thank all my merit fans who supported me through my time of meritorious posts. And, to theymos for creating the merit system. Without you all, this obviously wouldn't have been possible!   I'd of course like to thank my family for putting up with the hours of time spent here, and I'd like to thank Vod for creating the BPIP ranking system in the first place.

I will now take a bow, and move about my day graciously.  

LOL - You moved down to 98.  

[ibminer]

LOL - You moved down to 98.  

Heh .. heh, all is well..   down to 92nd now. Maybe I posted too soon.. I think it may have just been my subconscious mind desiring to post a new badge picture, interacting with my conscious mind, which was sad it was going to disappear from my profile page... whew, I need some rest ... At this point, only place left to go is > 50. 

[Vod]

At this point, only place left to go is > 50. 

What number ranges did we eventually use for the different badges?

[Don Pedro Dinero]

I've also been moving down for the past months, even though I don't get a lot of merit. Any idea why that is?

I remember being the 325th most merited not so long ago.

[ibminer]

At this point, only place left to go is > 50.  

What number ranges did we eventually use for the different badges?

<=10 Gold
<=50 Silver
<=100 Bronze

Why else would I aim for >50?  

I've also been moving down for the past months, even though I don't get a lot of merit. Any idea why that is?

I remember being the 325th most merited not so long ago.

Given the circumstances, you seem to get a reasonable amount of merit. Maybe others above you are also not being active or not getting merit and falling in the numbers.

[Vod]

At this point, only place left to go is > 50. 

What number ranges did we eventually use for the different badges?

<=10 Gold
<=50 Silver
<=100 Bronze

Why else would I aim for >50?   

Hmm, there are 24 even numbers between 1 and 50 - are you 24 years old?   

[ibminer]

<=10 Gold
<=50 Silver
<=100 Bronze

Why else would I aim for >50?   

Hmm, there are 24 even numbers between 1 and 50 - are you 24 years old?   

Sound logic, indeed.. I did say I was tired not too long ago in this thread, don't confuse me. lol 

[Vod]

I've also been moving down for the past months, even though I don't get a lot of merit. Any idea why that is?

I remember being the 325th most merited not so long ago.

Only 18 merits needed to move that many places, as long as the people between 267 and 325 did not get any merit.

[ibminer]

I've also been moving down for the past months, even though I don't get a lot of merit. Any idea why that is?

I remember being the 325th most merited not so long ago.

Only 18 merits needed to move that many places, as long as the people between 267 and 325 did not get any merit.

And you've gotten 27 merits in the past month.. some good mathematics going on here. 

[twiki]

https://bpip.org/report.aspx?r=mostrecognized

Hey  , I noticed that the domain name registration bittalk.me ends 2018-11-05.
This may be useful to you for the next interesting idea related to the forum. 
best regards

[Vod]

https://bpip.org/report.aspx?r=mostrecognized

Hey  , I noticed that the domain name registration bittalk.me ends 2018-11-05.
This may be useful to you for the next interesting idea related to the forum. 
best regards

Thanks!

I believe BPIP is a unique(ish) phrase that could eventually be more recognized than bittalk. 

[El duderino_]

I recognize the first 17 names. #18 posts on Mining/Hardware, and indeed, I don't go there.
Around Rank 100, I still recognize most of the names.
From (about) Rank 400 downwards, I recognize less than half the names.

I'd say the fastest way up this list is gaining trust, high Activity is only for people who have been here longest.

For consideration:
If you're counting the initial (airdropped) Merit, which was based on Activity, aren't you double counting Activity?

actualy how do you gain TRUST ? i consider myself to be trustful, (like not scamming or any crazy things.....) but how to gain it in the forum?
cause from day one its just 0-0 with me......

and i do like some positive GREEN on my trust

[Steamtyme]

It really comes down to having interactions on the forum where someone had to place trust in you or the way you would conduct yourself.Some people get positive trust from trades, some get it for actively fighting scams.

The trust that really affects things (due to visibility) comes from members of DT, otherwise it doesn't show up on your score for everyone else to see.

Not sure if all trust is taken into account here or just trust left by DT members.

[OgNasty]

Not sure if all trust is taken into account here or just trust left by DT members.

Depends on the individual's trust settings that are viewing the rating and who they've included in their trust network.  By default, any trust left by DT1 or members they've added to DT2 is taken into account here.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

actualy how do you gain TRUST ? i consider myself to be trustful

I've said this before:  We judge ourselves by our intentions but judge others by their actions.  You might very well be a great guy who would never scam anyone, but if you haven't demonstrated that here (especially to a DT member if it's green trust you seek), you're not going to be recognized as a trusted person.

I don't know what you've done on the forum, but the last feedback you got was a neg for shitposting.  If you're not doing deals with people and/or not busting scammers, you won't be rewarded with green trust.  Also, people tend to look very suspiciously at members here who state that they're looking to gain trust.  Doesn't mean you're a scammer, but it makes people question your intentions.

And dang, now I'm #40 on the bpip list.  I soooo don't deserve to be ranked that high.  There has got to be a flaw in Vod's algorithm or something.  I can barely recognize who I am sometimes, so I'm fairly sure I shouldn't be that recognized as a member of bitcointalk.

[bones261]

actualy how do you gain TRUST ? i consider myself to be trustful, (like not scamming or any crazy things.....) but how to gain it in the forum?
cause from day one its just 0-0 with me......

and i do like some positive GREEN on my trust

I have my trust setting to level 4. So you have a green rating of 9 in my book. 

[OgNasty]

And dang, now I'm #40 on the bpip list.  I soooo don't deserve to be ranked that high.  There has got to be a flaw in Vod's algorithm or something.  I can barely recognize who I am sometimes, so I'm fairly sure I shouldn't be that recognized as a member of bitcointalk.

The list is heavily weighted to make merit much more valuable than it is and not give credit to contributions made prior to the merit system's introduction.  That's why you see relatively new members without meaningful contributions but tons of merit ranked so highly (not directed at you), while users with household names like Gavin Andresen who have been influential in the community since before any of us heard of Bitcoin are considered unrecognizable per their rank.  No system is perfect and I'm sure there will be adjustments down the line as Vod's site is still very new and he has been actively developing it.

[Vod]

The list is heavily weighted to make merit much more valuable than it is

OG, the site doesn't rank you based on how many merit you have, but how many you have compared to others. 

If merit is easy to get, it would be easy to get for everyone.

[Steamtyme]

Depends on the individual's trust settings that are viewing the rating and who they've included in their trust network.  By default, any trust left by DT1 or members they've added to DT2 is taken into account here.

Thanks, I understand that about the trust system in general.

I meant I wasn't sure how it was rated with BPIP, whther it was only green trust from DT2 and DT1 that was considered or all feedback.

And dang, now I'm #40 on the bpip list.  I soooo don't deserve to be ranked that high. 

You may be to close to see it, but with being a DT member and very active in some sections you fit the category of recognizable on the forum.

[OgNasty]

The list is heavily weighted to make merit much more valuable than it is

OG, the site doesn't rank you based on how many merit you have, but how many you have compared to others.  

If merit is easy to get, it would be easy to get for everyone.

Excluding the merit that theymos gave to users for their previous contributions and scewing the results in favor of newer or lower ranked members and merit abusers. I’m well aware as we’ve discussed this privately. It’s your site though and if you want to reward merit abusers and penalize the early folks that established Bitcoin, that is 100% up to you. I was just explaining why The Pharmacist was self admittedly rated way higher than deserved.

I'm #40 on the bpip list.  I soooo don't deserve to be ranked that high.  There has got to be a flaw in Vod's algorithm or something.

EDIT: I should say that I am not calling The Pharmacist a merit abuser.  Users who have legitimately obtained a substantial amount of merit are also benefactors of the ignoring of merit earned from prior forum participation.

The reason this matters is that users who were instrumental to Bitcoin like early developers and people who have been shunned from the community as it evolved are penalized by the way Recognition Rank is scored.  Vod's argument is that newer users here don't recognize the early names.  I don't believe this to be true. Roger Ver has a Recognition Rank of >1000 & Gavin Andresen has a Recognition Rank of 865, while abhiseshakana has a Recognition Rank of 333.  Which names do you recognize?  What would the ranks be if the original merit were included in the algorithm?

[r1s2g3]

The list is heavily weighted to make merit much more valuable than it is and not give credit to contributions made prior to the merit system's introduction. 

Might be you are right, because few days back I have same activity and same trust and I am not in the list. I guess I got some 20 merits and I make it to this list. so this list is considering merit seriously.

The reason this matters is that users who were instrumental to Bitcoin like early developers and people who have been shunned from the community as it evolved are penalized by the way Recognition Rank is scored.  Vod's argument is that newer users here don't recognize the early names.  I don't believe this to be true. Roger Ver has a Recognition Rank of >1000 & Gavin Andresen has a Recognition Rank of 865, while abhiseshakana has a Recognition Rank of 333.  Which names do you recognize?  What would the ranks be if the original merit were included in the algorithm?

Contribution to forum activities is not equivalent to the contribution the bitcoin development. So new user that you see highly ranked just mean they are contributing in forum well being or making other people aware of bitcoin or putting some good discussion or helping to catch the scammers and shitposters.

So whatever the rank Vod's site shows, it is just  parameter of taking part in forum discussions and recognized in this forum.(Nothing to do with your recognition in BTC world).

PS: I do know about Gavin and Roger Ver .

[DarkStar_]

The reason this matters is that users who were instrumental to Bitcoin like early developers and people who have been shunned from the community as it evolved are penalized by the way Recognition Rank is scored.  Vod's argument is that newer users here don't recognize the early names.  I don't believe this to be true. Roger Ver has a Recognition Rank of >1000 & Gavin Andresen has a Recognition Rank of 865, while abhiseshakana has a Recognition Rank of 333.  Which names do you recognize?  What would the ranks be if the original merit were included in the algorithm?

How do you propose users should be ranked then? I agree with your points, but it's easy to make complaints and harder to find solutions. Aside from creating some sort of centralized list, I don't think there's a statistic based way to approach this. Perhaps those with earlier registration dates could gain some recognition points, but other issues would arise from that.

[roslinpl]

There are quite a few names in the top 100 that I recognize but don't see posting much anymore.  This doesn't surprise me, given how bad the forum has become, and they're not exactly sig campaigners who are earning money here.  Some of the names I don't recognize at all and I'm assuming they made a name for themselves early on and haven't been active, or they post in sections I don't visit.  There are a lot of people in the collectibles and mining sections that I'm not familiar with.  It's amazing how provincial I've become, even on the internet.  Hell, even on a single website!

Nice compilation, Vod.

'Bad forum'.
'Nice compilation.'
=
?? xd A Nice compilation of a bad forum users.

Please... xd  what are you trying to say by that?

If it's so bad then what are you doing here?
Do something! Change something!

Everyone has a chance!

[OgNasty]

How do you propose users should be ranked then? I agree with your points, but it's easy to make complaints and harder to find solutions. Aside from creating some sort of centralized list, I don't think there's a statistic based way to approach this. Perhaps those with earlier registration dates could gain some recognition points, but other issues would arise from that.

Step 1 would be to not arbitrarily dismiss user merits that were earned through prior participation here. Step 2 would be for people to leave merit for historical contributions, and not just current posts. Also, I’m a bit shocked users like Gavin Andresen have a 0 trust rating. In his particular case, satoshi trusted him to lead development on the Bitcoin client but he’s regarded as not trustworthy enough to accept PayPal from? He was a major influence here whose first project when he discovered Bitcoin was to create a faucet to give it away. Users like him personally inspired me, so I think Step 3 would be finding and leaving trust for these users that they clearly earned prior to the trust system being implemented. Many probably don’t realize there was a period of years before the trust system was implemented. I used to have a thread with dozens of quotes complimenting my efforts and listing successful trades that I would refer users to back then. All who were active back then didn’t have the same opportunities to build long-term user stats that are available to users today. Penalizing them further with new scoring methods that reduce their early contributions seems backwards to me.

So that’s off the top of my head 3 proposals for Vod and the community to work together on legitimizing and improving this type of rating system.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

Roger Ver has a Recognition Rank of >1000 & Gavin Andresen has a Recognition Rank of 865, while abhiseshakana has a Recognition Rank of 333.  Which names do you recognize?  What would the ranks be if the original merit were included in the algorithm?

I've just realized that I’m supposedly more recognized than Ver and Andersen, lol! I’ve got a Recognition Rank of 824.

Vod has done a great job and it is clear that the system favors members who are active now. It is up to him if he wants to make changes. Other people can set up another site with other parameters too, but any system is going to have some flaws.

[xtraelv]

Roger Ver has a Recognition Rank of >1000 & Gavin Andresen has a Recognition Rank of 865, while abhiseshakana has a Recognition Rank of 333.  Which names do you recognize?  What would the ranks be if the original merit were included in the algorithm?

I've just realized that I’m supposedly more recognized than Ver and Andersen, lol! I’ve got a Recognition Rank of 824.

Vod has done a great job and it is clear that the system favors members who are active now. It is up to him if he wants to make changes. Other people can set up another site with other parameters too, but any system is going to have some flaws.

https://bpip.org/report.aspx?r=mostrecognized

Satoshi at 42 ? Surely most people would know who satoshi is.

[LoyceV]

And dang, now I'm #40 on the bpip list.  I soooo don't deserve to be ranked that high.

You've tagged countless (I'm lazy this morning ) shitposters, they'll all recognize you

Vod's argument is that newer users here don't recognize the early names.  I don't believe this to be true. Roger Ver has a Recognition Rank of >1000 & Gavin Andresen has a Recognition Rank of 865, while abhiseshakana has a Recognition Rank of 333.  Which names do you recognize?

I don't recognize abhiseshakana either. He may be recognized in his local board, but not globally.

What would the ranks be if the original merit were included in the algorithm?

That would temporarily raise old users' Recognition Rank. Long-term, the airdropped amount shouldn't be a big part of the total Merit anymore (although at the rate Merit is currently being distributed, that's going to take a very long time).

Step 1 would be to not arbitrarily dismiss user merits that were earned through prior participation here.

Vod initially included all Merit, but changed is as previous contributions were already included in a higher Activity Rank:

For consideration:
If you're counting the initial (airdropped) Merit, which was based on Activity, aren't you double counting Activity?

Step 2 would be for people to leave merit for historical contributions, and not just current posts.

Agreed, but it's not realistic. Old posts are read much less often than new posts, which makes it much less likely to receive Merit. I made this thread: Percentage of Merit received on old posts, deleted posts, and average per post, but since it requires scraping all posts for each user, I can only check selected users. I'll add your stats here.

Also, I’m a bit shocked users like Gavin Andresen have a 0 trust rating. In his particular case, satoshi trusted him to lead development on the Bitcoin client but he’s regarded as not trustworthy enough to accept PayPal from? He was a major influence here whose first project when he discovered Bitcoin was to create a faucet to give it away. Users like him personally inspired me

I wasn't around when he was still active. What's stopping you from leaving Gavin Andresen trust now?

[JayJuanGee]

The reason this matters is that users who were instrumental to Bitcoin like early developers and people who have been shunned from the community as it evolved are penalized by the way Recognition Rank is scored.  Vod's argument is that newer users here don't recognize the early names.  I don't believe this to be true. Roger Ver has a Recognition Rank of >1000 & Gavin Andresen has a Recognition Rank of 865, while abhiseshakana has a Recognition Rank of 333.  Which names do you recognize?  What would the ranks be if the original merit were included in the algorithm?

I understand that on the face, there seems to be something that is deficient about Vod's recognition ranking algorithm when bitcoin famous people do not have as much recognition as non-famous bitcoin people, but then again, the algorithm seems to be defining recognition based on "forum activity" criteria, so the question becomes whether the forum member is recognizable in terms of various recent forum participation criteria that Vod has outlined, and attempts to depict recent forum activities, not recognition in a bitcoin objective sense - or some other worldly criteria sense...  

There are a lot of famous people in the world, but a large majority of them are not forum famous because they either might not have a forum account or they might not be recently active on their forum account...  even satoshi is more recognizable in bitcoin historical terms, but since he has not been active on the forum for many years, with the passage of time, other forum members are going to become more recognizable than satoshi, even though there is always going to be a certain objective recognition (rather than forum recognition) that would be in the minds of people, especially if it comes to someone like satoshi.  

It seems to me that Vod's recognition criteria must be in the ballpark - because it seems to be giving greater weight to the recognition of forum members based on recent forum activity rather than historical (even bitcoin historical) activity.

[El duderino_]

actualy how do you gain TRUST ? i consider myself to be trustful

I've said this before:  We judge ourselves by our intentions but judge others by their actions.  You might very well be a great guy who would never scam anyone, but if you haven't demonstrated that here (especially to a DT member if it's green trust you seek), you're not going to be recognized as a trusted person.

I don't know what you've done on the forum, but the last feedback you got was a neg for shitposting.  If you're not doing deals with people and/or not busting scammers, you won't be rewarded with green trust.  Also, people tend to look very suspiciously at members here who state that they're looking to gain trust.  Doesn't mean you're a scammer, but it makes people question your intentions.

And dang, now I'm #40 on the bpip list.  I soooo don't deserve to be ranked that high.  There has got to be a flaw in Vod's algorithm or something.  I can barely recognize who I am sometimes, so I'm fairly sure I shouldn't be that recognized as a member of bitcointalk.

fair enough just don't now how it works, and i never did deals with someone on the forum, with a 2 way deal..... i did a few things where other only could earn BTC whitout risking to lose anything (freerolls) and i did honour every one of them, and still 5 are running that will all be honoured as well.

now i do believe that when we are in the WO thread "everything should be taken with a grain of salt" so ofcourse there is a shitpist here and there but thats the kind of talk that just happens between posts and stuff .....
also when i am out of line (like creating a game in the WO.... that includes me of making a list, needed to be updated dailey, wasn't fun for everyone, like JJG complained a bit about that...... asking me to make another thread for that stuff, and then i just did that .

i don't actualy asking/looking for trust, just wanna know on what its based ....... cause i always honoured all that i said

[El duderino_]

actualy how do you gain TRUST ? i consider myself to be trustful, (like not scamming or any crazy things.....) but how to gain it in the forum?
cause from day one its just 0-0 with me......

and i do like some positive GREEN on my trust

I have my trust setting to level 4. So you have a green rating of 9 in my book. 

THX fellow  HAT carrier 

[o_e_l_e_o]

I think the issue here is that we are conflating the "bitcoin world" with the "bitcointalk world", the latter of the two being the metric that Vod's site is aiming to track.

It is undeniable that users like Gavin Andresen are more recognized and more important in the bitcoin world than the majority of us here. However, if you were to poll every user on bitcointalk, I would stake a significant amount of bitcoin that more of them had heard of OgNasty, Vod or The Pharmacist than had heard of Wladimir van der Laan, for example. There are probably several developers who don't even have an account on the forum, and therefore have no recognition score at all.

I think we need to decide what we are actually tracking here. If we are tracking currently active forum users who are widely recognized by other forum users, then I think Vod's list is probably pretty accurate. If we want to track in terms of historical or current contributions to bitcoin development and adoption, then I agree with OgNasty that there a lot of names missing from the list.

[OgNasty]

I wasn't around when he was still active. What's stopping you from leaving Gavin Andresen trust now?

I nearly did yesterday, but thought I’d see if there were any legitimate arguments against such an action prior to me doing so. I’ll likely do it next time I’m at a PC instead of on my mobile. However, my action alone isn’t enough to make much difference, which is why I’m bringing this issue to light. Besides a more accurate scoring system, we will need to do our jobs as a community and fill in the gaps of some historically relevant users. I suggest people who frequent certain Bitcoin related sites or use a certain software application take the time to learn who is behind these things, and leave them appropriate ratings.

I think we need to decide what we are actually tracking here. If we are tracking currently active forum users who are widely recognized by other forum users, then I think Vod's list is probably pretty accurate. If we want to track in terms of historical or current contributions to bitcoin development and adoption, then I agree with OgNasty that there a lot of names missing from the list.

Even in the current contributions scenario, it shouldn’t count total merits received and instead count the number of users that have left an individual merit. This would at least dull the effects of merit circles a bit, but unfairly reward users who have multiple alts (it already does, so this idea might be a step in the right direction). One could also make the argument that the number of accounts who received merit from a user would cause them to be recognized, but it would unfairly reward merit sources and users like myself who seek out new users to reward with merit, so it’s too self-serving an idea for me to push.

[S_Therapist]

I think we need to decide what we are actually tracking here. If we are tracking currently active forum users who are widely recognized by other forum users, then I think Vod's list is probably pretty accurate.

The list is organized based on Merit, activity and trust. With this three parameters, anyone with higher position can definitely be on the top list. Gavin Anderson has enough activity but in trust, he is not even in 1000 list, IMO. Also, almost close in merit. So, if we consider those 3, he is definitely not most recognized. Well, this result is based on forum activity only. It doesn't calculate the contribution of course.
Agreed with you. That's bitcointalk world, not bitcoin world.

I believe the three main pillars of a bitcointalk profile are Merit, Activity and Trust (MAT). 

Since I already rank everyone based on those attributes, I thought I would make a new attribute and call it "Recognition".

Everyone is scored 1-1000 for each pillar.  If you are not ranked you are scored 1000.  The totals are added up, and divided by three.

[TheBeardedBaby]

Vod's project is just a pure statistics based on 3 measures.
One of these 3 were introduced just 10 months ago. It is clear that all the early adopters who are not (so) active anymore will have not so good score becase of the low (no) activity (not as a measure but more as a exposure).

Personally I don't really think that my place is in the top 300 if we are talking about real recognition ( not the statistics one ). There are so many people deserving to be before me. I joined the community only a year ago so I really see my place there.

Of course, when I see my score I feel that i've done some even though is a samll and maybe insignificant but the people here seems to like it so I'm glad.

[Vod]

I think the issue here is that we are conflating the "bitcoin world" with the "bitcointalk world", the latter of the two being the metric that Vod's site is aiming to track.

It is undeniable that users like Gavin Andresen are more recognized and more important in the bitcoin world than the majority of us here. However, if you were to poll every user on bitcointalk, I would stake a significant amount of bitcoin that more of them had heard of OgNasty, Vod or The Pharmacist than had heard of Wladimir van der Laan, for example. There are probably several developers who don't even have an account on the forum, and therefore have no recognition score at all.

Perfect.  Thank you!

It's also only a record of the current state of the forum.   I'm sure a BPIP website many years ago during bitcoin development would have different names. 

[DooMAD]

However, my action alone isn’t enough to make much difference, which is why I’m bringing this issue to light. Besides a more accurate scoring system, we will need to do our jobs as a community and fill in the gaps of some historically relevant users. I suggest people who frequent certain Bitcoin related sites or use a certain software application take the time to learn who is behind these things, and leave them appropriate ratings.

When merit was first introduced, I left some 5s on posts that I thought were historically important, but then it occurred to me that, since I'm not a source, I'd soon run out if I kept doing that.

Take this post for instance.  That's a hugely important post in my view, as it recounts a time when crucial things were set in motion that ultimately led to how things are now, but no one else seems to have noticed it.  In general, Cryddit has only received 28 merit and has neutral feedback.  This guy was there at the very inception of Bitcoin, so surely he deserves a little more recognition than this?

//EDIT:  Perhaps this is a topic for a new thread, though.

[Vod]

I nearly did yesterday, but thought I’d see if there were any legitimate arguments against such an action prior to me doing so. I’ll likely do it next time I’m at a PC instead of on my mobile. However, my action alone isn’t enough to make much difference, which is why I’m bringing this issue to light. Besides a more accurate scoring system, we will need to do our jobs as a community and fill in the gaps of some historically relevant users. I suggest people who frequent certain Bitcoin related sites or use a certain software application take the time to learn who is behind these things, and leave them appropriate ratings.

I've been meriting old posts as well.  It would be nice if there was a list of important historical posts so we could give them the recognition they deserve.

[TheBeardedBaby]

I nearly did yesterday, but thought I’d see if there were any legitimate arguments against such an action prior to me doing so. I’ll likely do it next time I’m at a PC instead of on my mobile. However, my action alone isn’t enough to make much difference, which is why I’m bringing this issue to light. Besides a more accurate scoring system, we will need to do our jobs as a community and fill in the gaps of some historically relevant users. I suggest people who frequent certain Bitcoin related sites or use a certain software application take the time to learn who is behind these things, and leave them appropriate ratings.

I've been meriting old posts as well.  It would be nice if there was a list of important historical posts so we could give them the recognition they deserve.

Not exactly what you are looking for but here a list with the most important threads (just ignore the one on the top ) > https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4322078.0
Thanks to xtraelv

[OgNasty]

I've been meriting old posts as well.  It would be nice if there was a list of important historical posts so we could give them the recognition they deserve.

I put together a top 10 list a while back that was my original Merit Source application. I added some shameless self promotion, but there are lots of classic posts on the thread.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2822621.0

[JayJuanGee]

I think we need to decide what we are actually tracking here. If we are tracking currently active forum users who are widely recognized by other forum users, then I think Vod's list is probably pretty accurate.

The list is organized based on Merit, activity and trust. With this three parameters, anyone with higher position can definitely be on the top list. Gavin Anderson has enough activity but in trust, he is not even in 1000 list, IMO. Also, almost close in merit. So, if we consider those 3, he is definitely not most recognized. Well, this result is based on forum activity only. It doesn't calculate the contribution of course.
Agreed with you. That's bitcointalk world, not bitcoin world.

I believe the three main pillars of a bitcointalk profile are Merit, Activity and Trust (MAT). 

Since I already rank everyone based on those attributes, I thought I would make a new attribute and call it "Recognition".

Everyone is scored 1-1000 for each pillar.  If you are not ranked you are scored 1000.  The totals are added up, and divided by three.

These continued references to Gavin Andresen caused me to look at his account, and even though I understand that he has recognition in the bitcoin world, he has served in various important positions in bitcoin.. but his forum activity has waned considerably in the past few years.  His last posts on the forum were in early 2015, and it appears that he has not even logged into his forum account after early 2016.

Andresen does seem to show a great case in point, that his forum activity and participation has largely vanished in recent times, and likely also shows that Vod's system is sufficiently gathering relevant data to rank recognition.  Surely, if Andresen were to resume participation on the forum, he would gain in "forum" recognition too.. at least in terms of Vod's formulations.

[S_Therapist]

it appears that he has not even logged into his forum account after early 2016.

Wasn't he active in October 2018?

[JayJuanGee]

it appears that he has not even logged into his forum account after early 2016.

Wasn't he active in October 2018?

My mistake.  Initially, I went by the "last active" date that is shown in the BPIP search as April 21, 2016.

https://bpip.org/search.aspx?q=gavin

However, I see from the forum profile, it shows that he did log into the forum on October 11, as you mentioned.  I think that my point does still stand though because login in and not posting is likely NOT going to achieve much BPIP recognition, unless he is sending PMs through the forum, and I am not even sure if that would help much, unless he were to be gaining merits through such PMs (which would be a strange set of events, no?).

[o_e_l_e_o]

His last posts on the forum were in early 2015, and it appears that he has not even logged into his forum account after early 2016.

This is a good example. Someone who has been inactive on the forum for three and a half years can't exactly be said to be "well recognised". As we acknowledge the difference between the "bitcoin world" and the "bitcointalk world", I think we also should acknowledge the difference between "recognised" and "important". Sirius is pretty important to bitcointalk. Does your average user know who he is? I doubt it.

Vod is very clear which metrics his list is tracking, and I think it does a pretty good job at identifying currently active and recognised users. Regarding users who are important but not recognised, to either bitcoin or bitcointalk - I think this is a reason for a separate list as OgNasty has done, rather than discarding Vod's list.

[ibminer]

I've always seen the recognition list to be something that moves or changes in time with the forum (dynamic). If you add weight to historical inactive accounts moving forward, don't you eventually over time end up with a static Hall of FameRecognition/Greatest recognition of all time sort of list as people move on?  Not that this wouldn't be a nice thing to have, but I'd assume the current way recognition is calculated would be more valuable to an active member of the forum because it's more or less based off of their current point in time on the forum.

Being someone who can't spend as much time as I'd like reading everything from everyone on this forum (semi-active?), the list gives a glimpse of names I may not recognize (whom other more active users might), and maybe for whatever reason I'd like to look into why or check out why they are gaining in recognition. If the list included a bunch if inactive people, I'm not sure it is as useful from this perspective.

Again, it would be great to have a hall of recognition sort of list to click through, and I'd assume something could be created, although I'd see this to be a semi-static list because outside of activity and post count, I don't believe there is much data collected from these older accounts to dynamically create an accurate representation unless (as was mentioned) you get people leaving high amounts of merit for historical posts, on a continual basis... but I don't believe the merit system is really intended or designed to do that, and I'd have to assume merit counts will still continually increase more so with active users than non-active, regardless of those older members [likely temporary] getting injected with merits for old posts.

I suppose the ultimate dynamic recognition list would do what it does now, in addition to either:
a) Scanning post content for profile names and keeping some sort of count which adds value to their score (they are more likely to be recognized due to repeated mentions) - which I'd then assume issues with resources come into play.
-or-
b) Include an advanced telepathic artificial intelligence mind-reading script... I can get started on this if anyone wants to fund my time on this project - but it's likely not a wise investment!

[Gloverwrt]

I've come across a number of posts made before the merit system was introduced which received merits from users who went back to acknowledge them.

I doubt we would ever be able to get to all deserving posts or accounts which were created and active before the trust system was introduced.

This analysis seems pretty accurate in my opinion and it highlights accounts which has been influential to bitcointalk and are likely familiar to most of the current users.

I personally rate trust as the most important parameter as it is the most difficult to earn and can not be easily abused as the others.

[LoyceV]

I've always seen the recognition list to be something that moves or changes in time with the forum (dynamic). If you add weight to historical inactive accounts moving forward, don't you eventually over time end up with a static Hall of FameRecognition/Greatest recognition of all time sort of list as people move on?  Not that this wouldn't be a nice thing to have, but I'd assume the current way recognition is calculated would be more valuable to an active member of the forum because it's more or less based off of their current point in time on the forum.

This got me thinking: an "average Recognition score" could be developed over time. Imagine all recognition scores for all users are stored once a week. At any given moment, the "average Recognition score" can be calculated by adding up all weekly scores per user, and dividing this by the number of weeks stored. The result will be a value that includes past recognition instead of only current recognition. This will help recognize users with long-term involvement.
A large shortcoming will be that it can't be done retroactively, but long term (in the far future) that effect will subside.

[DooMAD]

Some of the 'Merit Received' scores don't seem to add up.  It says I've received 175 merit, but I have 1180 in total.  I had the 1000 starting/airdropped merit, so I've received 180.  A discrepancy of -5.

The Pharmacist's entry says they've received 897, but have a total of 1866, so (again, assuming the 1000 starting merit) a discrepancy of +31.  That's probably one of the more extreme examples.  

LoyceV's adds up fine.

Is it something to do with deleted posts?  Or maybe when profiles are parsed?

[erikoy]

There are quite a few names in the top 100 that I recognize but don't see posting much anymore.  This doesn't surprise me, given how bad the forum has become, and they're not exactly sig campaigners who are earning money here.  Some of the names I don't recognize at all and I'm assuming they made a name for themselves early on and haven't been active, or they post in sections I don't visit.  There are a lot of people in the collectibles and mining sections that I'm not familiar with.  It's amazing how provincial I've become, even on the internet.  Hell, even on a single website!

Nice compilation, Vod.

I like more The Pharmacist. Seeing his/her post were very straightforwarded. This is why I always love to read his/her post. But, I was surprised why he did not make i on top 10 as known in this forum. Maybe as what he said that some are not active anymore and I do not know them personally compared to The Pharmacist that is very active and supportive to respond countless complain and appeals in the forum.

 

[Vod]

Some of the 'Merit Received' scores don't seem to add up.  It says I've received 175 merit, but I have 1180 in total.  I had the 1000 starting/airdropped merit, so I've received 180.  A discrepancy of -5.

The Pharmacist's entry says they've received 897, but have a total of 1866, so (again, assuming the 1000 starting merit) a discrepancy of +31.  That's probably one of the more extreme examples.  

LoyceV's adds up fine.

Is it something to do with deleted posts?  Or maybe when profiles are parsed?

There is a rare bug that sometimes awards the merit to the wrong person in a certain situation.

As soon as I launch Trust stats next week, I will squash it.

I have all the correct merit records - I just need to recalculate who the merit was sent to.

[Aleksabit]

I've just realized that I’m supposedly more recognized than Ver and Andersen, lol! I’ve got a Recognition Rank of 824.
Other people can set up another site with other parameters too, but any system is going to have some flaws.
Vod has done a great job and it is clear that the system favors members who are active now.

[Strufmbae]

--

Nothing to say,  just trying to break the numbers, of post,  activity and merit hahahaha. 
Sorry. 

[dogie]

Hmm, I'm at rank 122. I'm one of the top posters of all time but have been AWOL for 2 years so my activity isn't at its potential AFAIK, and plenty of trust but a good blob of them got kicked out of DT so I'm only at 20. And all of my posts were made pre-merit - I think I might have one of the higher scores if had been introduced when I was active.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

Hmm, I'm at rank 122. I'm one of the top posters of all time but have been AWOL for 2 years so my activity isn't at its potential AFAIK, and plenty of trust but a good blob of them got kicked out of DT so I'm only at 20. And all of my posts were made pre-merit - I think I might have one of the higher scores if had been introduced when I was active.

You will rank up easily if you remain active from now on. I've been ranking up even though I'm sure I'm not nearly as a good poster as you are.

[r1s2g3]

There is a rare bug that sometimes awards the merit to the wrong person in a certain situation.

As soon as I launch Trust stats next week, I will squash it.

I have all the correct merit records - I just need to recalculate who the merit was sent to.

I noticed this bug tends to add Merit on the account of Thread Starter instead of the user who commented in that thread and got merited for its comment.
I think this bug is triggered (not sure) if that user merited the OP.

[OgNasty]

Has the formatting always been like this on a phone? Sorry if this was already reported.

https://talkimg.com/images/2024/01/11/sx4ZH.jpeg

Edit: I’m using Safari on an iPhoneX.

Update: FIXED!

[DarkStar_]

Has the formatting always been like this on a phone? Sorry if this was already reported.

https://i.imgur.com/eHVTZQZ.jpg

I can't reproduce. (Firefox 63.0.2 for Android on a Pixel 2 XL in the screenshot, but Chrome 70.0.3538.80 also gives the same view)

https://i.imgur.com/yT4RcB0.jpg

Might be isolated to any browsers using the WebKit engine.

[Vod]

Has the formatting always been like this on a phone? Sorry if this was already reported.

https://i.imgur.com/eHVTZQZ.jpg

Edit: I’m using Safari on an iPhoneX.

Try it again.

BPIP was in an error state.  I forgot to limit the transaction log size and it ate up all my disk space.

When you see two BPIP logos - it means the SQL server is having an issue.

[ibminer]

When you see two BPIP logos - it means the SQL server is having an issue.

This happens because of the way the page/css is designed. If the server doesn't get to the point in the code to set the visibilities, it'll display both logos.

We could probably get the "BPIP is unavailable at this time"' exception to appear under the alert banner - without the actual error message (which can get long)?  It should be easy enough to output the HTML needed, I may have to adjust the css depending on where that exception is caught and spits out the error but I believe it would work.
...I've modified the dev site to output the HTML but might need to cause an exception to test (it currently includes the error). Different banner colors (or a different icon) could indicate whether it's an announcement or an error.

Hopefully not getting too off-topic here... this post might be best in project development but since the logo stuff came up here, I'm posting here.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

It says I have 185 Merit received. I have 1279 Merit which means I should have 279 Merit Received.

The last time I checked my position in ‘Most Recognized’ I was ranked 74th or 75th. Now I’m 90th for some reason.

Something not adding up?

[o_e_l_e_o]

You were demoted 15 places for being a Liverpool fan

[Vod]

It says I have 185 Merit received. I have 1279 Merit which means I should have 279 Merit Received.

The last time I checked my position in ‘Most Recognized’ I was ranked 74th or 75th. Now I’m 90th for some reason.

Something not adding up?

Yes - merit is still being recalculated.  Once it is done and the info banner is removed, refresh your profile and all will be right as rain.  

7,128 records to go out of 46,000!

[El duderino_]

You were demoted 15 places for being a Liverpool fan

haha lol

i'm demoted 100 places or something

and just saw this is VOD's counter game for getting me back behind in that merit list   






i'm no meritwhore but do like to gain some just to have the ability to send some to stuff i like and...... but they go so fast

[Vod]

and just saw this is VOD's counter game for getting me back behind in that merit list   

All merit has been parsed.  You can refresh your profile if you want to see your stats, or just wait and it will be parsed automatically.

[TheBeardedBaby]

But still some difference :

Merit Received   609

 

Should be 610

[LoyceV]

But still some difference :

My "Merit Received" is 1 short too. For both of us "Current Merit" is accurate.

Vod's data is accurate, so micgoossens' conspiracy theory is still plausible

and just saw this is VOD's counter game for getting me back behind in that merit list   

[TheBeardedBaby]

Vod's data is accurate, so micgoossens' conspiracy theory is still plausible

and just saw this is VOD's counter game for getting me back behind in that merit list    

I guess you are right, I got pushed again in the top 20 even as I'm not so active the last weeks.
There is a conspiracy there for sure...

[LoyceV]

There is a conspiracy there for sure...

Now have a look at satoshi:
Current Merit    1626 > should be 1565
Merit Received    1111 > should be 1315
Merited Rank    4 > should be 2

But what really gets me is this:

Code:

Security/Moderator Log
Has received 1315 merit 178 times, from 147 profiles

I guess that means BPIP now has 2 database fields for "Merit Received".

[TheBeardedBaby]

There is a conspiracy there for sure...

Now have a look at satoshi:
Current Merit    1626 > should be 1565
Merit Received    1111 > should be 1315
Merited Rank    4 > should be 2

But what really gets me is this:

Code:

Security/Moderator Log
Has received 1315 merit 178 times, from 147 profiles

I guess that means BPIP now has 2 database fields for "Merit Received".

Yeah but there's this >

Last Parsed   16 days ago
Next Planned Parse   1/1/2019 3:46:09 PM

I have updated his profile and looks like the things are OK.
Current Merit   1565
Merit Rank           11
Merit Received   1315
Merited Rank   4

[shasan]

I do not think "Recognition Rank" is correct. I do not think that my "Recognition Rank   436". I think it should be "Recognition Rank   >1000". Also I have noticed that I am not on this list. So, Either my Recognition Rank is wrong or most recognized list is wrong. Also after Recognition Rank   973 none are placed serially. I think these should be checked and make correction.

[Vod]

The problem will reparsing merit is delete threads will cause an error.

I have 483 records that have been deleted since they were merited.

I am now reconciling with Theymos's data to fix them.

I do not think "Recognition Rank" is correct. I do not think that my "Recognition Rank   436". I think it should be "Recognition Rank   >1000". Also I have noticed that I am not on this list. So, Either my Recognition Rank is wrong or most recognized list is wrong. Also after Recognition Rank   973 none are placed serially. I think these should be checked and make correction.

You'll need to wait a bit for all records to be reparsed before Recognition lists are fully correct.  Your ranking depends on if others above you have been reparsed yet.

[Jet Cash]

I see I have slipped to 320 now that I am following OgNasty's advce to stop starting threads.

I suspect that a lower profile may lead to a quieter life. As a Legendary and a merit source, I don't need to earn any merits, so this could help me to avoid those annoying conflicts that seem to come from high activity.

 I'm still looking for good posts to award with merits though.

[Vod]

I see I have slipped to 320 now that I am following OgNasty's advce to stop starting threads.

You do start a lot of threads, especially in meta.  :/

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=24.3040;sort=starter

Four pages.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

I’m in at number 73 now. My attack to get into the top 70 begins now
Seriously, this is a fantastic website Vod, you deserve a lot of credit for taking time out of your life to do it. It adds a bit more fun to forum life.

Just left Vod some +ve trust for his excellent service to the forum

[Vod]

I’m in at number 73 now. My attack to get into the top 70 begins now
Seriously, this is a fantastic website Vod, you deserve a lot of credit for taking time out of your life to do it. It adds a bit more fun to forum life.

Just left Vod some +ve trust for his excellent service to the forum

Thank you sir!  I have been active on this forum now for 241 days, 12 hours and 49 minutes.

All without wearing paid advertisements, escrowing, managing etc.  I have never tried to make any money off this forum.

You're going to love the new reports that are coming out soon. 

[El duderino_]

if i just would know how to give trust and all that stuff .... or how recognition and that stuff works....

but i also like all the work that people put into this BTCforum, just amazing community
and for me i will also never be here to make any kind of money, only to lose a bit

but thx for all your work, and that fun thread last time (btw see your PLAN did worked out, passed me back on the list )

[coinlocket$]

You're going to love the new reports that are coming out soon.  
~

Do we will have new features?

[LoyceV]

I guess that means BPIP now has 2 database fields for "Merit Received".

Yeah but there's this >

Last Parsed   16 days ago
Next Planned Parse   1/1/2019 3:46:09 PM

I have updated his profile and looks like the things are OK.

That does explain the different values for "Merit Received" indeed. As a more permanent solution, can you (@Vod) instantly parse each profile each time it gets merited?

[Vod]

As a more permanent solution, can you (@Vod) instantly parse each profile each time it gets merited?

Excellent idea! 

[Stunna]

This is really neat. If this was added to bitcointalk directly there would be such a competition to get to top recognized  

Other details like how many times you've been quoted would be interesting. I think you've done a killer job with this because I actually recognize most of the people on this even though I'm not incredibly active.

[roslinpl]

This is really neat. If this was added to bitcointalk directly there would be such a competition to get to top recognized  

Other details like how many times you've been quoted would be interesting. I think you've done a killer job with this because I actually recognize most of the people on this even though I'm not incredibly active.

Hello,
Indeed it's fun Mr. #31.




Best wishes.
-Mr. #32.


 

[Coyster]

I see I have slipped to 320 now that I am following OgNasty's advce to stop starting threads.
I suspect that a lower profile may lead to a quieter life. As a Legendary and a merit source, I don't need to earn any merits, so this could help me to avoid those annoying conflicts that seem to come from high activity.
 I'm still looking for good posts to award with merits though.

Lol,i actually read the post were OGnansty was all in your face about staying away from the new topic button for a while,but I'm sure that didn't/hasnt stopped you from starting new threads,as you still very much do..

While a lower profile may not attract a lot of attention,i sure would prefer to be a Legendary member,with all the attention in the world,i actually wouldn't mind

Merits earned are actually better than those replenished every 30days, as they actually do count on one's merit score, so earning merits as well as looking for meritable posts is a wonderful combination...

That being said Vod put together a masterclass on this thread..
Inspiration mate!!!

[shasan]

I see I have slipped to 320 now that I am following OgNasty's advce to stop starting threads.

I suspect that a lower profile may lead to a quieter life. As a Legendary and a merit source, I don't need to earn any merits, so this could help me to avoid those annoying conflicts that seem to come from high activity.

 I'm still looking for good posts to award with merits though.

Recognition rank does not depend on how many threads you have created. It depends on how many merits you have received, What is your total activity and what is your trust score. So, I do not get point of stopping to create new threads for growing recognition rank.

[HabBear]

Personally, I was quite stunned at the results.  :/

Just stumbling on this today...I've been living life outside this forum for a while. I too am stunned by the results (accept for Theymos topping the list). I'm more impressed by the work you've done here and how applicable it is for everyone - well done!

The greatest takeaway for me is realizing that you, Vod, have given me the most merit of anyone on this forum. And I want you to know that the honor you feel in supporting the brilliance of my posts is shared by me, I'm honored to have your endorsement over and over again.  

One thought for a future iteration, if you're interested in such things, people who were granted "merit source" status by Theymos have an inflated amount of merit. Much of the merit they've received hasn't come from their work to contribute to the forum with posts but rather through the administrative process. Have you accounted for that in your analysis? If not s there anyway to normalize your data for people who are assigned by Theymos to serve in this merit source role?

Good luck to you, thanks.

[ibminer]

people who were granted "merit source" status by Theymos have an inflated amount of merit. Much of the merit they've received hasn't come from their work to contribute to the forum with posts but rather through the administrative process. 

I'm curious how a merit source gets merit through the administrative process? 
Merit sources are given sMerit, not merit.

[OgNasty]

people who were granted "merit source" status by Theymos have an inflated amount of merit. Much of the merit they've received hasn't come from their work to contribute to the forum with posts but rather through the administrative process.  

I'm curious how a merit source gets merit through the administrative process?  
Merit sources are given sMerit, not merit.

HabBear has no idea what he’s talking about. As usual. Best to ignore what he says.

[HabBear]

people who were granted "merit source" status by Theymos have an inflated amount of merit. Much of the merit they've received hasn't come from their work to contribute to the forum with posts but rather through the administrative process.  

I'm curious how a merit source gets merit through the administrative process?  
Merit sources are given sMerit, not merit.

Ahh, good point. So maybe the spendable merit isn't actually a double count as I thought it was. Thanks for clarifying that point! As I mentioned, i've been away from the forum for a stretch...thanks for refreshing my knowledge on how the merit mechanism works.

I'm curious how a merit source gets merit through the administrative process?  
Merit sources are given sMerit, not merit.

He has no idea what he’s talking about.

Nasty, no need to be an ass (although I know it's natural for you). I totally forgot that the credit and debit of merit come from two different "accounts" within one's profile.


Vod, it'd be interesting take this a step further to see who among us are known for good contributions vs. harmful contributions.

Perfect examples:

• Spam posts, i.e., those whose posts are brief and therefore low in content or not adding to the discussion
• Abusers of the trust system, i.e., those giving negative trust as a weapon rather than an accurate account of an actual transaction

[Vod]

Vod, it'd be interesting take this a step further to see who among us are known for good contributions vs. harmful contributions.

Perfect examples:

• Spam posts, i.e., those whose posts are brief and therefore low in content or not adding to the discussion
• Abusers of the trust system, i.e., those giving negative trust as a weapon rather than an accurate account of an actual transaction

- Well I can parse all new posts (planned) and I can apply some sort of calculation to them.

(I can't find that thread/website that parsed all a user's posts and displayed a quality score...)

- All I can do is display trust as it is added or removed - I don't know how to track abuse.

:/

[Kopyleft]

Recognition rank does not depend on how many threads you have created. It depends on how many merits you have received, What is your total activity and what is your trust score. So, I do not get point of stopping to create new threads for growing recognition rank.

Activity is directly concerned with your post count and time frame, so the more post you make, the more your activity increases over time, and if it increases against your merit count, then you recognition is likely to drop.

[Vod]

Activity is directly concerned with your post count and time frame, so the more post you make, the more your activity increases over time, and if it increases against your merit count, then you recognition is likely to drop.

That is not true, and does not make any sense.

[shasan]

Recognition rank does not depend on how many threads you have created. It depends on how many merits you have received, What is your total activity and what is your trust score. So, I do not get point of stopping to create new threads for growing recognition rank.

Activity is directly concerned with your post count and time frame, so the more post you make, the more your activity increases over time, and if it increases against your merit count, then you recognition is likely to drop.

As further as I know you will get recognition rank separately for merit, activity and trust and then base on these 3 you will get recognition rank. For example if you 1 activity, 0 merit and 10 trust then you will get your score for trust. So if activity increase but merit does not increase then your rank will increase too. But as on the same time others activity will increase too that's why it will seem your recognition not increasing. Also in the meantime others may receive trust and merit so their recognition will increase but as your recognition not increased they will go upper then you as a result you will go lower. Hopefully think now all is clear.

That is not true, and does not make any sense.

Exactly.

[OgNasty]

Vod, it'd be interesting take this a step further to see who among us are known for good contributions vs. harmful contributions.

Perfect examples:

• Spam posts, i.e., those whose posts are brief and therefore low in content or not adding to the discussion
• Abusers of the trust system, i.e., those giving negative trust as a weapon rather than an accurate account of an actual transaction

Maliciously spreading misinformation is another example, but how would you judge such things?

[Vod]

Maliciously spreading misinformation is another example, but how would you judge such things?

Create an ICO to build the AI?   

I certainly can see no way BPIP can do anything else but display data.

[JayJuanGee]

I have noticed in the past week or so, that on BPIP my merit rank has been around 34 and currently shows that I have received 471 merits; however, in reality, currently, I have received only 454 merits, which puts my current actual placement at a rank of 40.

Accordingly, it seems that my recognition score has gotten skewed upwards too, seemingly based on the mistaken merit rank.  
A few weeks ago, my recognition score used to be around 97 or 98 (fluctuating a bit, of course), but currently is at 94, which seems to be partially higher based on the mistaken merit rank...  My activity rank went up a bit, too, so sometimes it can be difficult to know exactly the reasons for the recognition score changing (upwards in this example).

[Vod]

I have noticed in the past week or so, that on BPIP my merit rank has been around 34 and currently shows that I have received 471 merits; however, in reality, currently, I have received only 454 merits, which puts my current actual placement at a rank of 40.

Accordingly, it seems that my recognition score has gotten skewed upwards too, seemingly based on the mistaken merit rank.  
A few weeks ago, my recognition score used to be around 97 or 98 (fluctuating a bit, of course), but currently is at 94, which seems to be partially higher based on the mistaken merit rank...  My activity rank went up a bit, too, so sometimes it can be difficult to know exactly the reasons for the recognition score changing (upwards in this example).

I am still working on the merit issue, sorry everyone.

[bitmover]

Hello Vod,

as others already said, there are some bugs with the merits.

I saw the the homepage, https://bpip.org/, shows a different list of the most merited than the Top Merited Users, all time

[LoyceV]

I saw the the homepage, https://bpip.org/, shows a different list of the most merited than the Top Merited Users, all time

On the other hand, https://bpip.org/report.aspx?r=mostmerited seems to be correct.

I think there's a problem updating the trust rank too: https://bpip.org/report.aspx?r=mosttrusted seems up to date and doesn't show Lutpin, but https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Lutpin puts Lutpin at 32^ND Most Trusted.

[TheBeardedBaby]

Also, the manual update of the profiles is not working since yesterday ( at least ... I found about it yesterday).
Edit > Tested it today - 28.11 and is working fine
The personal merit stats are ok too.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

I saw the the homepage, https://bpip.org/, shows a different list of the most merited than the Top Merited Users, all time

On the other hand, https://bpip.org/report.aspx?r=mostmerited seems to be correct.

I think there's a problem updating the trust rank too: https://bpip.org/report.aspx?r=mosttrusted seems up to date and doesn't show Lutpin, but https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Lutpin puts Lutpin at 32^ND Most Trusted.

You keep overtaking me from 75th into 74th every other day Loyce
Stop being such a useful & helpful member of the community, damn it.

[Vod]

Sorry everyone,

I tend to make changes on live code.

Sometimes, my changes interrupt valid live data and it takes a while for that data to resync itself.

Right now I am making major changes to prepare for trust tracking.  It's pretty well done, and I am just waiting to clear up the backlog of current trust records before I can start tracking the actual changes.

[LoyceV]

You keep overtaking me from 75th into 74th every other day Loyce

And just 2 days later, I'm 51st
I moved up many places when my trust went up just slightly. Most trusted users with 30 trust range from Rank 212 to 310. I'm placed at 241, and this has a huge influence on my recognition score.

I was thinking about a different variable that might have some value to the Recognition score: the number of different users who left feedback to a person (both DT and non-DT). Positive or negative, receiving feedback means the user is recognized.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

You keep overtaking me from 75th into 74th every other day Loyce

And just 2 days later, I'm 51st
I moved up many places when my trust went up just slightly. Most trusted users with 30 trust range from Rank 212 to 310. I'm placed at 241, and this has a huge influence on my recognition score.

I was thinking about a different variable that might have some value to the Recognition score: the number of different users who left feedback to a person (both DT and non-DT). Positive or negative, receiving feedback means the user is recognized.

My trust score is only +1
I’d like to get a higher trust rating & move up in the list but I’m not going to go around buying stuff or kissing ass just to gain trust. If it comes it comes, if it doesn’t it doesn’t.

Edit

I think the above text I’ve bolded is a good idea btw

[friends1980]

I am at 777. That's like the Number of the Beast but not quite.

I think that theymos guy has been bribing all members of the jury.

[OgNasty]

I think that theymos guy has been bribing all members of the jury.

I bet he’s satoshi and created Bitcoin just for the recognition. 

[ibminer]

I think that theymos guy has been bribing all members of the jury.

I bet he’s satoshi and created Bitcoin just for the recognition. 

Nope. Satoshi is lucifer... I know this because someone necrobumped a 4 year old off-topic thread today which was still in my watchlist.

[friends1980]

I think that theymos guy has been bribing all members of the jury.

I bet he’s satoshi and created Bitcoin just for the recognition. 

Nope. Satoshi is lucifer... I know this because someone necrobumped a 4 year old off-topic thread today which was still in my watchlist.

Asking myself if I should or should not Merit that post, must be the most difficult dilemma I have ever been confronted with in my life.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

I am at 777. That's like the Number of the Beast but not quite.

Not even on the same side of the street.

So I guess we never got those bitcointalk trading/playing/tarot cards going.  I wish I could take the reins on that one, but I have no contacts, pull with anyone, nor any spare cash anymore.  Oh well. 

I think I was #42 on the bpip list last I checked, which makes me chuckle.  I wouldn't claim to know vod's algorithm, but something about it smells funny.  Not like a dead skunk smell, but more like an incense that, once burned, makes house cats hide in the litter box.  I'm not asking to be down-ranked, but there are hordes of members below me on that list that have to be more "recognized" in the bitcointalk world.  Either that, or it could be that there is a surfeit of blabbering on my part that's fooling people into thinking I know what I'm talking about and also drawing too much attention. 

I'm going to open the windows and try to locate my cats.

[Steamtyme]

I'm not asking to be down-ranked, but there are hordes of members below me on that list that have to be more "recognized" in the bitcointalk world.  Either that, or it could be that there is a surfeit of blabbering on my part that's fooling people into thinking I know what I'm talking about and also drawing too much attention. 

*Vod* Snaps fingers, and your 665 or 667 but never in between lol.

I've probably said something similar in the past, but you stand out. I think you often struggle to differentiate from the forum (which this list is based on) and the world of Bitcoin. Yeah in the grand scheme of things maybe a couple of people on the list would also make the list of known in the BTC world, but not many. However on the forum, this isn't a ban evading shitposter that doesn't fear the and know the Pentagram.

As for the rest, you hit the metrics. Posts are quality, been here for a few years, there is feedback activity. Your expertise might just be how to participate in a forum combined with using Bitcoin. These are useful pools of knowledge here not everyone can understand the computer science behind the scenes - I know I don't.

Hell I'm in the top 200 somewhere definitely a surprise, but I do spend a lot of time on the forum and participate in a lot of boards.

[RodeoX]

Maybe if I had a more offensive avatar photo I would be more recognized? And if it was on a hat!

[El duderino_]

Maybe if I had a more offensive avatar photo I would be more recognized? And if it was on a hat!

the HAT is just a XhomerX10 creation he can make you something if you just ask him

[El duderino_]

You keep overtaking me from 75th into 74th every other day Loyce

And just 2 days later, I'm 51st
I moved up many places when my trust went up just slightly. Most trusted users with 30 trust range from Rank 212 to 310. I'm placed at 241, and this has a huge influence on my recognition score.

I was thinking about a different variable that might have some value to the Recognition score: the number of different users who left feedback to a person (both DT and non-DT). Positive or negative, receiving feedback means the user is recognized.

My trust score is only +1
I’d like to get a higher trust rating & move up in the list but I’m not going to go around buying stuff or kissing ass just to gain trust. If it comes it comes, if it doesn’t it doesn’t.

Edit

I think the above text I’ve bolded is a good idea btw

i just don't understand how to gain some trust etc or how the Recognition works ... but as you say if it comes it comes

[NavI_027]

After minutes of scrolling and looking down the list, I found out that my name is not included there. Well, that's okay because I'm not expecting at all and I admit to myself that I'm not good enough to get recognized. Maybe I need to work harder .

Nonetheless, I'm still happy and proud because at least few members including our moderators of our local board able to get in. It only implicates that our board also got quality posters and not just full of shitposters.

VOD IS SCAMMER. Do not trade with him!
This motherfucker will deceive you

This one should not belong here but in the Scam Accusations.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

I just had a check on my position for the first time in a while, I’ve moved up to number 45. I’m quite proud of that if I don’t say so myself.

[TMAN]

only 54th? rigged...

need a new metrix please Vod, Right now I am fucking trending dude - got to be top 20 at least

[Vod]

only 54th? rigged...

need a new metrix please Vod, Right now I am fucking trending dude - got to be top 20 at least

Who are you?   

[TMAN]

Who are you?   

Don't force me to post more and overtake you in the merit list!

[playboy654]

Who are you?    

Don't force me to post more and overtake you in the merit list!

Nah!He is far away from you (You are 182 merits behind him while I am writing this post) even in the most merited list as well.

[TMAN]

Personal joke. But if I keep up this activity, I’ll do him in a few months.

[Vod]

I’ll do him in a few months.

Send me a pic first. 

[bill gator]

I’ll do him in a few months.

Send me a pic first. 

May I watch?

[Vod]

I’ll do him in a few months.

Send me a pic first. 

May I watch?

I said to my lesbian friend "I wanna watch" and she got me a fitbit for xmas. 

[LFC_Bitcoin]

Personal joke. But if I keep up this activity, I’ll do him in a few months.

Ooooohhhhhh Hello

[TMAN]

Send me a pic first. 

DICK PIC

[Steamtyme]

I said to my lesbian friend "I wanna watch" and she got me a fitbit for xmas. 

I can't stop laughing at this.

My guess is the New Year's resolution was to practice your enunciation for this years ask. Good luck

[LFC_Bitcoin]

I do love this addition to our community, I check my rank every few days. It does seem that once you get to a certain placing in the table/standings it’s difficult to move much higher up from that position.

I’m currently 44th in the most recognized list which is pretty cool I think. I presume the only way to move up significantly from 44th would be to gain trust & I don’t trade here so it’s going to be monumentally difficult for me to move any higher.

[Vod]

I’m currently 44th in the most recognized list which is pretty cool I think. I presume the only way to move up significantly from 44th would be to gain trust & I don’t trade here so it’s going to be monumentally difficult for me to move any higher.

I don't trade here either and I have 178 trust.  (changes almost daily though now lol)

[LFC_Bitcoin]

Bump

Was just looking at BPIP & checked on my stats like I do from time to time. I noticed that I’m 37th in Most Posts which isn’t too embarrassing as I registered in 2014.

Any way, the guy in 36th above me - ChiNgadOr - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1176794

He registered in September 2017 & has posted 12,047 times. That’s over 8,000 posts per annum. Fucking insane amount of posting that is, I’m surprised he hasn’t been banned for spamming.

[DooMAD]

Any way, the guy in 36th above me - ChiNgadOr - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1176794

He registered in September 2017 & has posted 12,047 times. That’s over 8,000 posts per annum. Fucking insane amount of posting that is, I’m surprised he hasn’t been banned for spamming.

That does seem just a little excessive, heh.  At my current rate of posting, I'm hitting an average of around 600 posts per annum.  If that continues, I'd have to stick around for another 14+ years to reach 12000 posts.  

Maybe that's why I can't break into the top 100 "most recognised", heh. 

[mikeywith]

Any way, the guy in 36th above me - ChiNgadOr - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1176794

He registered in September 2017 & has posted 12,047 times. That’s over 8,000 posts per annum. Fucking insane amount of posting that is, I’m surprised he hasn’t been banned for spamming.

He is an ICO guy, seems like he does this shit full time , most of the ICO guys have pretty high post count and low merit, honestly speaking they are the once that generating the majority of traffic, without them , it will be handful of people discussing serious bitcoin topics, and a few members fighting over the trust system, and those combined won't do 50 posts a day. 

[Quickseller]

Perhaps the number of people who have sent merit to a profile can be taken into consideration in calculating their scores.

[tmfp]

I'd never really looked at the recognized section before, although I use BPIP quite a lot (thanks Vod). A very Vod like algo employed, I see. 
Actually, "recognized" is a neutral word, not in itself implying either laudable or notorious, simply "identifying something or someone as previously seen, known, etc."

On that basis maybe all trust should be added, both positive and negative, to establish all the really "recognized" members.
Should that be implemented, then surely the previous poster would be

[The Sceptical Chymist]

On that basis maybe all trust should be added, both positive and negative, to establish all the really "recognized" members.

Hmm.  That's not a horrible idea if you're looking at 'recognition' as a neutral term, but I'm not sure Vod intended it to be that way.  I think in normal use the term actually does have positive connotations.  If someone says you're recognized in the field of medicine, it pretty much means you're famous--and not in a bad way, by any means.

And if I know Vod, I'm fairly sure he did not create this list to highlight the scammers who've been negged by 50% of the members here (that's an exaggeration, of course, but Tradefortress comes to mind).

[Hhampuz]

Damn, I dropped like 40 places in the most recognizes category while moving up in most trusted & most merited, whatup with that? 

[bones261]

Damn, I dropped like 40 places in the most recognizes category while moving up in most trusted & most merited, whatup with that? 

I went up over 100 spots. I think something is going on with the trust ratings ATM. There is no way there are only 500 accounts with positive trust. (0 trust starts at 501.)

[Vod]

I went up over 100 spots. I think something is going on with the trust ratings ATM. There is no way there are only 500 accounts with positive trust. (0 trust starts at 501.)

Yes, I am rebuilding trust with new features for an upcoming revamp!

[darklus123]

While watching my current community status , sh*t I have been a piece of sh*t in the real world same goes here. Keeping my status clean tho is my primary concern AKA (Doing neutral stuffs)

can't stop crying tho 

[Agrawas]

Wow - Just stumbled upon this topic, pretty interesting to see what users have done with the data available and rank the Users.. Great Info though..

[LFC_Bitcoin]

Vod, you’re probably aware mate but if not - The Most Merited stats are wrong atm.

https://bpip.org/report.aspx?r=mostmerited

It’s got me at 292nd when I’m usually 62nd or something like that.

It’s saying theymos is 1st with only 625 Merit & some obscure names in 2nd, 3rd & 4th. Everything else seems ok but Most Merited is way out.

[cabalism13]

Vod, you’re probably aware mate but if not - The Most Merited stats are wrong atm.

https://bpip.org/report.aspx?r=mostmerited

It’s got me at 292nd when I’m usually 62nd or something like that.

It’s saying theymos is 1st with only 625 Merit &

BPIP, is somewhat having some Minor Problems especially on badges. I just hope Vod will have some time to fix this issues. I recently have 2 Badges but now only 1

[LFC_Bitcoin]

Vod, you’re probably aware mate but if not - The Most Merited stats are wrong atm.

https://bpip.org/report.aspx?r=mostmerited

It’s got me at 292nd when I’m usually 62nd or something like that.

It’s saying theymos is 1st with only 625 Merit &

BPIP, is somewhat having some Minor Problems especially on badges. I just hope Vod will have some time to fix this issues. I recently have 2 Badges but now only 1

Vod is THE MAN.
He’s lightening quick at fixing stuff, I just wanted to make him aware of some issues on BPIP incase he didn’t know. He’s probably a really busy guy.

[ibminer]

Lots of work going on behind the scenes so there may occasionally be a loss of the bleeps, the sweeps, and the creeps.  

https://youtu.be/B9K4N328OI8?t=29

[Cøbra]

We snakes like to stay hidden, so I'm glad I didn't make the list .

[Vod]

We snakes like to stay hidden, so I'm glad I didn't make the list .

OK scammer ( )  you just wait until I fix the bug with unusual characters in the name. 

[LFC_Bitcoin]

Anybody else's post count way out on BPIP?

It says I’ve made 12,392 posts but this is my 12,617th post.

I know it’s sometimes a bit out due to parsing etc but that’s not a bit out.

[Vod]

Anybody else's post count way out on BPIP?

It says I’ve made 12,392 posts but this is my 12,617th post.

I know it’s sometimes a bit out due to parsing etc but that’s not a bit out.

Was that due to you not refreshing the profile?

In the past, I took the page and treated it like one big string, cutting the data I needed.  Unknown variables would lead it to break all the time.

Now I parse the page properly using the HTMLAgilityPack.  It will either return the number of posts, or 0 if the HTML has been modified.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

I’m on fire.
Slicing through the hierachy, up to 19th in most recognized now