List of useful Bitcoin block explorers

[GazetaBitcoin]

1miau, what would you consider a 10 out of 10 Block Explorer?

Good question.  
I don't really have an answer for your question but as we all know nothing is perfect, I believe there are always few improvements to implement.
Maybe Blockchair could also be rated 9/10 but for whatever reason, it's currently 8/10.

Loooooool but you added Blockchair to the list Yet you talk like someone else rated it only with 8/10 I also believe it deserves a better mark. And, changing it is very simple, as it's only up tp you for 2 reasons: (1) you are topic's author, thus you can change marks anyway (smile) and (2) this explorer was suggested by you, thus you are not changing the mark against someone else's will, if you believe it should have a better mark.

From my perspective I'd go even more far than 9/10 and I'd give it 10/10 for the following reason: it's the best one we have! As a consequence, all other ones will be compared with best one, right? Therefore, if it is best one we have, it actually deserves 10/10, no matter that it can be improved here and there. If another explorer will come up, having all Blockchair features and also some more nice additions then it will be marked with 10/10 and change Blockchair's mark to 9/10. Does this make sense?

1miau is tired, dear GazetaBitcoin.  
And it's lot of BBCode which is quite a mess sometimes (I believe you know it from your translations list.  ).

Oh yes, I know, I know...

You are right, I need to spell PrivacyG's name properly, my dear GazetaBitcoin.  
I'll do it correctly from now on and in Romanian it's Intimitate(a)G's (because PrivacyG might be female  ).  

You are also right "Intimitate" means "Privacy", while "Intimitatea" means "The Privacy". And it is, indeed, a substantive of feminine gender. Unfortunately, the gender of our nyms don't also reveal our real genders Yet I have my reasons for also believing that PrivacyG is a chick   Now it came into my mind to vote PrivacyG at Miss BitcoinTalk category during BCA 2023.

Ohhhh, shoot, I forgot that icopress took most wrong decision of his entire life (facepalm)  

We could do it like that, if it's ok for everyone [...]
Any opinions, if the layout above is decent, are welcome.  

You trimmed it well, padawan! And it's almost there! 99%! I will explain and also propose a solution for having it perfectly fitting the screen!

Take a look at this (this is how it shows on 1080p):



As far as I see, on 1080p, the comments section show only 96 characters (I counted the characters from this string: "movement of our balance. If using no-JS, click a random TX, Block or Address and edi" -- which represents the visible part of the text). The line containing "edit" word has 87 characters. The other truncated line (from BitcoinWho'sWho) has 98 characters (the word "as" is not shown). As a consequence, we are in need of 2-3 more characters for "Comments" column.



As shown in the above picture, I think we can shorten "Usefulness" column with 3 characters, by deleting that emoji. Having "Usefulness" column shortened then, maybe "Comments" column can be expanded with 3 characters.

I hope this helps.


Later edit: PrivacyG has one more suggestion but I guess shyness prevailed ()). He (?) said that he believes that Atomic explorer is not actually redirecting to Trezor explorer website. Instead, he believes that Atomic copies Trezor's website and that there is only a very small difference between the two websites.

[1714284814]

1714284814

[1714284814]

1714284814

[1714284814]

1714284814

[1714284814]

1714284814

[1714284814]

1714284814

[1miau]

1miau, what would you consider a 10 out of 10 Block Explorer?

Good question.  
I don't really have an answer for your question but as we all know nothing is perfect, I believe there are always few improvements to implement.
Maybe Blockchair could also be rated 9/10 but for whatever reason, it's currently 8/10.

Loooooool but you added Blockchair to the list Yet you talk like someone else rated it only with 8/10

I don't know why I only rated it with 8/10 (but Blockchair is my favorite Explorer).
Maybe I wanted to see some more improvements?  

I also believe it deserves a better mark.

You are right, maybe we can make a public survey.  

And, changing it is very simple, as it's only up tp you for 2 reasons: (1) you are topic's author, thus you can change marks anyway (smile) and (2) this explorer was suggested by you, thus you are not changing the mark against someone else's will, if you believe it should have a better mark.

But, would it be legitimate to change it? If we change it, everyone would come up and try to change ratings?  
In my opinion, we need a public survey to be legitimate.

From my perspective I'd go even more far than 9/10 and I'd give it 10/10 for the following reason: it's the best one we have! As a consequence, all other ones will be compared with best one, right? Therefore, if it is best one we have, it actually deserves 10/10, no matter that it can be improved here and there.

Sheeesh.
We need to have space for improvements, dear GazetaBitcoin.  

If another explorer will come up, having all Blockchair features and also some more nice additions then it will be marked with 10/10 and change Blockchair's mark to 9/10. Does this make sense?

My favorite would be to arrange a public survey and by doing so, we could review the public opinion. Do you agree here?  

You are right, I need to spell PrivacyG's name properly, my dear GazetaBitcoin.  
I'll do it correctly from now on and in Romanian it's Intimitate(a)G's (because PrivacyG might be female  ).  

Unfortunately, the gender of our nyms don't also reveal our real genders Yet I have my reasons for also believing that PrivacyG is a chick  

I have to disagree here because we are on the internet. And as far as we know today, Bitcointalk is only an online place, where we can exist, dear Gentlemen / Gentlewomen / Gentlecats. If these platforms cease to exists, so will we.  

And I don't beleive, that PrivacyG is a chicken. If so, it would be called ChickenG. And it would be neutral (it).

Now it came into my mind to vote PrivacyG at Miss BitcoinTalk category during BCA 2023.

Nominating PrivacyG at Miss BitcoinTalk category during BCA 2023 would be a legitimate consideration, dear GazetaBitcoin.

Ohhhh, shoot, I forgot that icopress took most wrong decision of his entire life (facepalm)  

It's probably me, dear GazetaBitcoin.  

We could do it like that, if it's ok for everyone [...]
Any opinions, if the layout above is decent, are welcome.  

You trimmed it well, padawan! And it's almost there! 99%! I will explain and also propose a solution for having it perfectly fitting the screen!

Done, I've implemented a part of your suggestions to trim it 1% more.  

As shown in the above picture, I think we can shorten "Usefulness" column with 3 characters, by deleting that emoji. Having "Usefulness" column shortened then, maybe "Comments" column can be expanded with 3 characters.

Deleting the emoji??!!  
Are you dense?
We don't delete the emoji, dear GazetaBitcoin!  

I hope this helps.

Yes, it helps, should be properly formatted now?
Plz confirm, Sirs!

Later edit: PrivacyG has one more suggestion but I guess shyness prevailed ()). He (?) said that he believes that Atomic explorer is not actually redirecting to Trezor explorer website. Instead, he believes that Atomic copies Trezor's website and that there is only a very small difference between the two websites.

Ok, many thanks for the input. So, what's our conclusion?
In our current explanation, it says Atomic explorer is mirroring Trezor explorer, which should be accurate?

[SFR10]

@GazetaBitcoin and @1miau:
I do know both of you probably hate dealing with complicated codes, so I tried to simplify the table in a manner that it could show everything without being too wide in smaller resolutions...

• We can create a hover box by using the abbreviation tag in order to combine the "Usefulness and Comments" columns.
  ^{- Comments will appear whenever they hover their mouse pointer over each of the ratings.}

e.g. this is the result for the row that has the longest comment:

Name (link)	Bech32 / Bech32m (P2TR) supported?	SegWit (P2SH) identifiable?*	Usefulness (subjective rating)	Works without JS	Rated by
________________________	______________________________	_______________________	__________________________	______________	________________
BitInfoCharts	Yes (09/2022) / No (11/2022)	No (09/2022)	7 / 10 Points	Partially**	ajiz138

[1miau]

@GazetaBitcoin and @1miau:
I do know both of you probably hate dealing with complicated codes, so I tried to simplify the table in a manner that it could show everything without being too wide in smaller resolutions...

• We can create a hover box by using the abbreviation tag in order to combine the "Usefulness and Comments" columns.
  ^{- Comments will appear whenever they hover their mouse pointer over each of the ratings.}

That's a great solution and I could try to find some time next weekend to implement it but in my opinion, many readers won't notice such a hovering feature, even if we add a bold explanation.
I don't know as well if it's an option for the mobile version. I've not checked it but hovering might be not possible for mobile devices?

I can implement it as it's a really clean solution and it would help a lot to gain more space buy maybe it's already enough to remove the comment section entirely as it's pretty meaningless sometimes and I can just link the comments from the members who initially presented each explorer?
Opinions?

If there's support for your suggestion, I would implement it, of course. 

[SFR10]

but in my opinion, many readers won't notice such a hovering feature, even if we add a bold explanation.
~Snipped~
I can implement it as it's a really clean solution and it would help a lot to gain more space buy maybe it's already enough to remove the comment section entirely as it's pretty meaningless sometimes and I can just link the comments from the members who initially presented each explorer?
Opinions?

I also agree that features like this tend to go unnoticed by most users... Since it'd only benefit desktop users and all of those comments are subjective, then IMO it'd be better to save some space by removing that section.
^{- Come to think of it, since the usefulness column shows subjective ratings, perhaps something similar should also happen to them. What do you think?}

I don't know as well if it's an option for the mobile version. I've not checked it but hovering might be not possible for mobile devices?

Unfortunately, it doesn't work on mobile devices ^{[I even tried pairing a Bluetooth mouse while I was in the "desktop site" mode of Chrome, but it didn't work]}.

[NeuroticFish]

I've not checked it but hovering might be not possible for mobile devices?

Indeed, it's not working for mobile phones, still I think that if you use this trick at least for the dates (and also make the header more condensed/multiline) you can at least from there squeeze more space. And the comments also.. they're useful, but not crucial, hence one can live without them on mobile.

[GazetaBitcoin]

You are right, maybe we can make a public survey.   [...]
But, would it be legitimate to change it? If we change it, everyone would come up and try to change ratings?  
In my opinion, we need a public survey to be legitimate.

Well, if you want so much to be politically correct, who am I to stop you? Seriously now, I think it's a good idea. Let's make a poll about it.

From my perspective I'd go even more far than 9/10 and I'd give it 10/10 for the following reason: it's the best one we have! As a consequence, all other ones will be compared with best one, right? Therefore, if it is best one we have, it actually deserves 10/10, no matter that it can be improved here and there.

Sheeesh.
We need to have space for improvements, dear GazetaBitcoin.  

=)))

Picture this: we all know that Usain Bolt is fastest man alive, right? Now let's suppose he did not run 100m in 9.58" but in 15". And nobody else would run this distance faster than him. Therefore we would still consider him fastest man alive, right? No matter that he runs 100m in 15" and we actually know that it's possible to do it in 9.58". Does that make sense? Now imagine this analogy regarding Blockchair. Nevertheless, a poll with more users voting what they think about Blockchair is a fair choice.

And I don't beleive, that PrivacyG is a chicken. If so, it would be called ChickenG. And it would be neutral (it).

ChickenG

(By the way, in Romanian chicken is a substantive having also feminine gender  )

Nominating PrivacyG at Miss BitcoinTalk category during BCA 2023 would be a legitimate consideration, dear GazetaBitcoin.

Then we must coerce icopress somehow to not cancel this category.

Done, I've implemented a part of your suggestions to trim it 1% more.  

Yay!

Deleting the emoji??!!  
Are you dense?
We don't delete the emoji, dear GazetaBitcoin!  

Pardon my blasphemy   Emoji must stay!

Yes, it helps, should be properly formatted now?
Plz confirm, Sirs!

It seems the 1% trim worked just fine. I noticed the "as" from BitcoinWhosWho, which was not shown earlier, is shown now, as you placed it on the second row. Besides, the "t" from "edit", which was also not shown, appears well now.



1miau, you are tables master! I bow down! Can we have this update implemented in OP now? (I took the screenshot from post #141.)

Ok, many thanks for the input. So, what's our conclusion?
In our current explanation, it says Atomic explorer is mirroring Trezor explorer, which should be accurate?

For me, the comment is fine as it is now. Let's see though what PrivacyG says about this.

@GazetaBitcoin and @1miau:
I do know both of you probably hate dealing with complicated codes, so I tried to simplify the table in a manner that it could show everything without being too wide in smaller resolutions...

I love complex BBCode the way I love wearing winter pyjama trousers during hot summer  

• We can create a hover box by using the abbreviation tag in order to combine the "Usefulness and Comments" columns.
  ^{- Comments will appear whenever they hover their mouse pointer over each of the ratings.}

That's a great solution and I could try to find some time next weekend to implement it but in my opinion, many readers won't notice such a hovering feature, even if we add a bold explanation.
I don't know as well if it's an option for the mobile version. [...]
If there's support for your suggestion, I would implement it, of course.  

I merited your proposal, as this feature of BBcode seems very exotic to me, as I only saw it used very rarely. I like it! However, it comes together with the lack of functionality on mobiles.

Having this in mind, together with the fact that 1miau already found a way for trimming the table enough (the power of 1% is so incredible, as always!) in order to still have all information shown, I guess we can use it like this (meaning the way 1miau trimmed it)? Comments column can still be left as it is, as now all text is shown... Practically we reached already what we were trying to obtain: implementing PrivacyG's new column while having whole table displayed properly.

[1miau]

I also agree that features like this tend to go unnoticed by most users... Since it'd only benefit desktop users and all of those comments are subjective, then IMO it'd be better to save some space by removing that section.

Ok, I'll start formatting next weekend and post an update here when it's done.  

^{- Come to think of it, since the usefulness column shows subjective ratings, perhaps something similar should also happen to them. What do you think?}

Since it's not taking too much space, I would leave it there but we can include it in the survey as well and ask if Bitcointalk members would like to have it removed.

I've not checked it but hovering might be not possible for mobile devices?

Indeed, it's not working for mobile phones, still I think that if you use this trick at least for the dates (and also make the header more condensed/multiline) you can at least from there squeeze more space. And the comments also.. they're useful, but not crucial, hence one can live without them on mobile.

I can add it in the survey as well but after removing the comments, we would have enough space to leave it there.

You are right, maybe we can make a public survey.   [...]
But, would it be legitimate to change it? If we change it, everyone would come up and try to change ratings?  
In my opinion, we need a public survey to be legitimate.

Well, if you want so much to be politically correct, who am I to stop you? Seriously now, I think it's a good idea. Let's make a poll about it.

Noted, dear GazetaBitcoin.  
I'll try to arrange a survey next weekend.  

Picture this: we all know that Usain Bolt is fastest man alive, right? Now let's suppose he did not run 100m in 9.58" but in 15". And nobody else would run this distance faster than him. Therefore we would still consider him fastest man alive, right? No matter that he runs 100m in 15" and we actually know that it's possible to do it in 9.58". Does that make sense?

That's true but who knows if there won't be a better sprinter in 10 / 20 / 30 years?  
And in case we'd get a better sprinter, we need some numbers to give out "above" our current top number.
Maybe we can make it like for earthquakes? 1.00 point increase is 10x increase?

Now imagine this analogy regarding Blockchair.

Usain Bolt is retired, isn't he?  
Blockchair is not retired yet.  

And I don't beleive, that PrivacyG is a chicken. If so, it would be called ChickenG. And it would be neutral (it).

ChickenG

(By the way, in Romanian chicken is a substantive having also feminine gender  )

Well, here we go, dear GazetaBitcoin.  
It seems to be a female chicken.

Nominating PrivacyG at Miss BitcoinTalk category during BCA 2023 would be a legitimate consideration, dear GazetaBitcoin.

Then we must coerce icopress somehow to not cancel this category.

Noted, I can try to convince him, too.

Deleting the emoji??!!  
Are you dense?
We don't delete the emoji, dear GazetaBitcoin!  

Pardon my blasphemy   Emoji must stay!

// blushing  

Yes, it helps, should be properly formatted now?
Plz confirm, Sirs!

It seems the 1% trim worked just fine. I noticed the "as" from BitcoinWhosWho, which was not shown earlier, is shown now, as you placed it on the second row. Besides, the "t" from "edit", which was also not shown, appears well now.

We'll re-arrange it anyways next weekend, so it should be solved by then.  

1miau, you are tables master! I bow down! Can we have this update implemented in OP now? (I took the screenshot from post #141.)

// blushing   (once again)
I've copied it into my OP.  

I merited your proposal, as this feature of BBcode seems very exotic to me, as I only saw it used very rarely. I like it! However, it comes together with the lack of functionality on mobiles.

I'll include it in our survey as well.  

[GazetaBitcoin]

I'll try to arrange a survey next weekend.  

Okay

That's true but who knows if there won't be a better sprinter in 10 / 20 / 30 years?  
And in case we'd get a better sprinter, we need some numbers to give out "above" our current top number.
Maybe we can make it like for earthquakes? 1.00 point increase is 10x increase? [...]

Usain Bolt is retired, isn't he?  
Blockchair is not retired yet.  

Oh gawd... =)))


After some struggles with BBCode (can't be else, can it?) I also updated the translated topic by including the column suggested by PrivacyG (don't worry, the emoji stayed!), as I was curious to see how it looks in Romanian as well. I know that some more changes will follow but I had to add this update anyway so I did it now. Surprisingly, it looks great and no other adjustment was needed.

What I would further recommend is to either (1) delete the "**" placed next to "Partially", as nowhere in OP is explained what "**" means or (2) place the "**" next to "Works without JS" (thus it will look like this: "Works without JS**") and replace

PrivacyG has made a list of all Block Explorers above working without Java Script. You can find PrivacyG's contribution here to find out more about it.

with

**PrivacyG has made a list of all Block Explorers above working without Java Script. You can find PrivacyG's contribution here to find out more about it.

(Also please don't forget to change "PrivacyG" from OP with "PrivacyG" )

This way, the "**" will also be explained somewhere in OP.

Additionally, I'd also suggest replacing "Works without JS" with "Works without JS?".

Ok, I'll start formatting next weekend and post an update here when it's done.  

Looking forward for next update!

[1miau]

After some struggles with BBCode (can't be else, can it?) I also updated the translated topic by including the column suggested by PrivacyG (don't worry, the emoji stayed!), as I was curious to see how it looks in Romanian as well. I know that some more changes will follow but I had to add this update anyway so I did it now. Surprisingly, it looks great and no other adjustment was needed.

What I would further recommend is to either (1) delete the "**" placed next to "Partially", as nowhere in OP is explained what "**" means or (2) place the "**" next to "Works without JS" (thus it will look like this: "Works without JS**") and replace
...

Done, I've added it below my explanation where I've linked PrivacyG's contribution.  

(Also please don't forget to change "PrivacyG" from OP with "PrivacyG" )

Done as well, dear GazetaBitcoin.  


Regarding our survey, we have agreed to collect votes for the following issues:

- Rating from Blockchair Bitcoin Block Explorer exactly 8/10 points?
- Rating from Blockchair Bitcoin Block Explorer over 8/10 points?
(suggested by GazetaBitcoin)

- Removing "comments" column from our table - Yes
- Removing "comments" column from our table - No
(suggested by several members)

- Including comments in "hover format" - Yes
- Including comments in "hover format" - No
(suggested by SFR10)



Am I right here?
Did I forget any point?

[GazetaBitcoin]

Done, I've added it below my explanation where I've linked PrivacyG's contribution. 

Awesome! I added your note as well.

By the way, for consistency purposes I'd suggest one more small change: replace

* : BTC addresses starting with "3" what are they ? simplified explanation.

PrivacyG has made a list of all Block Explorers above working without Java Script. You can find PrivacyG contribution here to find out more about it.

**Some elements are not showing or working properly, but mostly works fine.

with

*BTC addresses starting with "3" what are they ? simplified explanation.

PrivacyG has made a list of all Block Explorers above working without Java Script. You can find PrivacyG contribution here to find out more about it.

**Some elements are not showing or working properly, but mostly works fine.

Practically, I deleted the ": " after "*", in order to be same alignment and spacing as in the case of "**".

Regarding our survey, we have agreed to collect votes for the following issues:

- Rating from Blockchair Bitcoin Block Explorer exactly 8/10 points?
- Rating from Blockchair Bitcoin Block Explorer over 8/10 points?
(suggested by GazetaBitcoin)

Basically, I'd say to let everyone vote the preferred mark for this explorer... That would simplify the two questions into a single one

- Removing "comments" column from our table - Yes
- Removing "comments" column from our table - No
(suggested by several members)

- Including comments in "hover format" - Yes
- Including comments in "hover format" - No [...]

Am I right here?

In rest everything is correct. Let's do this

[1miau]

Practically, I deleted the ": " after "*", in order to be same alignment and spacing as in the case of "**".

Nice catch, I've removed it and now it's tidied up. 

Basically, I'd say to let everyone vote the preferred mark for this explorer... That would simplify the two questions into a single one

But that would add more options to our survey.
We can do it according to your suggestion and add an option to vote for a single mark.
Our survey would look like that:

- Rating from Blockchair Bitcoin Block Explorer 7 points?
- Rating from Blockchair Bitcoin Block Explorer 8 points?
- Rating from Blockchair Bitcoin Block Explorer 9 points?
- Rating from Blockchair Bitcoin Block Explorer 10 points?
(suggested by GazetaBitcoin)

- Removing "comments" column from our table - Yes
- Removing "comments" column from our table - No
(suggested by several members)

- Including comments in "hover format" - Yes
- Including comments in "hover format" - No
(suggested by SFR10)

I've also added 7 points if someone wants to lower the rating for whatever reason. 
Did I got it right?

[1miau]

Dear "List of useful Bitcoin block explorers" contributors!

Our survey is now up and everyone is invited to vote!
People can select up to 8 answers because I don't see a better option to put such a poll into one topic (otherwise we would would need seeral topics, making it very messy).

Plz vote here: Survey regarding our Bitcoin Blockexplorer topic
You can also leave a comment / suggestion / advertisement for any of the options. 

We also need to specify how long our poll will be running.
My favorite is 14 days. 

[GazetaBitcoin]

Nice catch, I've removed it and now it's tidied up.  

Yay!

Our survey would look like that [...]
Did I got it right?

Yup, I think it will cover all we need!

Our survey is now up and everyone is invited to vote!

Thank you for taking your time and creating this survey, 1miau! I already made my vote. It seems I was the first one, hehe.
Needless to say, those which will vote to keep "Comments" column must also vote against having comments "hover" format and vice-versa (I hope there will not be contradictory votes).

We also need to specify how long our poll will be running.

I believe that 14 days are more than enough for having a good image of what voters want to see changed / kept in the table from OP.
Once again, great job!

[1miau]

Thank you for taking your time and creating this survey, 1miau! I already made my vote. It seems I was the first one, hehe.

I've voted now, too and currently, 4 people have voted already.  

Needless to say, those which will vote to keep "Comments" column must also vote against having comments "hover" format and vice-versa (I hope there will not be contradictory votes).

Indeed, I have addressed the issue in our survey topic and in case of a very unlikely occurence of outcomes we could arrange a runoff vote.

We also need to specify how long our poll will be running.

I believe that 14 days are more than enough for having a good image of what voters want to see changed / kept in the table from OP.
Once again, great job!

I agree here, 14 days are a very fair and generous time for our survey.  

[Jon_Hodl]

I don't use any of these because they are all bloated with lots of clutter and shitcoinery. I use a few different block explorers for different things.

I use Mempool.Space for almost everything because it's simple and gets me all of the info I need for a basic tx and the current fee rate, etc. - https://MemPool.space

I use BitFeed for more precise info of each block but similar static data can be found on MemPool. I like to look more closely at the fee rate of all of the txs in a block - https://bits.monospace.live

When I need some basic "chain analysis" I use bread crumbs to see if I can follow funds a bit better to and from verified exchange wallets - https://www.breadcrumbs.app/

I also use TX Flow to follow money on chain a bit easier than other explorers but it tend to crash when you try to look up addresses with a lot of history - https://www.txflow.io/

OXT.me is good for understanding privacy and the flow of funds on-chain but this is usually a lot more than I need - https://oxt.me/

Finally, I use KYCP to know how private a transaction is and view the flow of funds within a tx - https://kycp.org/

I hope these tools help. Please stop using all of these poor block explorers to look up on-chain transactions. If you do, please use a VPN or Tor at the very least.

[1miau]

I don't use any of these because they are all bloated with lots of clutter and shitcoinery. I use a few different block explorers for different things.

I use Mempool.Space for almost everything because it's simple and gets me all of the info I need for a basic tx and the current fee rate, etc. - https://MemPool.space

...

Many thanks for sharing. 
Mempool.space is already added in our list, when it was suggested and rated by SFR20 here. SFR10 has rated it with 7.5 out of 10 points, where he is right in my opinion, because it is a very good rating for a very good explorer.
If you want, you can also rate some of your suggestions (if they are Block Explorers) and I'll include them in my list.


I've also locked our survey. For results, please see here.
I'll add all changes when I have some time and post an update here, when it's done. 

[1miau]

I've updated our list according to the outcomes of our survey. Please let me know if you like our improved version, if you want to share your opinion.
Unfortunately, I had to remove all links from the comments as it's not possible to add links for our new hover format.

Instead, I'll leave an old version from before our changes here. You'll find it below "old format".
I'll also add a link and a description in our OP.  

"After evaluating our table layout, we have analyzed a few changes and after doing a survey, we have agreed to implement these changes.
You'll still find our old table layout here (Link). "





Old version:

Bitcoin block explorers:

Name (link)	Bech32 / Bech32m (P2TR) supported?	SegWit (P2SH) identifiable?*	Usefulness (subjective rating)	Works without JS?	Rated by	Comments
________________________	____________________________	_______________	___________________	______________	________________	________________________________________________________________________
Blockchair.com	Yes (09/2019) / Yes (05/2022)	Yes (09/2019)	8 / 10 Points	Yes	1miau
Trezor Bitcoin Explorer	Yes (11/2019) / Yes (05/2022)	Yes (11/2019)	7.5 / 10 Points	Partially**	Saint-loup	The only one with Blockchair to manage zpub keys
mempool.space	Yes (10/2020) / Yes (05/2022)	Yes (10/2020)	7.5 / 10 Points	No	SFR10	Detailed and great UI
OKLink	Yes (08/2022) / Yes (08/2022)	Yes (08/2022)	7.5 / 10 Points	No	SFR10	It quickly became one of my favorites!
bitaps.com	Yes (09/2019) / Yes (05/2022)	Yes (09/2019)	7 / 10 Points	No	1miau
BTC.com	Yes (09/2019) / Yes (05/2022)	Yes (09/2019)	7 / 10 Points	No	1miau
chainflyer.bitflyer.jp	Yes (12/2019) / Yes (05/2022)	Yes (12/2019)	7 / 10 Points	No	Alveus
BitcoinWho'sWho	Yes (09/2022) / Yes (09/2022)	Yes (09/2022)	7 / 10 Points	No	GazetaBitcoin	Very efficient, including very interesting features; now it supports Bech32 addresses as well
BitcoinExplorer	Yes (08/2022) / Yes (08/2022)	Yes (08/2022)	7 / 10 Points	Partially**	SFR10	Simple and clean.
bitquery	Yes (09/2022) / Yes (09/2022)	Yes (09/2022)	7 / 10 Points	No	Rizzrack	Can separate ingoing from outgoing tx and has a very cool visual representation of the flow of coins to and from a certain address
TokenView	Yes (09/2022) / Yes (09/2022)	Yes (09/2022)	7 / 10 Points	No	ajiz138	Interesting block explorer, and there's a balance chart underneath.
BitInfoCharts	Yes (09/2022) / Yes (04/2023)	No (09/2022)	7 / 10 Points	Partially (see Comments)	ajiz138	This explorer can see the top and busiest wallets, there is a graph that can see the movement of our balance. If using no-JS, click a random TX, Block or Address and edit the URL in your browser to view the desired information.
SoChain	Yes (09/2019) / Yes (05/2022)	Yes (09/2021)	6 / 10 Points	No	1miau
Blockcypher.com	Yes (09/2019) / Yes (05/2022)	Yes (04/2023)	6 / 10 Points	Partially**	1miau
cryptoID	Yes (12/2019) / No (10/2022)	Yes (12/2019)	6 / 10 Points	No	SFR10	Not suited for unconfirmed transaction ID's
ViaBTC.com	Yes (09/2019) / No (10/2022)	No (09/2019)	6 / 10 Points	No	1miau
Btcscan	Yes (08/2022) / Yes (08/2022)	Yes (08/2022)	6 / 10 Points	Yes	SFR10
Blockchain.com	Yes (11/2019) / Yes (10/2022)	Yes (12/2019)	5 / 10 Points	Partially**	1miau
BitcoinBlockExplorer	Yes (08/2022) / Yes (08/2022)	No (08/2022)	5 / 10 Points	No	SFR10
Atomic	Yes (08/2022) / Yes (08/2022)	No (08/2022)	4.5 / 10 Points	Partially**	SFR10	Outdated UI / currently mirroring Trezor Explorer
Yogh	Yes (10/2022) / Yes (10/2022)	Yes (04/2023)	4 / 10 Points	No	ajiz138	Quite simple but less interesting
Blockexplorer.one	Yes (12/2019) / Yes (10/2022)	No (12/2019)	3 / 10 Points	No	LTU_btc
Blockpath	Yes (12/2019) / Yes (05/2022)	No (12/2019)	3 / 10 Points	No	SFR10	Outdated UI
Blockstream	Yes (11/2019) / Yes (05/2022)	Yes (11/2019)	2 / 10 Points	?	pooya87	good details, blocks visitors from my country
Insight	Yes (12/2019) / Yes (05/2022)	No (12/2019)	1 / 10 Points	No	SFR10
Walletexplorer.com	Yes (09/2022) / Yes (05/2022)	No (09/2019)	0 / 10 Points (avoid)	Yes	1miau	Risk of getting your IP tracked, not recommended to use
Spiral	Yes (09/2022) / Yes (10/2022)	No (09/2022)	x / 10 Points	No	cygan	beta phase ... only working for addresses with balance right now

New version:

Bitcoin block explorers:

Name (link)	Bech32 / Bech32m (P2TR) supported?	SegWit (P2SH) identifiable?*	Usefulness (subjective rating)	Works without JS?	Rated by
________________________	________________________________	_________________________	___________________	________________	________________
Blockchair.com	Yes (09/2019) / Yes (05/2022)	Yes (09/2019)	8 / 10 Points	Yes	1miau
Trezor Bitcoin Explorer	Yes (11/2019) / Yes (05/2022)	Yes (11/2019)	7.5 / 10 Points	Partially**	Saint-loup
mempool.space	Yes (10/2020) / Yes (05/2022)	Yes (10/2020)	7.5 / 10 Points	No	SFR10
OKLink	Yes (08/2022) / Yes (08/2022)	Yes (08/2022)	7.5 / 10 Points	No	SFR10
bitaps.com	Yes (09/2019) / Yes (05/2022)	Yes (09/2019)	7 / 10 Points	No	1miau
BTC.com	Yes (09/2019) / Yes (05/2022)	Yes (09/2019)	7 / 10 Points	No	1miau
chainflyer.bitflyer.jp	Yes (12/2019) / Yes (05/2022)	Yes (12/2019)	7 / 10 Points	No	Alveus
BitcoinWho'sWho	Yes (09/2022) / Yes (09/2022)	Yes (09/2022)	7 / 10 Points	No	GazetaBitcoin
BitcoinExplorer	Yes (08/2022) / Yes (08/2022)	Yes (08/2022)	7 / 10 Points	Partially**	SFR10
bitquery	Yes (09/2022) / Yes (09/2022)	Yes (09/2022)	7 / 10 Points	No	Rizzrack
TokenView	Yes (09/2022) / Yes (09/2022)	Yes (09/2022)	7 / 10 Points	No	ajiz138
BitInfoCharts	Yes (09/2022) / Yes (04/2023)	No (09/2022)	7 / 10 Points	Partially (see Comments)	ajiz138
SoChain	Yes (09/2019) / Yes (05/2022)	Yes (09/2021)	6 / 10 Points	No	1miau
Blockcypher.com	Yes (09/2019) / Yes (05/2022)	Yes (04/2023)	6 / 10 Points	Partially**	1miau
cryptoID	Yes (12/2019) / No (10/2022)	Yes (12/2019)	6 / 10 Points	No	SFR10
ViaBTC.com	Yes (09/2019) / No (10/2022)	No (09/2019)	6 / 10 Points	No	1miau
Btcscan	Yes (08/2022) / Yes (08/2022)	Yes (08/2022)	6 / 10 Points	Yes	SFR10
Blockchain.com	Yes (11/2019) / Yes (10/2022)	Yes (12/2019)	5 / 10 Points	Partially**	1miau
Localbitcoinschain.com	Yes (12/2019) / No (10/2022)	Yes (12/2019)	5 / 10 Points	No	SFR10
BitcoinBlockExplorer	Yes (08/2022) / Yes (08/2022)	No (08/2022)	5 / 10 Points	No	SFR10
Learnmeabitcoin	Yes (10/2022) / No (10/2022)	No (10/2022)	5 / 10 Points	No	ajiz138
Atomic	Yes (08/2022) / Yes (08/2022)	No (08/2022)	4.5 / 10 Points	Partially**	SFR10
CoinCap	Yes (10/2020) / No (10/2022)	No (10/2020)	4 / 10 Points	No	SFR10
Yogh	Yes (10/2022) / Yes (10/2022)	Yes (04/2023)	4 / 10 Points	No	ajiz138
Blockexplorer.one	Yes (12/2019) / Yes (10/2022)	No (12/2019)	3 / 10 Points	No	LTU_btc
Blockpath	Yes (12/2019) / Yes (05/2022)	No (12/2019)	3 / 10 Points	No	SFR10
Blockstream	Yes (11/2019) / Yes (05/2022)	Yes (11/2019)	2 / 10 Points	?	pooya87
Insight	Yes (12/2019) / Yes (05/2022)	No (12/2019)	1 / 10 Points	No	SFR10
Walletexplorer.com	Yes (09/2022) / Yes (05/2022)	No (09/2019)	0 / 10 Points	Yes	1miau
Spiral / Blyss [1]	Yes (09/2022) / Yes (10/2022)	No (09/2022)	x / 10 Points	No	cygan

[GazetaBitcoin]

I've updated our list according to the outcomes of our survey. Please let me know if you like our improved version, if you want to share your opinion.

Great job, 1miau! The table looks more "clean" now And keeping also the old format, inside that post, for mobile users, is also a very wise decision. I also implemented all changes within the translated version of the topic.

Unfortunately, I had to remove all links from the comments as it's not possible to add links for our new hover format.

Yup, I noticed that. It is what it is... However, I wanted to let you know that, while implementing the changes inside the translation (I did it while also looking at your new BBCode) I noticed that you left a reference to an earlier hyperlink inside the new BBCode. It does not affect the table in any way, yet I believe you can also delete that part, for having a "100% clean" code as well Here is the reference to that hyperlink:

Code:

[td][abbr=Outdated UI / Currently mirroring Trezor Explorer[/url]

And, perhaps, this part can also be deleted?

Code:

I've included a poll and if you want, please leave a vote which block explorer is your favorite one. Everyone will have 2 votes, you can revise it at any time, like when the block explorer makes changes and features are removed / added or when it goes completely offline.

(Eventually, you can change this text with a text related to the new survey -- the one for Blockchair's final mark?)

Other than that, everything looks great! Thank you for the efforts you made to update the BBcode!

[1miau]

I've updated our list according to the outcomes of our survey. Please let me know if you like our improved version, if you want to share your opinion.

Great job, 1miau! The table looks more "clean" now And keeping also the old format, inside that post, for mobile users, is also a very wise decision. I also implemented all changes within the translated version of the topic.

+1
Well done, dear GazetaBitcoin!
I would really like to leave you some Merit for your effort, but I've reached my limit of 50 Merit, when I can't send you Merit anymore... 

Unfortunately, I had to remove all links from the comments as it's not possible to add links for our new hover format.

Yup, I noticed that. It is what it is... However, I wanted to let you know that, while implementing the changes inside the translation (I did it while also looking at your new BBCode) I noticed that you left a reference to an earlier hyperlink inside the new BBCode. It does not affect the table in any way, yet I believe you can also delete that part, for having a "100% clean" code as well Here is the reference to that hyperlink:

I've tried to search it but didn't find it...
Do you know for which Blockexplorer the reference is still left?

Code:

[td][abbr=Outdated UI / Currently mirroring Trezor Explorer[/url]

And, perhaps, this part can also be deleted?

Nice catch!
I've removed it, it's from Atomic Explorer.

Code:

I've included a poll and if you want, please leave a vote which block explorer is your favorite one. Everyone will have 2 votes, you can revise it at any time, like when the block explorer makes changes and features are removed / added or when it goes completely offline.

(Eventually, you can change this text with a text related to the new survey -- the one for Blockchair's final mark?)

Yes, I'll write a similar explanation about out new survey, which will be ready next weekend.