[BPIP] Bitcointalk Public Information Project [Back in Action]

[ibminer]

Yep, I apparently muffed a copy/paste on the sample users above, thanks again LoyceV.

I think you made a mistake on AverageGlabella, who made many posts (and is listed in your list).
The other 3 users posted spam/malware (1, 2, 3), and MindlessElectron must have gotten to them before your scraper saw them. They're also banned, so it doesn't matter.

I also want to join the party…

Day 1: I'm in love with your strut
Day 2: I'm in love with your strut
Day 3: I'm in love with your strut
And guess what?  I'm in love with your strut.   (I'm straight btw - "objectify, but don't cross the line!" =P)
.. I couldn't help myself. - maybe NSFW.
edit: had to fix the lyrics!

Idk why it’s a lot lower than LoyceV’s.

My query ended on 12-31-2022 so you might have 1 more day of results than what I posted from BPIP. The main differences I see between LoyceV and BPIP seems to be the users who had posts quickly removed before BPIP picked them up (you probably have these), and while doing a difference check, I had ran into a handful of users with posts in 2023 not 2022, which would not be in your list.. but I only spot checked maybe 10-15 accounts. With 2 parsers usually running I'm surprised BPIP didn't see these deleted posts but the parsers run multiple jobs checking various things at various intervals so quickly deleted posts may not get picked up by the time a parser checks the new post area.

[joker_josue]

Well, with so many numbers I even got confused! 

I can do that

Thanks for the help @LoyceV, you are fantastic.
I have to see how I can run this code, for future situations.

https://public.ninjastic.space/users-2022.txt

Your list is interesting, the only thing missing is the user ID. I always prefer the ID over the username. Because a different character is enough for the result to no longer work.
But thanks for the work.

https://bpip.org/active_in_2022_and_received_merit_in_2022.txt -- (5,300 results)

In the midst of so many options, I think I'll opt for this one. Since it only includes active users who have received merits. Right @ibminer?


Thanks again for everyone's help.
I hope that later you will like the statistics that I will present with these data. 

[LoyceMobile]

I have to see how I can run this code, for future situations.

You can't, it requires server access. I only posted it as a reminder for myself.

[joker_josue]

I have to see how I can run this code, for future situations.

You can't, it requires server access. I only posted it as a reminder for myself.

 
Makes more sense.

For a moment, I thought about how I could use that...
It's true that I'm no programming expert, but I also know that that wasn't enough for me to do anything. So I thought maybe I'd have to do some deeper research on the topic to find out.
But that being said, it's clear. Thanks again. 

[TryNinja]

Your list is interesting, the only thing missing is the user ID. I always prefer the ID over the username. Because a different character is enough for the result to no longer work.
But thanks for the work.

Here it is:

https://public.ninjastic.space/posts-2022-only-ids.txt
https://public.ninjastic.space/posts-2022-ids-and-users.txt

It’s in my TODO list to allow whitelisted users to query stuff on-demand (i.e All posts/merits from X to Y in this format).

[ibminer]

In the midst of so many options, I think I'll opt for this one. Since it only includes active users who have received merits. Right @ibminer?

To be as specific as possible, the 5,300 would be any user with a post created in 2022 (which wasn't deleted quickly), who also received merit in 2022

Thanks again for everyone's help.
I hope that later you will like the statistics that I will present with these data.  

Don't let us down.

[TryNinja]

Honestly, I’m having fun figuring this out through a unix terminal on my phone.

Here is my latest attempt: https://public.ninjastic.space/posts-2022-ids-and-users-with-merits.txt

My POV, for the curious: https://pasteboard.co/Lqg0GP6igyCV.png

(All other img hosts were down for me, so quickly found this one)

[joker_josue]

Honestly, I’m having fun figuring this out through a unix terminal on my phone.

Here is my latest attempt: https://public.ninjastic.space/posts-2022-ids-and-users-with-merits.txt

My POV, for the curious: https://www.photobox.co.uk/my/photo/full?photo_id=505296147014

(All other img hosts were down for me, so quickly found this one)

This is your list of all users who posted in 2022 and received merits, right?
Thank you, I'll add that information to what I already have.

Regarding the image, something in that link is not right, as it does not open any image.

[TryNinja]

This is your list of all users who posted in 2022 and received merits, right?

Posted at least once in 2022 and received at least one merit in 2022, yes.

Regarding the image, something in that link is not right, as it does not open any image.

Lol, turns out the website I was using is for photo printing (so only I could see the picture and I had to pay to have it printed and shipped to me ). Updated with a new link.

[ibminer]

Honestly, I’m having fun figuring this out through a unix terminal on my phone.

Here is my latest attempt: https://public.ninjastic.space/posts-2022-ids-and-users-with-merits.tx

My POV, for the curious: https://pasteboard.co/Lqg0GP6igyCV.png

(All other img hosts were down for me, so quickly found this one)

I've done a lot of things from my phone, including painfully navigating complex tasks through a remote/gui session (not fun), but I'd lose my mind if I had to type long queries in with that keyboard LOL, maybe you're using some voice-to-text?
(fyi-you might have broke the other link when fixing the image (missing the .txt now))

I realize the numbers are small but I had to look at why there was a difference.. I partly wasn't being specific enough on my date/time, so with my new query:

(tables and field names are modified for security purposes - call me paranoid if you must)

Code:

select distinct author from PostsTable 
left join MeritTable on PostsTable.author=MeritTable.merit-to
where postdatetime between 2022-01-01 00:00:00 AND 2023-01-01 00:00:00
AND MeritTable.merit-date between 2022-01-01 00:00:00 AND 2023-01-01 00:00:00
order by author asc

^ Note: I had to remove the single quotes in the code above or it would trigger cloudflare's security feature and block me.

I'm getting 5,313 results now (updated the .txt), but diff checker is still showing differences between your data and BPIP's:
BPIP has 9 ids listed that you don't have, you have some ids listed that BPIP doesn't have and some duplicates (also resulting in 9).. explanations:
--
The 9 BPIP listed, which were not in your list:
1- 413 - bg002h posted in 2022 and received merit.
2- 30747 - Vod posted in 2022 and received merit.
3- 63363 - smiletyson posted in 2022 and received merit
4- 3406889 - Salamande posted in 2022 and received merit
5- 3457634 - SpenserReed posted in 2022 and received merit
6- 3473890 - M__SUFYAN posted in 2022 and received merit
7- 3509533 - ChillyMatthew posted in 2022 and received merit
8- 3520784 - fedesse posted in 2022 and received merit
9- 3525938 - RobbyN789 posted in 2022 and received merit
--
The 9 you have listed, which BPIP didn't:
1,2,3,4- Your list contained duplicates for 161364, 487418, 938833, 1980983 which increased the count (name changes & maybe a character encoding issue)
5- 949407 - the post this user did in 2022 doesn't exist in BPIP's DB, I'm assuming there was a parser issue here where it didn't get picked up.
6- 2848088 - no merit is shown being given in 2022 for this user (doesn't exist in BPIP's merit log), the user does have 1 merit on the account currently but it looks like the post isn't there anymore for me to verify.
7- 3414189 - same situation as #6..!
8- 3455838 - BPIP has record of this in the merit log, but the post itself doesn't exist in the posts table so this account didn't make it in BPIP's list.
9- 3520394 - similar situation as #8

[GazetaBitcoin]

I come back on this thread with another inconsistency I encountered: I noticed that after ranking up some places on ladders of Most merit and Most earned merit, sometimes the positions you are shown on ladders of Most Recognized and Most trusted are drawn back.

I will explain below with more details:



- this is a screenshot since I was 59th user with most merits and 47th with most earned merits. Note that at this moment I was 520th most trusted and 239th most recognized.



- later on, after receiving more merits, I was 54th user with most merits and 42nd with most earned merits. Note that at this moment I was 515th most trusted and 233th most recognized. So, at this moment, my position on Most Trusted and Most recognized ladders advanced together with the merits which pushed me on the other two ladders.



- later on, after receiving some more merits, I was 51st user with most merits and 41st with most earned merits. Note that at this moment I became 662nd most trusted and 297th most recognized. So, at this moment, my position on Most Trusted and Most recognized ladders decreased, no matter the merits which pushed me on the other two ladders. Besides, the fluctuations are not minor: I advanced 3 positions on Most merit ladder and 1 position on Most earned merit, yet I decreased with 64 positions on Most recognized ladder and with 147 on Most trusted ladder.

And I've noticed in the past in multiple occasions these big fluctuations of Most recognized and Most trusted ladders. Take into account that in all this while my Trust score hasn't changed, only my activity and number of merits.

And, since the formula of recognition is the one below,

The top 1000 most recognized profiles report is calculated using:1000 - ((Activity Rank + Trust Rank + Earned Merit Rank) / 3).

I believe that, if Trust score remains unchanged, as activity and number of merits increase then recognition should also increase, not decrease. Regarding the position on Most Trusted ladder I have no idea why it went down so much, since my Trust score remained the same.

I am not sure if similar fluctuations occur for the other ladders as well (Most active, and Most posts), as I don't have these badges displayed on my bpip profile.

I hope this helps.

And, as a suggestion, perhaps it would be a good idea to implement on bpip's home page all these six ladders, thus it would be easier to observe also which users have most posts and which ones have most earned merits? I know these ladders can be accessed with a workaround (e.g. go to the profile of any user and click on Most earned merit link and the ladder will be shown) but I think it would be nice to have them on home page too. Now of course, it's possible to not fit. But if they can be arranged somehow (perhaps with a smaller column width or a smaller font?) thus they would fit on home page then maybe this would be a nice addition

[ibminer]

Are you taking into account the fluctuations of 1,000 other users, based on when they were last refreshed?

More importantly, in this context, the formula for most trusted doesn't care about merit, earned or not. Plus, the 'most trusted' would definitely fluctuate each month with the DT1/2 random selection process which shuffles trusted feedback around and would change the scores.

The formula for most recognized is accounting for activity, trust, and earned merit.. just because you jumped in earned/merit doesn't mean someone else didn't jump more in activity and trust and become more "recognized"... plus, the aforementioned DT1/2 shuffle each month would effect this score also.

And, as a suggestion, perhaps it would be a good idea to implement on bpip's home page all these six ladders, thus it would be easier to observe also which users have most posts and which ones have most earned merits? I know these ladders can be accessed with a workaround (e.g. go to the profile of any user and click on Most earned merit link and the ladder will be shown) but I think it would be nice to have them on home page too. Now of course, it's possible to not fit. But if they can be arranged somehow (perhaps with a smaller column width or a smaller font?) thus they would fit on home page then maybe this would be a nice addition

I definitely tried with the initial design to get more tables on there.. the only good way with the current design is to start another row of columns below the current 4.. but it creates a much larger page, more resource intensive, and it wouldn't be as easy to compare in this arrangement.

[GazetaBitcoin]

Are you taking into account the fluctuations of 1,000 other users, based on when they were last refreshed? [...]

The formula for most recognized is accounting for activity, trust, and earned merit.. just because you jumped in earned/merit doesn't mean someone else didn't jump more in activity and trust and become more "recognized"... plus, the aforementioned DT1/2 shuffle each month would effect this score also.

I understand... I did not take into account the DT shuffles. In the last example I offered my drawback from Most Recognized ladder happened after I was removed from DT1 after theymos' last shuffle of DT1 users. This may explain...

Regarding the idea to take into account that others could have jumped in activity and / or Trust -- yes, I thought about this, but I did not believe that changes would be so big to determine a decrease of almost 150 positions on a ladder, especially considering that the screenshots were taken at short time intervals one after the other. But, somehow, I think the impact of dropping from DT1 to DT2 has a big impact on this.

Thank you for your explanations!

I definitely tried with the initial design to get more tables on there.. the only good way with the current design is to start another row of columns below the current 4.. but it creates a much larger page, more resource intensive, and it wouldn't be as easy to compare in this arrangement.

Oh I see... Then what about this: maybe simply add links somewhere on top of the page to these two ladders? Maybe one at the left of "M" (the "M" from "MATR") and one at the righ of the "R"? Or at any other place you may find suitable? Would that work better?

[ibminer]

Thank you for your explanations!

No problem!

Oh I see... Then what about this: maybe simply add links somewhere on top of the page to these two ladders? Maybe one at the left of "M" (the "M" from "MATR") and one at the righ of the "R"? Or at any other place you may find suitable? Would that work better?

Have you seen the "?" on the column headers (mainly Most Recognized)? Clicking the "?" once will keep it open, so you can access the links involved in the formula, which takes you to the respective report page. Is this something like what you are looking for?

[GazetaBitcoin]

Have you seen the "?" on the column headers? Clicking the "?" once will keep it open, so you can access the links involved in a particular formula. Is this something like what you are looking for?

No, what I had in mind was to have a link somewhere on home page for the ladders of Most posts and Most earned merit. From what you said above I understood that two more columns won't fit the home page, therefore I suggested that, maybe, even two links written on the home page, redirecting to these two ladders may help.

A link could be named "Most posts" and the other one "Most earned merits".

And I suggested that they could be placed at the left, respective righ side of the "M" and the "R" from "MATR".

They would be just two links to the ladders, indeed, and not the entire ladders, but the advantage would be that these ladders could be also accessed from home page. Does this make sense? I hope I explained better now what I had in mind

[ibminer]

No, what I had in mind was to have a link somewhere on home page for the ladders of Most posts and Most earned merit.

I guess my point was that the Most earned merit link could already be accessed through the "?" for Most Recognized. I don't know, maybe I'm confused.. it's been a long day.

I was a little confused because I thought the Most Posts report was already linked under the Most Activity's "?", but I was mistaken on that one, so that might be a place where we could add a link to the 'most posts' report, maybe under the Most Activity "?"
... but are you saying you don't consider the "?" links to be "on the home page" and/or not prominent enough?

From what you said above I understood that two more columns won't fit the home page

Correct. To get a little technical, this is in the sense that we are talking about the standard sized screens and resolutions most people would be using, which is what the responsive design of the site was intended to work best with.

Fun related fact: The reason there is only 1 'rank' table in the larger/full screen version of the home page is because I couldn't cleanly fit the existing 4 ranking tables in the large-screen version when they each had a 'rank' column as part of each main ranking table (a long time ago). Putting 1 rank table in the middle saved the space needed to cleanly fit the 4 tables next to it, allowed longer username lengths, and I think looked better (but was ultimately harder to design..). Not to mention there are many hidden rank columns that were needed for the smaller-sized versions of the site to make it work correctly and make sense.

[GazetaBitcoin]

I guess my point was that the Most earned merit link could already be accessed through the "?" for Most Recognized. I don't know, maybe I'm confused.. it's been a long day.

Ohhhhhhh got you now! And I saw it, you are right! I confirm, the link is there and it's accessible.

I was a little confused because I thought the Most Posts report was already linked under the Most Activity's "?", but I was mistaken on that one, so that might be a place where we could add a link to the 'most posts' report, maybe under the Most Activity "?"
... but are you saying you don't consider the "?" links to be "on the home page" and/or not prominent enough?

The "?" are indeed on the home page. Maybe they can be extended a bit, though? Of course, if code allows. Regarding the place of the link for Most posts, at the moment, the description shown when clicking on the "?" of Activity looks like this:

Most Activity is calculated
      using:
min(time * 14, posts)

time = number of 2 week
periods in which a member
has posted since their
      registration

posts = total number of
      posts

Maybe you can insert the hyperlink for Most posts on the "posts" term highlighted by me? Alternatively, there is an empty line between the last line (the one with highlighted "posts") and the term "registration". Maybe the line with "posts" can be placed on this empty line from above, thus in the text box last line will be empty and you can add there something like "For Most posts click here".

To get a little technical, this is in the sense that we are talking about the standard sized screens and resolutions most people would be using, which is what the responsive design of the site was intended to work best with.

Yes, it makes sense.

Fun related fact: [...] Putting 1 rank table in the middle saved the space needed to cleanly fit the 4 tables next to it, allowed longer username lengths, and I think looked better (but was ultimately harder to design..).

This is interesting, as it shows how agile if the mind of a web designer and coder

[ibminer]

Maybe you can insert the hyperlink for Most posts on the "posts" term highlighted by me? Alternatively, there is an empty line between the last line (the one with highlighted "posts") and the term "registration". Maybe the line with "posts" can be placed on this empty line from above, thus in the text box last line will be empty and you can add there something like "For Most posts click here".

Thanks for the suggestion, the spacing is somewhat intentional to separate things but I made some adjustments and went with this:


I also realized while modifying the tooltip that this report never made it into the menu either, so I added it there as well under the "Activity" reports.

[Timelord2067]

Well, that went well (rolls eyes)

[ibminer]

Well, that went well (rolls eyes)

You see someone release an update to a tooltip and expect a BPIP card generator to work.. I'm the one who should be rolling his eyes.