[overview] ChipMixer Signature Participants Statistics

[BrewMaster]

It would be interesting to see what rank each participant had when they joined, but that's going to be a lot of work to dig up.

well the data already contains users'
- current rank
- current merit
- earned merit
it seems to me that it is a trivially easy computation to figure out what rank each user had.
for example i have 1003 merit and i've earned 503 merit that means i was a Hero Member when i joined.
you currently have 5963 and earned 4941 (according to your site) which puts you above 1000 with 22 diff (probably not updated yet) so you were Legendary when you joined.

[1715037872]

1715037872

[1715037872]

1715037872

[Lauda]

Meh, I don't think anyone is going to report you for sending statistic about chipmixer's signature participants to chipmixer's signature participants.

Would not surprise me if somebody who dislikes OP reports it, this is why it is better to be careful what you send and to who.
Nice data.

[LoyceV]

it seems to me that it is a trivially easy computation to figure out what rank each user had.

It's not:

you currently have 5963 and earned 4941 (according to your site) which puts you above 1000 with 22 diff (probably not updated yet) so you were Legendary when you joined.

I joined ChipMixer's campaign 2.5 months before I reached Legendary Rank. So I was a Hero Member back then.

[BrewMaster]

i totally forgot about the time before merit system was added.

[dragonvsandroid]

Ironically I had overlooked the fact that no doubt many members are also merit sources, otherwise you would of seen a chart up there  

Assuming you knew who those merit sources were--and you wouldn't necessarily, since that info isn't public.  

Honestly? I assumed I would get some merit for this yes, from people who find it interesting or useful, but as someone who finds numbers and statistics calming in times of panic, it wasn't the incentive as to why I made these charts in the first place, believe it or not.

Glad you're being honest about that, because people rarely admit that they're hoping for merits when they create a thread.  There's nothing wrong with that IMO.  It's perfectly natural to want some recognition for a post or thread that's well-done, and there's also the practical aspect of needing merits to rank up.  Obviously this thread was of interest to a few members, because you've earned quite a few merits for it already--and they're well-earned IMO.  The only stats I've seen on Chipmixer participants are earned merits, which is (or was) a part of DarkStar_'s spreadsheet.  There may have been another thread with some data, but if there was it's been buried.

I also don't really care for receiving merit from those who hodl and hoard their smerit, it usually feels in-genuine and more like charity than any genuine appreciation; no offence intended.

I doubt anyone is giving you charity merits, but since you're a Sr. Member I'd take all you can get and not worry about the intent of the member who gives them to you.

To clarify, I said I was expecting merit, not hoping for it. While you need merits to rank up, not all users need to rank up. Sure, most sig campaigns pay more to higher ranks. Mine does not I'm happy as a Senior Bitcoiner

I became curious of the standards and other metrics of the 56 participants, so are some statistics to share. See credits, disclaimer and notes below graphs.

And? What conclusion have you made looking at these graphs?

The demand appears to match the standards, that of being very high. I doubt there is a campaign that comes close to it.

Meh, I don't think anyone is going to report you for sending statistic about chipmixer's signature participants to chipmixer's signature participants.

Would not surprise me if somebody who dislikes OP reports it, this is why it is better to be careful what you send and to who.

The cat is correct.

[LoyceV]

Since you're curious of about ChipMixer participants, maybe you should analyze where usually participants make their posts (most likely it's either Meta or Beginners & Help)

I made a page for that. It doesn't receive automated updates, but I just ran an update. See http://loyce.club/sigcamp/chipmixer/topics7d.html

[jackg]

Sending unsolicited PM's is an offence on this forum that comes with a temp bann.

I received a PM from dragonvslinux about this, and although it was technically unsolicited, I'd say the forum rules aren't meant to stop this. There's a difference between: "Hey, here's a bunch of interesting things I'm working on, and I'd like to get your help" and "please sir can I buy 800 Merit or your account". I don't think this forum will become better if you have to ask permission to PM in public before asking someone a question by PM.

Yeah, it's clear why satoshi watned the rules to be unofficial, sometimes you need the extra analysis.

If you deem 1PM to be an annoyance and unsolicited then you probably ought to hit the logout button and not return...

Since you're curious of about ChipMixer participants, maybe you should analyze where usually participants make their posts (most likely it's either Meta or Beginners & Help)

I made a page for that. It doesn't receive automated updates, but I just ran an update. See http://loyce.club/sigcamp/chipmixer/topics7d.html

Is that in progress or did it just kill my browser when I tried to click another link for a different time spot?

Would be interesting if it evolved into where merits were earnt&sent by most of them too...

[LoyceV]

Is that in progress or did it just kill my browser when I tried to click another link for a different time spot?

Would be interesting if it evolved into where merits were earnt&sent by most of them too...

It works okay in (my) Firefox, although 30 days posts is heavy on the browser. I won't add Merit to this, this was only meant as a quick overview of what campaign participants are up to, but I never bothered to make automated updates. Now that I think about it: I used an outdated userlist for this.

[mikeywith]

Assuming you knew who those merit sources were--and you wouldn't necessarily, since that info isn't public.  

When was the last time you visited Meta?   apparently that info is indeed PUBLIC


OP I personally don't mind the PM, I appreciate your efforts.

[pooya87]

i didn't mind the PM, there are other PMs that are a lot more annoying than this one. besides this board wasn't a place i would have expected to see such stats, they are usually in meta.

I made a page for that. It doesn't receive automated updates, but I just ran an update. See http://loyce.club/sigcamp/chipmixer/topics7d.html

i don't know if it is possible but it would be nice to see this as a list of boards with post count instead of topics.

[dragonvslinux]

Assuming you knew who those merit sources were--and you wouldn't necessarily, since that info isn't public. 

When was the last time you visited Meta?  apparently that info is indeed PUBLIC

Thanks for sharing that link, I knew I'd seen a topic like that somewhere. Definitely helps to explain the following:



Will look into cross-referencing this data with participants

Merit sources should run along and merit another post that hasn't received any (or much less) and is worthy of receiving it. You missed your chance here, please move along now.

[Timelord2067]

Perhaps if you were to distil out the number of posts these people make to attack others you might then find a truer picture of how productive their posts are.

[dragonvsandroid]

Perhaps if you were to distil out the number of posts these people make to attack others you might then find a truer picture of how productive their posts are.

Sounds like a crazy amount of work analyzing thousands of posts, for attacks against other users.  Don't think LoyceAI could easily scrape this data either, the remit would be too specific to handle. Even cross-referencing merit geniorsity data is enough to take on right now.

Thanks for the suggestion though, it would be interesting to see for sure, but completely unrealistic.

[Timelord2067]

Perhaps if you were to distil out the number of posts these people make to attack others you might then find a truer picture of how productive their posts are.

Sounds like a crazy amount of work analysing thousands of posts, for attacks against other users.  Don't think LoyceAI could easily scrape this data either, the remit would be too specific to handle. Even cross-referencing merit generosity data is enough to take on right now.

Thanks for the suggestion though, it would be interesting to see for sure, but completely unrealistic.

An easy way to start the process would be to identify the threads that are simply hostile in intention "I don't like this user because" type of thread and just label all posts in that thread as being openly hostile accordingly.

Lots of those "pill addiction" style treads or "s/he doesn't deny it" threads are an embarrassment and stick out like a sore thumb (and have plenty of pages of doss due to their prolonged attacks on others).

Similarity, you can then identify quite quickly who the main agitators within the chip mixer sigcamp are creating these abusive threads and take the decision to blanket label all or a fair portion of their work as abusive and go from there.

[dragonvsandroid]

Perhaps if you were to distil out the number of posts these people make to attack others you might then find a truer picture of how productive their posts are.

Sounds like a crazy amount of work analysing thousands of posts, for attacks against other users.  Don't think LoyceAI could easily scrape this data either, the remit would be too specific to handle. Even cross-referencing merit generosity data is enough to take on right now.

Thanks for the suggestion though, it would be interesting to see for sure, but completely unrealistic.

An easy way to start the process would be to identify the threads that are simply hostile in intention "I don't like this user because" type of thread and just label all posts in that thread as being openly hostile accordingly.

To put it simply: That's not how data analysis works. That would lead to enomorous generalisations regarding people's posting style, as well as intent in posting in these threads.

Re: too much work. No.

[pugman]

Really nice statistics, I'm overwhelmed by the results, but overall not so bad. The visualization could have been better, for sure, but it's certainly not bad. Which software did you use for the visualization??

As for the pm,I want to think that you just wanted to spread positivity and curb enthusiasm, but a lot of people on this forum hate receiving pms like this, so be on the lookout next time onwards. Also,thank you for spending your time and creating these charts.

[dragonvslinux]

The visualization could have been better, for sure, but it's certainly not bad. Which software did you use for the visualization??

Agreed, appreciate the constructive criticism, I was hoping nobody would notice that! I usually spend more time on the "formatting" of these charts; colors, titles, axis, labels, etc, but I wasn't feeling the energy to do this as there are quite a few. I also find it easier to format charts based on trust for example, as I can use obvious color schemes to represent positive, negative and neutral for example. It was LibreOffice (open source Office), the charts are more of less based on the defaults with minor adjustments to the axis. In hindsight, It could all looked less like being from the naughties by having color transparency at a minimum of 50% for example.

Hence the following accurate interpretation, because Office spreadsheet defaults haven't changed much since Windows 2000  

The OP here made me chuckle a little, because it's like taking a time machine back 20+ years to when I took introductory statistics in college.  I remember making charts just like these for homework, though that's just about all I remember from that course (lol).

As for the pm,I want to think that you just wanted to spread positivity and curb enthusiasm, but a lot of people on this forum hate receiving pms like this, so be on the lookout next time onwards. Also,thank you for spending your time and creating these charts.

Spread something I believe is positive yes, but also deal with any potential controversy from anyone efficiently and effectively, instead of having participants stumble across this thread over the course of days and weeks and having issues with it. I prefer to get any issues out the way in one go as it were, rather than tediously spread out over a longer time period. I otherwise expected more people to have an issue with the data than there were (or are so far), so instead underestimated that how most people would find this to be positive, rather than have issues with it for x, y and z.

I otherwise agree, I'll be on the lookout next time, but in the context of any bcc based "mass" messaging, there won't be a next time from me. I've certainly learnt my lesson that while the majority may be fine (or even appreciate) a PM about a topic like this, there will always be a minority who don't appreciate it which could cause serious issues. I think Lauda put it best;

Meh, I don't think anyone is going to report you for sending statistic about chipmixer's signature participants to chipmixer's signature participants.

Would not surprise me if somebody who dislikes OP reports it, this is why it is better to be careful what you send and to who.

Even if I agree with LFC that in this case, if someone reported the PM - I think they're a bit of dick to be honest.

TL:DR: I really appreciate your constructive criticisms and compliments, hence the length reply  

[Kalemder]

Good information. Thank you.

How many representatives are there in which local section? Can we see this information?

[Vispilio]

Good information. Thank you.

How many representatives are there in which local section? Can we see this information?

As far as I know Kalemder was the only Chipmixer participant to be expelled from the Chipmixer campaign in years.

While his post quality and posting behavior can be criticized, as can everyone else's, I would rate him as one of the top 3 participants in the Turkish local boards.

I've met very few truly bilingual (or more) people in my life, and can quote you many professional writers and linguists who would also agree with the assessment that it's very difficult to achieve native fluency in multiple languages, particularly if they are originating from different language families.

Therefore, we need to accept that it would be very difficult for Darkstar_ to objectively judge the post quality of some local forum users.

Even though I nominate myself as the top local participant overall on this forum, I would still vote for Kalemder as worthy of a Chipmixer slot, as reviewing the range of Chipmixer posts over the years, most rational observers would agree his message quality is way above average (and brings a unique Turkish voice).

The fairness and meritocracy of the Chipmixer campaign are frequently brought into question, when the campaign manager fails to address any of these very pertinent criticisms raised to him, and often seems to make up his mind whimsically and under the strong influence of external advice given to him, without any convincing rational justification for his decisions...

As things currently stand, the fact remains that Turkish section is one of the most intellectual and active sections on this forum; however the frequent controversial arguments and schisms originating from that section lead to some very valuable campaigns overlooking and missing out on this hugely strategic part of the forum.

If we want to talk about a fair and rational campaign, the 1st step Darkstar_ & ChipMixer partnership need to take right now is to find at least 1 or more users who are active in Turkish local to establish their presence in that highly popular part of BTT.

[asche]

As far as I know Kalemder was the only Chipmixer participant to be expelled from the Chipmixer campaign in years.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

See week 139 for instance : https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17P52DifaD7YfvzLkX3wrxGVpKcaPHY4y57ZpI-FK754/edit#gid=642818732

Rest of your post is the same non sense.