Most Recognized Profiles (by BPIP)

[LoyceV]

If I send to user A B C and users B and C send to me, is my circle counted as 3+2 or 3+0?  I originally coded it as 3+0.

It's counted as 3. Using last week's data:

Code:

     2. 6087 Merit received by LoyceV (#459836) from 649 unique users in 3389 transactions
     2. 17342 Merit sent by LoyceV (#459836) to 1909 unique users in 7527 transactions

BPIP doesn't just add them together:

Code:

2 	LoyceV DT1 	2090 	Legendary 	2/26/2015 8:04:12 AM 	22 minutes 	12 minutes

[1714181352]

1714181352

[1714181352]

1714181352

[Vod]

I understand.  I just thought the wording could be improved.  :/

[Vod]

Still the most recognized member and the only one that has always been trusted by default.  

[Laudanum]

Remove merit score

Calculate number of words posted

Calculate threads started.

Calculate number of alt communities posted in.

Calculate number of times username mentioned.

I mean Bpip is incapable of analysing real influence aka lasting variance due to actions taken so entirely pointless for real meaningful insight. But lol at merits handed around to each other in meta and wall observer making them well known or recognised to the wider community? Also I'm sure people are recognised here outside of what the board metrics can demonstrate VB Coblee,

I mean clearly satoshi would be number 1 untouchable if the above was possible.

I mean obviously the sad clown created the algo that gave him some relevance. However if I said point to even 1 contribution that vod has ever made that can be reasonably argued made any lasting difference here to the community in a big way ?

Crickets?? Right? Nothing?

That right.

Then think satoshi, gmax, several other developers, even huge scammers that changed the fortunes of tons of people and forced other solutions be found. 

Vod? Lfc? Pharmacist ?  All irrelevant to crypto in every conceivable way. No reasonable claim to any recognition except being scammer supporters.

[Rikafip]

@Laudanum

Since bpip is by your own words "incapable of analysing real influence", why don't you make your own tool based on all those things that you mentioned? It's easy to talk what should have been done..

One thing is to say that some metrics should be removed/added, and another to say that current list is completely false. But even then, these kind of lists shouldn't be taken seriously anyway, not matter the way you calculate it. I know I don't.

[Laudanum]

@Laudanum

Since bpip is by your own words "incapable of analysing real influence", why don't you make your own tool based on all those things that you mentioned? It's easy to talk what should have been done..

Well how about they just make available the data ranking I suggested.

I'm simply attempting to provide what the OP asks for.

I'm simply saying that the algo that claims to = recognition or repute is bogus.

It is good for data ranking but there could be more interesting stats.

[Timelord2067]

why don't you ...

Didn't I read somewhere or other a while ago that someone was contemplating adding the merit circle score into the mix - instead of taking three scores by adding in the merit circle score they would have four scores to give a more even spread...

(unless of course we also add the most posts score - but then again is it really fair to add hundreds, if not thousands of posts that read "This thread has been moved to X,Y,Z..." that are automatically generated and don't actually contain any genuine post for the person they are attributed to??)  

[LFC_Bitcoin]

Vod? Lfc? Pharmacist ?  All irrelevant to crypto in every conceivable way. No reasonable claim to any recognition except being scammer supporters.

Three absolute legends of bitcointalk, early adopters, adored by their peers on the forum. Bow down to our superiority.

Our names will go down in history as the absolute titans we are

[qwk]

Do you have any suggestions for improving this score?

Current list of 500:

Code:

8	qwk DT2	939.333	Donator	6/15/2011 3:01:04 PM	3 hours	8 minutes

Not really a suggestion, but just the fact that I personally am in 8th position is an indicator of something "wrong" about the wording "most recognized".
I am, I dare say, probably "most recognized" in my specific local community.
I am most likely not known to a helluva lot of the international community.

I won't raise any objections to this lunacy, because I like the way "8th most recognized" sounds. I do like the way it sounds... I mean, I like it a lot.

I know what they're doing. I know exactly what they're doing. They just keep repeating "go faster than any man in the history of space travel", like that's a good thing. Like it'll distract me from how insane their plan is. Yeah, I get to go faster than any man in the history of space travel, because you're launching me in a convertible. Actually it's worse than that, because I won't even be able to control the thing. And by the way, physicists, when describing things like acceleration do not use the word "fast". So they're only doing that in the hopes that I won't raise any objections to this lunacy, because I like the way "fastest man in the history of space travel" sounds. I do like the way it sounds... I mean, I like it a lot. [pauses] I'm not gonna tell them that.

[eddie13]

I’d like to see most times a users posts have been quoted and most times the username has been mentioned (include abbreviations such as TS, TP, SM, CH)..

I also think negative trusts should count just as much as positives..

Maybe not total merits, but the amount of unique users merit has come from..

[The Sceptical Chymist]

<snip>Pharmacist ?  All irrelevant to crypto in every conceivable way.

I wouldn't argue that for myself, but I never claimed to be a big shot in the crypto world.  I'm not.  I'm just one member out of millions on this forum and I'm no expert in crypto.  What's your point?  I haven't even looked at the BPIP rankings in a long time [Edit: since last time I posted in this thread, which was in November.  Guess it wasn't that long ago.], so I don't know how "recognized" I am, but if I'm a somewhat recognized member it's only on this forum and not in the world of bitcoin in general.  

No reasonable claim to any recognition except being scammer supporters.

I don't support scammers and I don't think I'm recognized for that.

I also think negative trusts should count just as much as positives..

Nah.  Take a look at my trust page (or Vod's or any DT member who's busted a lot of scammers) and you'll see tons of negative retaliatory feedback that's untrue.  Hell, I've got a feedback in there somewhere that says I abuse animals--and that's what you get when you have a trust system that's completely unregulated.

[OgNasty]

Maybe the Largest Merit Circle can count for Recognition too

We all know why this won’t happen. It would be very damaging to someone’s ego who is no longer a merit source and wouldn’t be able to manipulate the metric. Otherwise, a good idea to improve the rating. Adding a length of time factor to the trust score calculation would also be a beneficial improvement.

[Vod]

Didn't I read somewhere or other a while ago that someone was contemplating adding the merit circle score into the mix - instead of taking three scores by adding in the merit circle score they would have four scores to give a more even spread...

The only ones that matter are suchmoon and ibminer.   When I designed BPIP, I built it on the three pillars that matr most - Merit, Activity, Trust.

Adding the merit circle in will wipe out recognition of people that used the system as intended - to reward good posts, not reward unique users.

I am currently the most recognized member, and have been for two years straight.  But I understand the ranking is meant to be a temporal one, so I'm going to stop climbing and enjoy the long slide down.