Survey regarding our Bitcoin Blockexplorer topic

[1miau]

After a few suggestions of Bitcointalk members in our topic "List of useful Bitcoin block explorers" here in "Beginners & Help", how to improve our table, we are going to hold a survey, where everyone can vote.
We'll change our table accordingly because we want to honor valuable input from Bitcointalk members.


He are all questions:


Question 1

Blockchair is curently rated at 8/10 points in our table. Because Blockchair is a very good explorer, there have been suggestions to increase Blockchair's rating.
Should it be increased or is 8/10 an appropriate rating?  
At how much points Blockchair should be rated?

- 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)


Question 2

Because our comment section in our table is very large (and not really useful), some members suggested to remove the section from our table.

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


Question 3

In addition to question 2, we could instead dislay comments by using SFR10's hover format visualization. It's helpful but it won't display on Bitcointalk's mobile version.
You'll find his suggestion here.

It would look like that:

• 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

Should we implement such a feature?

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


Plz, vote @everyone.  
We are very happy to receive your votes.
You can also leave a comment here or garner support for one of the options.  

[1714471598]

1714471598

[1714471598]

1714471598

[1714471598]

1714471598

[1714471598]

1714471598

[GazetaBitcoin]

Thank you, 1miau, for keeping your topic updated and in good shape! Thank you as well for this survey! I think it will help improving the overall aspect of the table containing all block explorers.

I, for one, gave the maximum mark to Blockchair, considering it best one available at the moment. Indeed, it may be improved, yet it's best we have In case another explorer will contain more features than Blockchair I will lower its mark and give maximum mark to this new explorer.

Regarding the other two questions, I suggest to voters to read them well and choose their votes in a non-contradictory manner: practically, those voting for removing "Comments" section should not vote with "No" at third question and those voting for keeping "Comments" section should not vote with "Yes" at third question.

Practically, if "Comments" column is removed, these comments will be shown by hovering the mouse pointer over data from "Usefulness" column. Therefore, removing "Comments" column goes with using "hover" format, while keeping "Comments" column goes with not using "hover" format.

I just wanted to make sure that all voters understand what they will be voting, as probably not all of them followed the discussion from the other thread.

[Stalker22]

I just wanted to make sure that all voters understand what they will be voting, as probably not all of them followed the discussion from the other thread.

It seems that I am one of those voters. I voted for keeping "Comments" section and with "Yes" at third question because I would like to see them using "hover" format. 

Regarding the first question, what does a block explorer need to get a perfect score of 10/10? If we consider that Blockchair is currently the best option available, I might give it a 9/10 because, let's face it, nothing is perfect, but it is the closest to it.

[1miau]

Thank you, 1miau, for keeping your topic updated and in good shape! Thank you as well for this survey! I think it will help improving the overall aspect of the table containing all block explorers.

I hope so and I believe it will improve our table overally.  

Regarding the other two questions, I suggest to voters to read them well and choose their votes in a non-contradictory manner: practically, those voting for removing "Comments" section should not vote with "No" at third question and those voting for keeping "Comments" section should not vote with "Yes" at third question.

Yes, it's recommended to consider our votes properly but whatever outcome will be voted, we can proceed.
There's a only a small possibility how we can end up having a messy outcome, for example if the following options will win:

- Remove "comments" column from our table - No
AND
- Include comments in "hover format" - Yes

But I don't expect it to happen.
Even if it does, we could arrange a runoff vote.  

I just wanted to make sure that all voters understand what they will be voting, as probably not all of them followed the discussion from the other thread.

It seems that I am one of those voters. I voted for keeping "Comments" section and with "Yes" at third question because I would like to see them using "hover" format.  

Many thanks for your vote!
In case we'll get the outcome from above, we'll do a runoff vote if comments should be added as a column (since remove as a column- NO) has won or if comments should be included as hover format.

Regarding the first question, what does a block explorer need to get a perfect score of 10/10? If we consider that Blockchair is currently the best option available, I might give it a 9/10 because, let's face it, nothing is perfect, but it is the closest to it.

It's a really difficult question and that's also why this column contains (subjective rating  ) because it's up to everyone to rate it who suggested a certain Block explorer.
In general, it's really difficult to determine which rating is 100% justified because some of us might like Blockexplorer 1, and some of us might go for Blockexplorer 2 instead.

[GazetaBitcoin]

There's a only a small possibility how we can end up having a messy outcome, for example if the following options will win [...]

But I don't expect it to happen.

Guess what? We already have one contradictory vote, lol. Of course, not all read the posts nor try to understand the logic and jump directly to posting

It seems that I am one of those voters. I voted for keeping "Comments" section and with "Yes" at third question because I would like to see them using "hover" format. 

It seems you did not understand exactly what you are voting for. And, as a consequence, your vote is contradictory. You can't have "Comments" column kept together with using "hover" format. It's either one or the other. Perhaps, seeing how "hovering" format looks like will help you understand the situation better:

• 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

The above format was proposed by SFR10. In this format "Comments" column is gone, yet comments are not gone at all. Comments are available by hovering mouse pointer over data from "Usefulness" column. This solution is elegant, as "hover" format is an exotic feature of BBCode. However, the disadvantage is that it's not useful on mobiles.

The other option is to keep "Comments" section as it is right now and not use any "hover".

For this reason, you can't vote to keep "Comments" column and "hover" format; nor to eliminate "Comments" and not use "hover" format.


1miau, for avoiding contradictory votes in the future (or, at least, for trying to limiting them as much as possible), perhaps it would be a good idea to add in OP of this survey the table from SFR10? At least, users would see with their eyes the possible change of the table, since there are low chances for having everybody reading all posts made inside this thread or inside the other one...

[1miau]

You can't have "Comments" column kept together with using "hover" format. It's either one or the other. Perhaps, seeing how "hovering" format looks like will help you understand the situation better:

Well, we still can keep the comment column and also add hover format but of course, it wouldn't make sense at all and be in opposition to our overal goal to save space to add PrivacyG's suggestion, too.
If our survey will have outcomes "remove comment section - NO" and "add hover format - YES", we'll simply do a runoff election to solve any contradictions. 
Right now, 5 people have voted. 

1miau, for avoiding contradictory votes in the future (or, at least, for trying to limiting them as much as possible), perhaps it would be a good idea to add in OP of this survey the table from SFR10? At least, users would see with their eyes the possible change of the table, since there are low chances for having everybody reading all posts made inside this thread or inside the other one...

Done, I've added SFR10's quote in my OP.
Hopefully, people will check it before voting. 

[jeraldskie11]

Question 1 — Although Blockchair is a very good explorer in my opinion, I will only give it a 9 out of 10, as there may be much better explorers out there.

Question 2 — Because our comment section in our table is very large (and not really useful)

I myself would want to keep the comments column because it continues to be helpful, especially for newbies. So I have to say NO.

Question 3 — It's helpful but it won't display on Bitcointalk's mobile version.

Although having a hover format is incredibly helpful, but because most people use mobile devices, it's a NO for me.

[LeGaulois]

Basically the topic you mention is not fully displaying because it's too large (to me at least, zoom 125%).
Thinking about it, dates in the Bech32 and SegWit columns could be removed (because not so usefull).
Same goes for the "rated by" column.

But that's just an opinion

However, I would say

Question 1:
It depends on what criteria you're giving a note. If you respect your criteria there is no need to change a note since you've already given what looked fair to you.
I would say  8/10 is an appropriate rating.
10/10 means the perfection, nobody and nothing is perfect

Question 2
 Remove "comments" column from our table - Yes
I didn't even know there is a "comments" section, since it's too large as I said.

Question 3
Why not if you think the information is necessary
Include comments in "hover format" - Yes

[Sarah Azhari]

there are quite a few things that me confusing about explorer especially blockchair. where if we used mixer, they put our privacy on the middle (3) indicator.

but if I don't use mixer, there isn't warning, my privacy indicator in high or healty level indicators.

So, What are the factors to determine that level?

[UchihaSarada]

Could you include columns for
- Privacy score
- Lightning network stats/ charts
- Information about mining pools, hashrate distributions.

[hugeblack]

Why do we need to re-adjust the rating when Blockchair already has the highest rating? I think it is an unjustified bias, as long as you do not host the explorer yourself, the rating will still be achieved less than 10. Generally they are the best.

Personally, I prefer to focus on aspects of privacy and UI, as it is the most important information for users, with the addition of a link to user experiences, which are new topics for each explorer through which each individual leaves his personal experience.

[decodx]

Question 1:
Rating from Blockchair Bitcoin Block Explorer 9 points
My only complaint about the Blockchair block explorer is the excessive amount of sponsored content and advertisements.

Question 2:
Remove "comments" column from our table - Yes
I'm having trouble seeing the "comments" column on my laptop. Even when I zoom out to 80%, all I can see are the first few words.

Question 3:
Include comments in "hover format" - Yes

[1miau]

Basically the topic you mention is not fully displaying because it's too large (to me at least, zoom 125%).

That's why we try to save some space. 

Thinking about it, dates in the Bech32 and SegWit columns could be removed (because not so usefull).

Good idea, mabye we can do this next in case we need more space.

So, What are the factors to determine that level?

Blockchair has a detailed explanation for it but I don't know how accurate their privacy evaluation tool really is.
In addition, it depends on what mixer you've used.

Could you include columns for
- Privacy score
- Lightning network stats/ charts
- Information about mining pools, hashrate distributions.

Privacy scaore would be interesting but as most Blockexplorers don't offer it, most of the column might be "No". Maybe we can add it in the comments?
Lightning network stats might also have very little support among block exporers. I would like to recommend my Bitcoin statistics list instead, where many Lightning statistics are listed: List of interesting Bitcoin statistics. Information about mining pools, hashrate distributions are listed in my statistics topic as well. 

Why do we need to re-adjust the rating when Blockchair already has the highest rating?

Because some members brought it up to re-evaluate the rating and we decided to ask the community.
I don't know if there's support to increase Blockchair's rating, so I've cretaed a survey. 

Personally, I prefer to focus on aspects of privacy and UI, as it is the most important information for users, with the addition of a link to user experiences, which are new topics for each explorer through which each individual leaves his personal experience.

Good idea, maybe people suggesting a new Blockexplorer could write a few more lines to describe why they've nominated it.


Many thanks everyone for your votes so far. 

[Stalker22]

It seems you did not understand exactly what you are voting for. And, as a consequence, your vote is contradictory. You can't have "Comments" column kept together with using "hover" format. It's either one or the other.

I don't see why we couldn't have a "Comments" column along with a hover box. To use your example, I had something like this in mind when I voted:

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

Courtesy of SFR10

This way, I can see the comments column and read the comment in its entirety when I hover.

The above format was proposed by SFR10. In this format "Comments" column is gone, yet comments are not gone at all. Comments are available by hovering mouse pointer over data from "Usefulness" column. This solution is elegant, as "hover" format is an exotic feature of BBCode. However, the disadvantage is that it's not useful on mobiles.

To be honest, I didn't read all the comments in the previous thread before I voted, so I didn't have all the info. In my opinion, combining the "Usefulness" and "Comments" columns into one does not seem logical.

The other option is to keep "Comments" section as it is right now and not use any "hover".

Right. And now you have a third option to consider. (Or should I have posted this in other thread?)


BTW, @1miau, why not rename the "Usefulness (subjective rating)" column to "Rating (subjective)"?

[1miau]

It seems you did not understand exactly what you are voting for. And, as a consequence, your vote is contradictory. You can't have "Comments" column kept together with using "hover" format. It's either one or the other.

I don't see why we couldn't have a "Comments" column along with a hover box.

Sure, it's a possible option.
Depending on the outcome, we'll set up a new survey to have a runoff vote if we should include a comment column and / or a hover feature.
But I don't believe it's very useful to have a separate comment column and a hover feature.
However, decision is up to Bitcointalk members. 

To use your example, I had something like this in mind when I voted:

...

This way, I can see the comments column and read the comment in its entirety when I hover.

That's also an option and I'll include it in a possible runoff survey.

BTW, @1miau, why not rename the "Usefulness (subjective rating)" column to "Rating (subjective)"?

Interesting suggestion and I'm in favor of it.
When re-arranging my table, I'll consider it. 

[GazetaBitcoin]

I don't see why we couldn't have a "Comments" column along with a hover box. To use your example, I had something like this in mind when I voted:

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

Courtesy of SFR10

This way, I can see the comments column and read the comment in its entirety when I hover. [...]

And now you have a third option to consider.

Oh, I finally understood now what you were saying. My bad, I thought you did not know the background of the debate... this is why I thought that you accidentally voted like that. Indeed, we did not think about this new possibility -- to have "hover" format on the data from "Comments" column... The idea was the following:

- to make the table a bit smaller, thus fitting the screen well: and for that it was suggested to remove the "Comments" column and insert the comments using "hover" format on the data from "Usefulness" column
- to keep the table as it is (meaning to keep "Comments" column), since 1miau managed to trim it somehow thus it fits well the screen now (after some implementations it did not fit properly the screen).

I don't know why we would keep the "Comments" column and write there just "#" symbols which can be hovered... But it's just my thought, anyway.

Sure, it's a possible option.
Depending on the outcome, we'll set up a new survey to have a runoff vote if we should include a comment column and / or a hover feature.
But I don't believe it's very useful to have a separate comment column and a hover feature.
However, decision is up to Bitcointalk members. 

Okay

BTW, @1miau, why not rename the "Usefulness (subjective rating)" column to "Rating (subjective)"?

Interesting suggestion and I'm in favor of it.
When re-arranging my table, I'll consider it. 

I also support that! 


I was thinking that, maybe, for users to have even a more clear view about the purpose of this survey -- would it be better if we also add the pros and cons (debated in the other topic) to OP? Thus users would understand better the uses (and lack of uses) of "hover" format and, as a plus, maybe some will take a look and the table from the other topic and see how it fits their screens now...?

[1miau]

I was thinking that, maybe, for users to have even a more clear view about the purpose of this survey -- would it be better if we also add the pros and cons (debated in the other topic) to OP? Thus users would understand better the uses (and lack of uses) of "hover" format and, as a plus, maybe some will take a look and the table from the other topic and see how it fits their screens now...?

I have linked in my OP, at least for question 1 and question 3, who brought up the suggestion (Gazeta Bitcoin for question 1 and SFR10 for question 3) and voters can follow the link to read the discussion but question 2 was simply a result of our discussion in general.
Maybe you have an idea, which reply I could link in question 2 but I beleive when reading the 2 linked suggestions in question 1 and question 3, it should be a good explanation already. 

[SFR10]

Question 1

I'd keep it at 8... I do know it has a lot of useful features, but the fact that they have no issues partnering with unreputable platforms ^{[most likely in exchange for a certain amount of money (e.g. "here's one" and it's not the only one)]} makes them "unworthy" of a higher rating.

Question 2

I voted for its removal.

Question 3

With regard to the hover box not appearing on mobile devices, we can go a step further to add an image link ^{[to each of the ratings]} that contains the comment for each of the block explorers.

[PrivacyG]

Agreed with SFR10.  Thought it may be more logical to rise Blockchair score to 10 since there is no 10 out of 10 scored Block Explorer.  But now that I think about it, it makes more sense to keep it on a lower level.

There is a single thing I want to know.  This will make me decide if it deserves a 8 or a 9.  Blockchair offers this Privacy level for TXID's.  Block Explorers generally pick up and store a lot of information.  Is Blockchair's offered Privacy level for TXID's more Privacy intruding or can you generate the same scoring based on information picked up by any other Block Explorer?

-
Regards,
PrivacyG

[1miau]

Question 3

With regard to the hover box not appearing on mobile devices, we can go a step further to add an image link ^{[to each of the ratings]} that contains the comment for each of the block explorers.

To do so, we would need to an additional column, where we could link that picture (one column for our hover feature, one column for our picure link).
Maybe we can just add a picture link of a screenshot from all comments (our current comments section / our current table) below and people can simply view our table on that external picture (imgur), how it is right now.

Blockchair offers this Privacy level for TXID's.  Block Explorers generally pick up and store a lot of information.  Is Blockchair's offered Privacy level for TXID's more Privacy intruding or can you generate the same scoring based on information picked up by any other Block Explorer?

Do you mean Blockchair's individual tx privacy score feature as posted here by Sarah Azhari and what Blockchair describes here?
I'm not a coder, so I don't know how exactly a certain Blockexplorer works and it might not make a difference because all Blockexplorers will have the same "Access" to any tx, so it doesn't matter much what's displayed there; it matters more if a certain Blockexplorer stores any data related to people visiting their site and entering tx (in general a Blockexplorer has access to any tx, no matter if it's entered or not).
It might be a good question for our Services (or better Technical Discussion board) to get a qualified answer because it's a very specific one.