Topic: [BPIP] Bitcointalk Public Information Project [Back in Action] - page 11. (Read 21754 times)

On the forum, the Flag shows Expired. Since it was inactive already, nothing else changes. If it would have been Active before it expired, the change would have been more noticeable.

I also thought it is so -- meaning that the "3 more supporting users than opposing users" should be only considered if they are DT users yet your case made me wonder if it really is so. As you see, theymos' sentence does not state anywhere anything about a condition for the users to be part of DT. If it is so -- and the supporting users have to be part of DT -- then theymos' definition should be changed. On the other side though, why is this the only flag which appears as expired and not as having insufficient support? It may also be the only one which has 3 more supporting users than opposing users from all the other type 2 or type 3 flags from your profile (again, I did not count the supporting / opposing users of the other flags but, since my curiosity is increasing I think I'll do it soon ). If it actually is so, then the definition is correct and the number of users is the only one which counts, no matter if they are DT or not.

If you have some time, you can do this test and count the opposing / supporting users of your flags which have insufficient support and see if there is any which has 3 more supporting users than opposing users. If there is at least one more which has 3 more supporting users than opposing users then indeed theymos' definition refers to DT users and it should be updated, as this particular flag has 3 more supporting users than those opposing it yet it was never valid and it is also not marked as expired now. But if there is none having 3 more supporting users than opposing users then it means the users do not have to be part of DT. Does this make sense?

What I meant was that, if those flags were active at some point then they became inactive you could see this difference regarding their change of status.


From what I understand, the situation is the following:


Reading the above sentence makes me believe that the respective flag was valid (therefore active) at some point, since it has 3 more supporting users than opposing users and now it's considered as expired becuase it's been more than 3 years since it was created.

It would be interesting to count the number of those opposing and supporting the other flags, which are marked with insufficient support now. Normally, none of them should have 3 more supporting users than opposing users. But if there is any which does not respect this condition then maybe something was changed in the flag system. I wanted to count the numbers of those opposing and supporting each flag with insufficient support but I did not have enough time to do it...

There is a difference and the difference is the following:

- first of all, you can only see that you have inactive flags at your profile (so no active ones are shown, if all your flags are expired or have insufficient support)



- second difference is that, although expired flags can be suppported or opposed, they are clearly emphasized at your profile as being inactive



As a consequence, they do not count anymore.

It means the flag expired -- as in it's not valid anymore. Each type of flag has a determined lifespan. According to theymos, type 1 never expires, type 2 expires after 3 years and type 3 after 10 years. That flag was a type 2 flag, created on Feb 13th, 2020, thus it expired on Feb 13th, 2023, three years after it was created. However, it may be recreated by its author.



(Although I did not find also a quote from theymos about Newbie flags, I take LoyceV's statement for granted.)

Thanks, it works as intended now. margon3 for example links to the last change in the Trust list back in 2020.

I hope you're not updating 16,000 database entries every hour, the file only changes once a week

So yes the thought has come up for a paywall of some sort which prevents the instant generation, and should hopefully avoid over exhausting resources, and I think it might be the easiest method... but it does fall into something that would involve some devoted development time. As much as I want to see it running personally, whenever I do get time to devote to BPIP code, in good conscience I try to aim at the existing TODO list which has its own priorities.. the generator is part of the list, but many other things would be seen as a higher priority.


Thank you.   I'll have to post some updated pictures at some point.

As it stands now, the generator pulls whatever stats exist on BPIP at the time of generating the image, currently there would be ~4-6 second gap of time between each card if it were generating a bulk set of cards back-to-back, within a particular year. There are not really any options to set a time range for it though. Historical ranks/scores aren't really kept in the DB, some ranks/scores could probably be re-calculated based on a date/time filter of posts & merit, but something like 'most trusted' (which also effects most recognized) couldn't be recalculated for a specific period of time without a historical set of data for feedback, which is not stored. But even without that option, it should be a close enough gap of time between cards that yearly sets would be possible and still make sense.


I wasn't trying to be secret about it  .. just haven't felt the need to post any updates. Nobody has really inquired about them, and I wanted to ultimately show a printed version I was happy with.
I'm happier now with some of the stuff I've printed this year but I've still been tweaking little things, again, as time permits.



I guess the insinuation comment comes from the expectations I have put on myself, as I'd have expected myself to have done this back in 2020, it's not a huge amount of code we're talking about here so I'm not sure if I completely missed it or what, I'm not seeing it in the work list items where we generally put every suggestion/idea/bug/etc., so I had more questions then answers for myself. Nonetheless, the site is now reading the latesttrustlist.txt and SM has gotten it setup on the server to download the .txt automatically every hour, so the older and newer trust lists should be appearing on profile pages now moving forward.

FWIW: I didn't mean to insinuate anything Just trying to improve BPIP so I don't have to build my own Search system

Cool, I appreciate it

Hey ibminer, thanks for your reply! I fully understand the reasons behind your decision. I understand why you kept working on your project and also why free time is not your friend. What can I say, I have same situation For 1.5 years I had two full time jobs. And, of course, family duties, a baby, other chores, all which don't leave too much free time... This is life!

However, I am glad to hear that you kept secretly ( ) working on your project. I remember reading Welsh's topic back then, while I was active here for just a month (indeed, my profile was made in 2017 but I only became active in late October 2019). And I remember I was so hungry to read everything I could on the forum. By pure chance I found Welsh's topic too and I found the idea to be very appealing. However, time passed and, as I kept reading every topic which came at hand, I was just like a dry sponge absorbing information; in the end I actually forgot about that topic's existence.

Yet you brought it back to my memory! Seeing that you kept working on this matter makes me hope that at some point in time your cards will come to fruition. And the fact that you kept working is what makes to be a small chance for this to happen. What can I say? I will encourage you to keep working, when you have some free time and who knows, maybe after some years something nice will happen 

---

To say the least, now you have a better picture of our favored DT member clown Have you seen also what feedback he left on my profile? I asked him in many occasions to make the slightest proof for his dumb allegations yet he never replied to me, lol

If rate limiting is a problem (not sure if I fully understand the issue at hand, though) - have you considered small Lightning payments for access? As in: very cheap for occasional usage, but too expensive to be able to spam the system?

I think they look super cool! I'd honestly like to own the physical cards of my favorite Bitcointalk members.. Only issue is that the stats change all the time, no? Would there be certain 'snapshots' in time at which a full set of the whole forum is made (e.g. 1/1/2023 edition, 1/1/2024 edition etc.)? Otherwise it is unfair to compare them (e.g. 2023 LoyceV vs. 2020 o_e_l_e_o).

I've spent too much time on it to just stop, not just the generator itself, but the overall designs and printing of them. It's become a slight obsession of mine.

I'm not saying it is completely off the table, the generator could still likely be used in some capacity, and I'm hoping it will be there one day. But I'm not sure it can be pulled off easily on a site like BPIP the way we had originally intended it. The only other ways I might foresee it working close to what we intended would involve much more development either with account creations/logins, or some sort of walled garden which prevents a direct instant generation of a card from any user (while avoiding a queuing system that will probably be just as abused). From a coding perspective, there are more important things to devote that type of time to.

I think the design of the cards has improved a lot. Outside of unavoidable performance issues, the generator itself has technically worked for quite some time, but I was not happy with the printed versions I ended up with. I'm happier now with them, but I've only done some DIY versions with newer designs (some using custom cores), and have been on & off working on a version without an avatar. That's been more of a personal project for me getting that stuff straight, which doesn't really involve much coding and doesn't involve as much accumulated time.

For me, design and coding require different levels of attention I end up needing to devote.. I can stop design work and pick it up a month later and only spend 10-20 minutes on it, and actually get something done.. but coding I need consistent devoted time of at least an hour to get anything productive done.. which IRL, with a [more than] full time job, family, and various other activities and events I can't mention without potentially doxing myself.. time isn't easy to come by.


Interesting links, thanks. And I'd agree with you on the trolling, mods do not.   I'm sure it's all open to the subjective interpretation of it, not excessive enough, etc. *shrug*


Not ignoring you here LoyceV, but based on what you've insinuated, I need some answers first before responding accurately. Regardless, I'll be working on getting the code done to read from the latesttrustlist.txt file as soon as I can.


I have not updated the original thread in a while, but some general info. and older samples could be found here.

What exactly are these cards all about? Now I'm intrigued..

I notice BPIP still doesn't show a link to my Trust list viewer for "new" users, like this one who has a Trust list here. Can you fix it?

I've proposed it before, but the number of new users who are missing keeps going up, so I'll suggest it again: please use latesttrustlist.txt to update all links in your database (weekly):
Make it 15 minutes to be safe

I just saw it. Perfect choice of words, congrats! I confirm it's also functional.


Oh, I am sorry, I was not aware of that.


Here I don't understand... if you kept working on it why will it never be released? I believe it will be a nice addition to the site...


Please don't mind the old perv and delusional troll as, most likely, he is out of medication again and on the loose from the mental facility where he is usually institutionalized. And, when he is out of pills, he usually starts saying imbecilities. I believe his post can be reported for trolling, as this is not allowed by forum rules:


I did not see him around for some months, while doctors held him in his straitjacket, but it seems he is back now, either at his mounting period or out of pills.

Be aware though on what you say, as he is jumpy on abusing Trust system and writing false feedbacks.

It has been updated to match the wording used in the tooltip.

I've mentioned in the past some of the issues with the card generator and resources, which is the main reason it has never been released, and at this point, will likely never be released. But I have not stopped working on it, and IMO they look great .

Nonetheless, the generation button on the profile page was inadvertently unhidden during the recent update mentioned a few posts above (when announcing the update to the "?" tooltip and menu).

I noticed the error myself within 5-7 minutes, and while re-publishing a corrected version of the site, which takes a few more minutes, I saw the thread and discovered a resentful member had exploited the error and attempted generating an image he wasn't authorized to generate, and when he couldn't get what he wanted, he apparently got mad and [stupidly] posted public pictures of his intentions to exploit the error, along with a snide comment.

Pretty lame & disappointing stuff from my perspective, and a little surprising, even from this user.. but IIWII.

Great job, ibminer! I checked the new implementation and it's there and fully functional! I am glad that my suggestion was helpful


You mean this one?



If yes, I can confirm that it also works. However, I just noticed something: the name of the section (and also of the new menu entry) is "Most posted profiles". It sounds to me like... a bit of forcing English language. Maybe this section should be named "Profiles with most posts"? Or any other way you find feasible, but make sure it won't force the language?

---

I'm not sure if this is intentional, but I can not see any card generator anymore Oo

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.  

Well, that went well (rolls eyes)

---

---

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.

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


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:


Yes, it makes sense.

---

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