Topic: [BPIP] Bitcointalk Public Information Project [Back in Action] - page 27. (Read 19631 times)

You guys are talking about :
https://blog.jooq.org/2013/10/09/sql-trick-row_number-is-to-select-what-dense_rank-is-to-select-distinct/

RANK will duplicate numbers (if two people have the same score, they have the same rank).  I don't like that, because a secondary sort would rank one higher than the other.

DENSE_RANK is more realistic.  You cannot have two people in the tenth spot in a line up.   :/

Agreed.

Thanks for your support and feedback on this topic, I made mention a few posts back that there may be a decimal place that isn't being shown - I also wondered if perhaps the score/rank is being rounded up/down ??  It would go a long way to clarifying the ranks being equal but not equal.

To jump back on this, I second that it could be useful to see this type of ranking implemented ( I know that the TODO list is huge).
Especially on the DT trust strong list
https://bpip.org/report.aspx?r=dtstrength
It appears that the last two members are  ranked 27.
However,  there are 91 people with a better trust "value" than them. 

Number of DT1 = 93
The last two (teeGUMES and Rmcdermott927) should be ranked 92 ex-quo

Nonetheless,
BPIP is a great tool.

Yes, that's true, I hadn't thought about the DT elections - it's also occurred to me just now that your scores might have a decimal place portion of the score that is not shown, hence a dozen people can appear to have the same score, but are ranked differently together with my score improving as the trust feedback positives have occurred in the last 12 months.

Would that be right?

DT1 "election" at the beginning of May could have caused some trust scores to change. If someone with a score >= 70 dropped below 70 it could have helped you move up those 11 positions between April 25 and May 13.

No not one place - thirteen positions...  I've shrunk the image so you can see the rest of the text which you've quoted.

This is a dynamic score. Someone like Phinnaeus Gage above you, got lately a lot of negative feedback so his trust score dropped and you went one position up. Simple.
If you have an archive of the most trusted you can compare and find who went down.

I think that a personal color scheme of earned merit in each BPIP profile can be useful, because it would allow to see instantly in which sections users got the most amount of merit (Bitcoin, Economy, Altcoins, Local, Other, Deleted).

For example, this is what the Bitcointalk global distribution of ~673.000 merit looks like in color diagram.




And this is the color chart of earned merit for Satoshi Nakamoto



All data from 24.01.2018 to 22.05.2020 and obtained from the Merit Dashboard.

Hi Guys, just a quick question:

What's causing my "Most Trusted" rank to slowly climb, even thought my actual score hasn't changed?



I'm sharing a value of "70" with many others, yet I seem to be climbing to the top of these other "70's" - On the 25th of April, my score was 70 and the rank was 244 (see this link).  And on the 13^th of May it was 70/233

Thanks.

Suchmoon & ibminer, have you ever considered translating BPIP in other languages? If you think this is feasible, let me know. I can help you with the translation in Romanian.

Now that you made it available in txt format - it might be feasible. I can't give you an ETA though, so far the list of TODOs is only getting longer.

Just bringing this suggestion here:
Any chance you can add old seclog data to BPIP? I made a very long list, but it's much more convenient if you can add it to BPIP. It's still incomplete, but includes older data than you have now.

Right now, on the most recognized page, the top seven profile are showing "Just Now..." as their last parsed.   You've obviously improved the parsing algorithm. 

Respect is a two way street.

I've actually planned on doing a badge on the profile page already after some of the posts from asche earlier in the thread, assuming suchmoon doesn't have any issues with it. I don't think it this would mean the main page has to change, we already have a 'most posts' badge on the profile page which isn't on the main page... we're not calling it MATRP, so I don't think we'd have to alter the 'MATR', just might end up making the badge area of the profile page a little more cluttered.

We could also find a way to distinguish the MATR badges on the profile page as well with a different style badge, and maybe have a sort of secondary badge for other statistics that are not part of the main page, like Most Posts and Most Earned Merit.. (just thinking out loud)

As for the main page, the wording at least will be cleared up in the next release, actually already has on the development site... there are some smaller things, and some larger things, in the works.

All we need is just a little patience. 

As for the rest of these posts, I'm only getting clips here and there (in quotes) of what Timelord2067 is saying these days and I'm not reading through his nonsense anymore.

I unfortunately had to add a 2nd entry to my ignore list this past week. Only 2 users to ever make the ignore list since 2013.. I clearly don't like ignoring people, but this dude is consistently repeating shit already addressed and seems to just be mainly trying to start trouble, and I don't have time for that.
The things, he says, his purple prose just give him away, the things, he says... he's unbelievable. 

If anyone I respect wants to decipher his lunacy and needs me to address anything specific, which hasn't already been addressed, please let me know.

TAMER?

Just a suggestion (because you asked) had you addressed logfiles then I would have understood your intention.

And I'm correcting and supplementing your answer. I hope that's ok.

logfiles was the one asking the questions, I was answering their enquiries.


I must have nodded off when that poll was announced here... It was announced here - yes?


That shit was started in this thread because I made a suggestion - *just* a suggestion.  I'm the one with the mill-stone around their neck yet I'm the one who's ignoring both of you and have moved on.  Can you?

Ownership of the site changed in December. You can see that in the OP of this thread. There was a discrepancy between badges, front page rank tables, reports, and profile pages, which we attempted to fix the best we could.


And they're titled differently and there is a question mark icon that you can hover on and you'll get an explanation and there are links to corresponding reports. I don't see how we can make this any clearer.

The goal was to make MATR (between badges, front page, and profile page) consistent and that's how it is now. The only question is whether M in MATR should be earned or total merit. ibminer had a poll about airdropped merit. Results were not overwhelming either way so I believe it's fine to leave it as is for now. If we find a way to fit another badge in and call it MEATR... MEART... MATER... - we'll consider it.


Please leave this shit out of this thread.