Topic: [BPIP] Bitcointalk Public Information Project [Back in Action] - page 29. (Read 19575 times)

Is this a bug from BPIP or the forum? or I am missing something?


Source: BPIP

This user woke up two times in 24 hours.

It's more DT1 exclusion than inclusion as well. I mean DT1 inclusion < DT1 exclusion.
When theymos compiled the DT1 for this month, all of these users had DT1 inclusion > DT1 exclusion but after the compilation some users who trusted/distrusted them has changed their minds and perhaps new DT1 came and excluded also which eventually made more DT1 exclusion then DT1 inclusion they had.

I think it makes sense :-P

My guess is they don't have any DT1-inclusions, so they're not on DT2 at all. Something similar to my previous suggestion not to show those, as they're "irrelevant" to DefaultTrust.

I'm having trouble taking a screen shot at the moment.  This is just a question about the dt1 page.  I've noticed a couple of users don't show up as DT1 or DT2, is this a thing, or is it a glitch?


Each one of these instances I've noticed it's the end of the line where (for whatever reason) there is not DT1/DT2 logo.

Nothing's broken as far as I can see but I'll take a deeper look. I have some doubts about the way we determine duplicates in modlog (unfortunately there are no timestamps) so maybe there is something going on there.

User Teltabit was Nuked last month:
This doesn't show up on https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Teltabit though. Is something broken?

Congratulations on (soon to be) making the top ten - For those of us further down the food chain I estimate I will edge closer to the top 100 by years' end as long as I post once per fortnight. (and being somewhere in the top 200-300 posters around the same time too)

A rare event is happening soon...

There will be a change in the Activity rank on BPIP - at the next activity update I will move up one spot due to an inactive member. 

Elwar and gmaxwell will be next.   There are no more inactive members ahead of us though. 

I think I have created a new word mixing Portuguese and English lol.
Just made a correction

That's a good point even though I have no idea what "contabilize" means

At the very least we should try to make the wording consistent between Bitcointalk and BPIP.


I got it unstuck but it might take a few hours to catch up.
 

I agree, it is for fun, it doesn't make me or anyone less important, its free, etc...

I am just trying to contribute, and I know ibminer, Vod, and everyone else who is involved in this project is very perfectionist. Ofc it is their decision, just trying to show another point of view, which could impact their decision.

Not sure why this profile hasn't been parsed yet, I'll try looking myself throughout the day today but might have to check in with suchmoon when he has some time to look into this as well.. at this point, he's more versed with the main parsing jobs code than I am.

There is already a list with those who have EARNED merit the most : https://bpip.org/report.aspx?r=earnedmerit
The stats are already there, what is going to be on the main page is not that important, at least for me if I still have access to it.

According to the BPIP badges, yeah I dropped from 20th to 50th place but those are just stats, the badges does not make you more or less important, it's just for fun. Besides this is an free-will\self-funded project, so I do respect all the work, time and money invested in it and if those guys decided to put up the top Merited users the way they are now, it's their decision, I'm thankful I can do what I do using their data.

---

Found this user : https://bpip.org/?notindatabase--2780099
 Why so? Registered 13 or March and has 6 porst already. Seems he escaped the BPIP as well (reading his posts )

Hello,

I see there is a discussion and the calculation of merited user changed, to consider the airdropped merit in the "merited" ranking.

I agree with  this statement


But there is something wrong in my opinion.

If you go to the page https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;stats=topusersat you will see " Top-merited users, all-time"

Theymos is not considering airdropped merit as "merited".

If you scroll down the list, all airdropped merit is just ignored in the "Top-merited users" official forum stats.


However, when we go to BPIP website there are users with 0 earned merit, but they are counted as "merited".
In the official forum "top-merited" stats, I am about 40th top merited users, but in BPIP I am 140. It makes a huge difference from official stats and third party BPIP stats.

TL/DR: Airdropped merit were not "merited", even in official bitcointalk statistics. in my opinion, there should be other name or other way to contabilize consider it in BPIP statistics.

IB put question marks in - just hover over them.

That IS the point. You say it's more objective because theymos did grand these merits. You are taking it out of context. Context being you offering a ranking, and the forum not doing it. So no, it is not objective




I can be very ... dense. However no I keep using the tool, but still disappointed on your judgement. Hopefully it will be the only topic where I don't share your opinion




It would make it easier to actually follow on the merit evolution vs others with the same baseline, without having to use 3-4 clicks to do it, or even manually go to "earnedmerits". So yes, it would help.

Can I ask what metric the recognition calculation uses?

Now I have passed Lauda again - but I looked at the profile and I am 976.333 while Lauda is 976.000

Maybe you guys could add a hover there with the less significant digits?

All good by me. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

The forum doesn't really provide any ranking at all the way BPIP does... not sure I get your point?

Surely your "loved" isn't in the past tense simply because of the way "most merited" on the front page is being calculated?.. that would seem a little dense... how were you using it as a tool? When did we lose your love??

theymos could have just given sMerit to all of the accounts. And I assume could have not displayed initial merit at all, but still allowed it to count in the rank of a profile. Regardless, I believe those that put in many, many years of posts, time, and activity.. should deserve some merit credit for it.

I still think it's an objective and balanced approach for the front page.

Would it make you any happier if there were a badge for earned merit on the profile page?

---

---

Just post more! lol  .. I've been messing with some of the fun stuff (BPIP cards/themes for extension) in the little spare time I've had recently. There are higher priority things to do on the coding side, but I find *slightly* more enjoyment in the design work.. which I need to try and get myself back into a good place mentally.

DT reports are using dense_rank but others are just counting up, to try and match front page.

The big "R"!

---

---

It was actually like this in the past, but it didn't make sense (or match) with the current layout of the main page and how it displays ranks (via the shared rank table). Would need to do some serious reconstruction on the front page if we wanted to do it this way.

There are many instances of profiles having the same rank on the various lists.  If I can make a suggestion for the group to consider - say three people hold the rank of 21 e.g. instead of giving the next user the rank of 22, the next user is actually rank of 24:

Name      Score      Rank

Alice      1234      20
Bob      1202      21
Hank      1202      21
Sue      1202      21
Fred      1138      24

I think various sports such as the Olympics use that style of ranking.

Thanks for reading.

p.s.   I don't think Lauda is a bitch.