Topic: [BPIP] Bitcointalk Public Information Project [Back in Action] - page 8. (Read 19631 times)

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

I guess my point was that the Most earned merit link could already be accessed through the "?" for Most Recognized. I don't know, maybe I'm confused.. it's been a long day.

I was a little confused because I thought the Most Posts report was already linked under the Most Activity's "?", but I was mistaken on that one, so that might be a place where we could add a link to the 'most posts' report, maybe under the Most Activity "?"
... but are you saying you don't consider the "?" links to be "on the home page" and/or not prominent enough?

Correct. To get a little technical, this is in the sense that we are talking about the standard sized screens and resolutions most people would be using, which is what the responsive design of the site was intended to work best with.

---

Fun related fact: The reason there is only 1 'rank' table in the larger/full screen version of the home page is because I couldn't cleanly fit the existing 4 ranking tables in the large-screen version when they each had a 'rank' column as part of each main ranking table (a long time ago). Putting 1 rank table in the middle saved the space needed to cleanly fit the 4 tables next to it, allowed longer username lengths, and I think looked better (but was ultimately harder to design..). Not to mention there are many hidden rank columns that were needed for the smaller-sized versions of the site to make it work correctly and make sense.

No, what I had in mind was to have a link somewhere on home page for the ladders of Most posts and Most earned merit. From what you said above I understood that two more columns won't fit the home page, therefore I suggested that, maybe, even two links written on the home page, redirecting to these two ladders may help.

A link could be named "Most posts" and the other one "Most earned merits".

And I suggested that they could be placed at the left, respective righ side of the "M" and the "R" from "MATR".

They would be just two links to the ladders, indeed, and not the entire ladders, but the advantage would be that these ladders could be also accessed from home page. Does this make sense? I hope I explained better now what I had in mind

No problem!

Have you seen the "?" on the column headers (mainly Most Recognized)? Clicking the "?" once will keep it open, so you can access the links involved in the formula, which takes you to the respective report page. Is this something like what you are looking for?

I understand... I did not take into account the DT shuffles. In the last example I offered my drawback from Most Recognized ladder happened after I was removed from DT1 after theymos' last shuffle of DT1 users. This may explain...

Regarding the idea to take into account that others could have jumped in activity and / or Trust -- yes, I thought about this, but I did not believe that changes would be so big to determine a decrease of almost 150 positions on a ladder, especially considering that the screenshots were taken at short time intervals one after the other. But, somehow, I think the impact of dropping from DT1 to DT2 has a big impact on this.

Thank you for your explanations!

---

Oh I see... Then what about this: maybe simply add links somewhere on top of the page to these two ladders? Maybe one at the left of "M" (the "M" from "MATR") and one at the righ of the "R"? Or at any other place you may find suitable? Would that work better?

Are you taking into account the fluctuations of 1,000 other users, based on when they were last refreshed?

More importantly, in this context, the formula for most trusted doesn't care about merit, earned or not. Plus, the 'most trusted' would definitely fluctuate each month with the DT1/2 random selection process which shuffles trusted feedback around and would change the scores.

The formula for most recognized is accounting for activity, trust, and earned merit.. just because you jumped in earned/merit doesn't mean someone else didn't jump more in activity and trust and become more "recognized"... plus, the aforementioned DT1/2 shuffle each month would effect this score also.



I definitely tried with the initial design to get more tables on there.. the only good way with the current design is to start another row of columns below the current 4.. but it creates a much larger page, more resource intensive, and it wouldn't be as easy to compare in this arrangement.

I come back on this thread with another inconsistency I encountered: I noticed that after ranking up some places on ladders of Most merit and Most earned merit, sometimes the positions you are shown on ladders of Most Recognized and Most trusted are drawn back.

I will explain below with more details:



- this is a screenshot since I was 59th user with most merits and 47th with most earned merits. Note that at this moment I was 520th most trusted and 239th most recognized.



- later on, after receiving more merits, I was 54th user with most merits and 42nd with most earned merits. Note that at this moment I was 515th most trusted and 233th most recognized. So, at this moment, my position on Most Trusted and Most recognized ladders advanced together with the merits which pushed me on the other two ladders.



- later on, after receiving some more merits, I was 51st user with most merits and 41st with most earned merits. Note that at this moment I became 662nd most trusted and 297th most recognized. So, at this moment, my position on Most Trusted and Most recognized ladders decreased, no matter the merits which pushed me on the other two ladders. Besides, the fluctuations are not minor: I advanced 3 positions on Most merit ladder and 1 position on Most earned merit, yet I decreased with 64 positions on Most recognized ladder and with 147 on Most trusted ladder.

And I've noticed in the past in multiple occasions these big fluctuations of Most recognized and Most trusted ladders. Take into account that in all this while my Trust score hasn't changed, only my activity and number of merits.

And, since the formula of recognition is the one below,

The top 1000 most recognized profiles report is calculated using:1000 - ((Activity Rank + Trust Rank + Earned Merit Rank) / 3).

I believe that, if Trust score remains unchanged, as activity and number of merits increase then recognition should also increase, not decrease. Regarding the position on Most Trusted ladder I have no idea why it went down so much, since my Trust score remained the same.

I am not sure if similar fluctuations occur for the other ladders as well (Most active, and Most posts), as I don't have these badges displayed on my bpip profile.

I hope this helps.

And, as a suggestion, perhaps it would be a good idea to implement on bpip's home page all these six ladders, thus it would be easier to observe also which users have most posts and which ones have most earned merits? I know these ladders can be accessed with a workaround (e.g. go to the profile of any user and click on Most earned merit link and the ladder will be shown) but I think it would be nice to have them on home page too. Now of course, it's possible to not fit. But if they can be arranged somehow (perhaps with a smaller column width or a smaller font?) thus they would fit on home page then maybe this would be a nice addition

I've done a lot of things from my phone, including painfully navigating complex tasks through a remote/gui session (not fun), but I'd lose my mind if I had to type long queries in with that keyboard LOL, maybe you're using some voice-to-text?
(fyi-you might have broke the other link when fixing the image (missing the .txt now))

I realize the numbers are small but I had to look at why there was a difference.. I partly wasn't being specific enough on my date/time, so with my new query:

(tables and field names are modified for security purposes - call me paranoid if you must)
^ Note: I had to remove the single quotes in the code above or it would trigger cloudflare's security feature and block me.

I'm getting 5,313 results now (updated the .txt), but diff checker is still showing differences between your data and BPIP's:
BPIP has 9 ids listed that you don't have, you have some ids listed that BPIP doesn't have and some duplicates (also resulting in 9).. explanations:
--
The 9 BPIP listed, which were not in your list:
1- 413 - bg002h posted in 2022 and received merit.
2- 30747 - Vod posted in 2022 and received merit.
3- 63363 - smiletyson posted in 2022 and received merit
4- 3406889 - Salamande posted in 2022 and received merit
5- 3457634 - SpenserReed posted in 2022 and received merit
6- 3473890 - M__SUFYAN posted in 2022 and received merit
7- 3509533 - ChillyMatthew posted in 2022 and received merit
8- 3520784 - fedesse posted in 2022 and received merit
9- 3525938 - RobbyN789 posted in 2022 and received merit
--
The 9 you have listed, which BPIP didn't:
1,2,3,4- Your list contained duplicates for 161364, 487418, 938833, 1980983 which increased the count (name changes & maybe a character encoding issue)
5- 949407 - the post this user did in 2022 doesn't exist in BPIP's DB, I'm assuming there was a parser issue here where it didn't get picked up.
6- 2848088 - no merit is shown being given in 2022 for this user (doesn't exist in BPIP's merit log), the user does have 1 merit on the account currently but it looks like the post isn't there anymore for me to verify.
7- 3414189 - same situation as #6..!
8- 3455838 - BPIP has record of this in the merit log, but the post itself doesn't exist in the posts table so this account didn't make it in BPIP's list.
9- 3520394 - similar situation as #8

Posted at least once in 2022 and received at least one merit in 2022, yes.

Lol, turns out the website I was using is for photo printing (so only I could see the picture and I had to pay to have it printed and shipped to me ). Updated with a new link.

This is your list of all users who posted in 2022 and received merits, right?
Thank you, I'll add that information to what I already have.

Regarding the image, something in that link is not right, as it does not open any image.

Honestly, I’m having fun figuring this out through a unix terminal on my phone.

Here is my latest attempt: https://public.ninjastic.space/posts-2022-ids-and-users-with-merits.txt

My POV, for the curious: https://pasteboard.co/Lqg0GP6igyCV.png

(All other img hosts were down for me, so quickly found this one)

To be as specific as possible, the 5,300 would be any user with a post created in 2022 (which wasn't deleted quickly), who also received merit in 2022

Don't let us down.

Here it is:

https://public.ninjastic.space/posts-2022-only-ids.txt
https://public.ninjastic.space/posts-2022-ids-and-users.txt

It’s in my TODO list to allow whitelisted users to query stuff on-demand (i.e All posts/merits from X to Y in this format).