Topic: Merit Data from 503 Randomly Selected Altcoin Bounty Hunters - page 2. (Read 845 times)

I just took a look at the outliers (should have earlier, I know) and it seems they got merits for dumb reasons (one guy used alt accounts, the other was selling ICO picks for merits). So a better stat would be that 103 legitimate (I assume) members have received 5.2 merits each.


Based on what I've seen in Gambling discussion and Bitcoin Discussion, those people without merits are probably just posting in spam megathreads or commenting stuff like "nice ICO!".
It's hard to automate a way to find the post quality of the user. I thought about finding the average character per post, but I noticed many have posts like:


I could write a program in some other language (nodeJS perhaps) to do it, but this data was a result of me getting the formula set up for the ChipMixer campaign, and deciding to reuse it.
Without looking though, I'm guessing that the 3 most merited sections are:
- Meta
- Development and Technical Discussion
- Technical Support


It's hard to scrape how many have sent merit, as you must be logged in to see those statistics. It would be too complicated to do it in Google Sheets, and probably still complicated in any of the programming languages I'm familiar with.

I took a look at your posts, and while they aren't spam, none of them really stand out to me as being worth merit. Most/all of your posts are very buried, and are on the 4th page of a thread, or more.


People in Altcoin campaigns likely still post in Bitcoin sections - after all, it's incredibility easy to make a post talking about why Bitcoin is better then Gold by reading the thousands of replies already made. I'm guessing that my Bitcoin campaigner data will show a much higher average too, so it's still possible to argue that merits aren't really being distributed in certain sections.

Members are ignoring merits or they are too lazy to send merit. Can you research how many bounty hunters sent merits and include number to spreadsheet? I guess you will find out that 90% members who are posting in altcoin section have never sent merits.

Is something wrong with my posts? Am I spamming? I don't see reason why nobody sent me merit while some guys here received 40 merits for couple of topics and posts in meta.

Should I become regular in meta now? Should I write more than it is necessary to write? Should I write essay over half page? Should I send merit to someone if i didn't receive any?

There you go, reasons and small rant. Decide which is which

Nice stats btw.

Wow what a nice statistic you got there, i guess this is not a hard job if it is done by an experienced manager.
This statistic really negate all the whiners who said that merits not given in some section and only meta's people getting a lot of merits. I dont know how does people's brain works if they are still denying the facts while we got some nice statistics here.


If you interested on finding out how the no 1 merit giver merit distributed, you can find it here on my thread https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.30272338 , but i made it about 4 days ago, so it is not an updated version, but it can gives you a glimpse on merit distribution based on board.

There are members giving away merits to new members who can apply in those threads. I remember one such thread in service section especially for contributions in alt section. One can quote their posts in alt section in that thread and get some merits.

Nice statistics here. I noticed while browsing the altcoin thread that actual worthy discussion almost always doesn't get merit, but the spam, announcement threads and the like are getting merits from what I would presume their alt accounts.

We will not get correct idea currently because of a number of reasons. Firstly, there are a number of members abusing the merit system, Some are still sending merits like 10,20 to their alts for meaningless posts. These incidences are getting reported in those threads like " report merit system abuse here" daily. Another problem is that initially most of the merits were given for pots in meta section in bulk. This data collection and analysis will be more fruitful as members get used to this new system

This is actually really interesting. While I do believe that there are some valuable posts in the altcoin section and by some altcoin bounty hunters, I think it is rather obvious that a lot of spam happens in the section and I do not believe it is as strictly moderated than the rest of the forum especially with all the coin pumping going on in there. This is mostly the main reason I try to stay away from it.

This does, however, bring up a very interesting question: how is merit distributed across different sections of the forum? It would be interesting to know which sections tend to produce the most quality content in the forums. This would probably be very hard to do considering that you are getting rate limited yourself with just 500 users in the sample size in a single section of the forum, but there might be an alternative way such as scraping the last x number of posts from the section and adding up the merit from there. However, with the number of sections in the forum I can see this being extremely slow. I do not have much experience with Sheets/Excel when it comes to scraping, but I might eventually write a quick script to do it and post the results myself.

You did a great job. These stats speak for themselves:

1) The 105 members in your sample received 10.75 merits each. This shows that there are enough merits for everyone, provided you are ready to make some efforts.

2) Majority has no merits. This is something that needs to be looked after. The promotional offers (bounties and campaigns) should not expect members without any merits.

Suggestion: If it is possible for you to include data regarding the average posts made by the user, please include it. Especially for those 105 members.

I scraped the earned merit data of 503 random^[1] people participating in altcoin bounty signature campaigns, just for fun and because I was curious to see how many of them would have no merits. The data I got was similar to what I expected (398 of them had 0 merit). Here is the raw merit data in the format Earned Merit | Profile URL.

Those members have:

• Received 1129 merits
• Average of 2.24 merits earned
• Excluding those who have no merits, earned, the remaining 105 have earned an average 10.75 merits

Chart excludes 2 outliers: pitipawn with 433 earned merits, and temmuz with 159 earned merits. Stats above do include these outliers.

---

Why?

My reason for doing this was curiosity - I plan on rechecking this sample sometime in the future, and maybe getting a sample of Bitcoin signature campaign participants^[2] (might be harder as pretty much every manager doesn't have direct profile links, myself included) to compare with. Draw your own conclusions from the data. Some points might be:

• Lack of merit sources in Altcoin sections?
• More spam in Altcoin sections?

Also to farm merits - gotta rank up to the Super Uber Legendary Cash rank

---

How?

I'm scraping merit data using Google Sheets, with this formula:

It grabs their merits, subtracts how much merit they would have been given at the start of the system based on current rank, and returns the result. Does not work if they have ranked up, ranked down, are Hero Members who were given 1000 initally or with Copper Members. You need to subtract/add the correction manually, and it's pretty easy to spot errors. This formula grabs their current merit count:


Be warned: You will get rate limited eventually. My original plan was to grab 1000 users worth of data, but it was getting really slow.

Edit: The D2 in the formula is a link to the user's profile. Data will automatically update as long as the formula is present.

---

^[1] By random, I mean I picked a few random bounties, and took the profile links of those who applied.
^[2] I am tracking ChipMixer campaign stats, but it's a much smaller sample.