Topic: [overview] ChipMixer Signature Participants Statistics (Read 1150 times)

It just shows that you put 0 efforts in checking facts before posting. Meaning nothing that you post can actually be relied upon.
I did nothing you didn't do to yourself. You destroy your own credibility. Not me, not anyone else.

---

DS is actually getting help for this, since as you state it he can't assess 10 + languages by himself.



How kind of you to nominate yourself. Except, who cares about your opinion?



I think you are confusing fairness and business. DS selection doesn't have to be fair. It's a one way street. He decides, and everyone else accepts it (or not for that matter). Neither you nor anybody else has a say in this.

Bye now.

That part is a tiny side point of the post you are referencing, read it again, you cannot just dwell on 1 introductory sentence and launch a sweeping ad hominem attack based on a minor inconsequential detail (but ok fine, others also get expelled from this campaign occasionally).

That is classless and unintelligent behavior on your part that doesn't even merit a response, so I suggest you don't pollute this thread anymore with your toxic bullshit and let people have a conversation.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

See week 139 for instance : https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17P52DifaD7YfvzLkX3wrxGVpKcaPHY4y57ZpI-FK754/edit#gid=642818732

Rest of your post is the same non sense.

As far as I know Kalemder was the only Chipmixer participant to be expelled from the Chipmixer campaign in years.

While his post quality and posting behavior can be criticized, as can everyone else's, I would rate him as one of the top 3 participants in the Turkish local boards.

I've met very few truly bilingual (or more) people in my life, and can quote you many professional writers and linguists who would also agree with the assessment that it's very difficult to achieve native fluency in multiple languages, particularly if they are originating from different language families.

Therefore, we need to accept that it would be very difficult for Darkstar_ to objectively judge the post quality of some local forum users.

Even though I nominate myself as the top local participant overall on this forum, I would still vote for Kalemder as worthy of a Chipmixer slot, as reviewing the range of Chipmixer posts over the years, most rational observers would agree his message quality is way above average (and brings a unique Turkish voice).

The fairness and meritocracy of the Chipmixer campaign are frequently brought into question, when the campaign manager fails to address any of these very pertinent criticisms raised to him, and often seems to make up his mind whimsically and under the strong influence of external advice given to him, without any convincing rational justification for his decisions...

As things currently stand, the fact remains that Turkish section is one of the most intellectual and active sections on this forum; however the frequent controversial arguments and schisms originating from that section lead to some very valuable campaigns overlooking and missing out on this hugely strategic part of the forum.

If we want to talk about a fair and rational campaign, the 1st step Darkstar_ & ChipMixer partnership need to take right now is to find at least 1 or more users who are active in Turkish local to establish their presence in that highly popular part of BTT.

Good information. Thank you.

How many representatives are there in which local section? Can we see this information?

Agreed, appreciate the constructive criticism, I was hoping nobody would notice that! I usually spend more time on the "formatting" of these charts; colors, titles, axis, labels, etc, but I wasn't feeling the energy to do this as there are quite a few. I also find it easier to format charts based on trust for example, as I can use obvious color schemes to represent positive, negative and neutral for example. It was LibreOffice (open source Office), the charts are more of less based on the defaults with minor adjustments to the axis. In hindsight, It could all looked less like being from the naughties by having color transparency at a minimum of 50% for example.

Hence the following accurate interpretation, because Office spreadsheet defaults haven't changed much since Windows 2000  

---

Spread something I believe is positive yes, but also deal with any potential controversy from anyone efficiently and effectively, instead of having participants stumble across this thread over the course of days and weeks and having issues with it. I prefer to get any issues out the way in one go as it were, rather than tediously spread out over a longer time period. I otherwise expected more people to have an issue with the data than there were (or are so far), so instead underestimated that how most people would find this to be positive, rather than have issues with it for x, y and z.

I otherwise agree, I'll be on the lookout next time, but in the context of any bcc based "mass" messaging, there won't be a next time from me. I've certainly learnt my lesson that while the majority may be fine (or even appreciate) a PM about a topic like this, there will always be a minority who don't appreciate it which could cause serious issues. I think Lauda put it best;


Even if I agree with LFC that in this case, if someone reported the PM - I think they're a bit of dick to be honest.

TL:DR: I really appreciate your constructive criticisms and compliments, hence the length reply  

Really nice statistics, I'm overwhelmed by the results, but overall not so bad. The visualization could have been better, for sure, but it's certainly not bad. Which software did you use for the visualization??

As for the pm,I want to think that you just wanted to spread positivity and curb enthusiasm, but a lot of people on this forum hate receiving pms like this, so be on the lookout next time onwards. Also,thank you for spending your time and creating these charts.

To put it simply: That's not how data analysis works. That would lead to enomorous generalisations regarding people's posting style, as well as intent in posting in these threads.

Re: too much work. No.

An easy way to start the process would be to identify the threads that are simply hostile in intention "I don't like this user because" type of thread and just label all posts in that thread as being openly hostile accordingly.

Lots of those "pill addiction" style treads or "s/he doesn't deny it" threads are an embarrassment and stick out like a sore thumb (and have plenty of pages of doss due to their prolonged attacks on others).

Similarity, you can then identify quite quickly who the main agitators within the chip mixer sigcamp are creating these abusive threads and take the decision to blanket label all or a fair portion of their work as abusive and go from there.

Sounds like a crazy amount of work analyzing thousands of posts, for attacks against other users.  Don't think LoyceAI could easily scrape this data either, the remit would be too specific to handle. Even cross-referencing merit geniorsity data is enough to take on right now.

Thanks for the suggestion though, it would be interesting to see for sure, but completely unrealistic.

Perhaps if you were to distil out the number of posts these people make to attack others you might then find a truer picture of how productive their posts are.

Thanks for sharing that link, I knew I'd seen a topic like that somewhere. Definitely helps to explain the following:



Will look into cross-referencing this data with participants

---

i didn't mind the PM, there are other PMs that are a lot more annoying than this one. besides this board wasn't a place i would have expected to see such stats, they are usually in meta.

i don't know if it is possible but it would be nice to see this as a list of boards with post count instead of topics.

When was the last time you visited Meta?   apparently that info is indeed PUBLIC

---

OP I personally don't mind the PM, I appreciate your efforts.

It works okay in (my) Firefox, although 30 days posts is heavy on the browser. I won't add Merit to this, this was only meant as a quick overview of what campaign participants are up to, but I never bothered to make automated updates. Now that I think about it: I used an outdated userlist for this.

Yeah, it's clear why satoshi watned the rules to be unofficial, sometimes you need the extra analysis.

If you deem 1PM to be an annoyance and unsolicited then you probably ought to hit the logout button and not return...


Is that in progress or did it just kill my browser when I tried to click another link for a different time spot?

Would be interesting if it evolved into where merits were earnt&sent by most of them too...

I made a page for that. It doesn't receive automated updates, but I just ran an update. See http://loyce.club/sigcamp/chipmixer/topics7d.html

To clarify, I said I was expecting merit, not hoping for it. While you need merits to rank up, not all users need to rank up. Sure, most sig campaigns pay more to higher ranks. Mine does not I'm happy as a Senior Bitcoiner


The demand appears to match the standards, that of being very high. I doubt there is a campaign that comes close to it.


The cat is correct.

i totally forgot about the time before merit system was added.

It's not:
I joined ChipMixer's campaign 2.5 months before I reached Legendary Rank. So I was a Hero Member back then.