Topic: [overview] ChipMixer Signature Participants Statistics (Read 1163 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.

Would not surprise me if somebody who dislikes OP reports it, this is why it is better to be careful what you send and to who.

---

Nice data.

well the data already contains users'
- current rank
- current merit
- earned merit
it seems to me that it is a trivially easy computation to figure out what rank each user had.
for example i have 1003 merit and i've earned 503 merit that means i was a Hero Member when i joined.
you currently have 5963 and earned 4941 (according to your site) which puts you above 1000 with 22 diff (probably not updated yet) so you were Legendary when you joined.

Assuming you knew who those merit sources were--and you wouldn't necessarily, since that info isn't public. 

Glad you're being honest about that, because people rarely admit that they're hoping for merits when they create a thread.  There's nothing wrong with that IMO.  It's perfectly natural to want some recognition for a post or thread that's well-done, and there's also the practical aspect of needing merits to rank up.  Obviously this thread was of interest to a few members, because you've earned quite a few merits for it already--and they're well-earned IMO.  The only stats I've seen on Chipmixer participants are earned merits, which is (or was) a part of DarkStar_'s spreadsheet.  There may have been another thread with some data, but if there was it's been buried.

I doubt anyone is giving you charity merits, but since you're a Sr. Member I'd take all you can get and not worry about the intent of the member who gives them to you.

Meh, I don't think anyone is going to report you for sending statistic about chipmixer's signature participants to chipmixer's signature participants. I like statistics and interesting topics and I don't mind when someone send me PM about it although it is not necessary in most cases. I don't even think this can be considered as spam, you are not doing airdrop, selling anything, shilling for random projects, advertising something, spamming my inbox with the same crap over and over again after I told you not to PM me any more...
And? What conclusion have you made looking at these graphs?

Ironically I had overlooked the fact that no doubt many members are also merit sources, otherwise you would of seen a chart up there  This is probably because I didn't consider the merit "generosity" of participants as having any real relevance to the standard of participants, or being accepted into the campaign for the matter. I could obviously be wrong though.

Honestly? I assumed I would get some merit for this yes, from people who find it interesting or useful, but as someone who finds numbers and statistics calming in times of panic, it wasn't the incentive as to why I made these charts in the first place, believe it or not. I also didn't think I would get this much and not in particular from merit sources either. I also don't really care for receiving merit from those who hodl and hoard their smerit, it usually feels in-genuine and more like charity than any genuine appreciation; no offence intended. Merit sources should run along and merit another post that hasn't received any (or much less) and is worthy of receiving it. You missed your chance here, please move along now.


You basically nailed it, or from the more pessimistic perspective, how many more members have a better chance of being accepted than me or many other applicants.


Exactly! That idea sounds more insulting to Darkstar's judgement rather than anything else 
If anything, I'd argue I've reduced my chances by creating a potential conflict of interest

I wasn't offended or otherwise inconvenienced by your PM, and I'm actually glad you pointed me to this thread as I probably would have missed it.  No worries on my end for that.

The OP here made me chuckle a little, because it's like taking a time machine back 20+ years to when I took introductory statistics in college.  I remember making charts just like these for homework, though that's just about all I remember from that course (lol).  Good job with the data crunching, dragonvslinux.  Being a member of the campaign (and I consider it an honor still), I do find it interesting to see all of this.  

He might have been hoping for some merits, because I have no doubt he knows the campaign has at least a few merit sources in it.  Personally I think he deserves some, because he obviously put some work into this analysis and the topic is relevant.  A lot of members apply to Chipmixer every time there's a spot open, so it's useful to have a sense of what your chances are based on the performance of members already in it.

Yeah, I agree.  I get spam PMs which I report and other unsolicited ones that I don't--because they're not spam.  And I would imagine most PMs are not solicited and if there was a hard rule against sending a PM if the recipient wasn't expecting one....that would just be a bizarre rule.

Well, the effort must be appreciated, probably a few will say, yeah why did you sent me a PM, I'm active on the forum I would have seen that anyhow...it's their choice what to do but I don't think we have anyone that trigger happy in the campaign, especially since the OP has nothing to really gain out of it.
If you believe he is doing this to get accepted in the campaign, is anyone here thinking one post will influence Darkstar's opinion that much? Doubt it!.

The only thing I dislike about this is that the topic isn't one self-moderated, whenever you post something about CM participants a shitstorm is on the horizon. Till now everything is fine...but we all know...

There is no "you problem" nor a "me problem" there is not problem at all and I don't want any "precious smerit" back. Now we are even.
I've been honest of what was my first impresion of seeing you PM. As I said above, you did a good job you put a lot of effort, it is constructive and informative data and I have nothing against you. I decided to give you the merit not because I felt pressured, but because of what you created.

I certainly don't mind the PM.  Can't speak for everyone else, but it's hard to imagine anyone would have taken offence to it.  It's not like someone is trying to sell us something.

Pretty sure the unsolicited messaging stuff is related to spam, which this isn't.

Don't worry I got that, I just don't think it came across to others like that. though obviously I know this wasn't your intent either. All good.
Mainly because your interpretation of what is "interesting", is considerably different from the average user here, for the following reason 


Thanks again for your help, it was necessary.

Confirmed That's not what I meant, what I wrote was meant to be a short description of your long and interesting^* PM

^*For a data mining AI human like me.

Good data pipelining and smart efforts too dude !

I am sure your motivation behind this thread was your personal curiosity, more specifically about the clumping up of DTs in there and not merits. I see it as a sign of centralization, although it's just a campaign, above data explicitly speaks much more.

dragonvslinux has made an extremely detailed & highly constructive OP. There are rarely posts of this high quality on the forum.

If I’m honest these kind of threads bore the shit out of me & I have no interest in them at all.

However, one has to appreciate & respect the hard work & effort he’s put in here. If anybody is annoyed or offended by him sending PM’s then I think they’re a bit of a dick to be honest. That particular forum rule can definitely be ignored on this occasion.

Like I said, this kind of thread isn’t for me but it’s very detailed & obviously took a lot of work.

+ 4 Merit’s.

True story, more interesting but also more work  


For reference, I never PM'd you saying "here's a bunch of interesting things I'm working on", but anyway.

Apologies to anyone who felt this unsolicited PM was spam or ban worthy. As referenced, I PM'd participants out of courtesy, I I acknowledge that not everyone appreciates their post/merit/trust data scrutinized and/or compared with others, even if intentionally not including usernames in the data. Arguably this was pointless and redundant, as anyone who wouldn't appreciate, also probably wouldn't appreciate a PM about it either. Picking up a double edged sword never works it seems. Lesson learnt!


To be clear; I don't care for anyone's merit over this, I did this out of personal curiosity (as referenced), and made it clear to DarkStar_ the intent.
If you (or anyone else) felt pressured to give merit, that's a "you problem" not a "me problem". Regardless, I return your precious smerit  


You're totally right, should of done this   Hadn't considered that would of notified all relevant participants, my oversight. Kind of obvious when you look at it. At the same time, I didn't want to post (again) there, because it would of looked like it was related to my application (as it's not). Re: double edged sword.


I didn't tell everyone to visit the thread at all, I agree this is not done, as it would be spam. I PM'd an FYI with the link out of courtesy, slightly different, but lesson still learnt either way.

And those such users (given their existence) should reconsider the nature of rules and regulations from a causal state: that is, what is the intent of such rules?

Trouble often occurs when people become inchoate pedantic admin-pleasers.

---

That being said, aggregate (and public) stats usually don't require the acknowledgment of each individual, do they? Especially with a large sample size.

Good work, but this PM was not exactly for my taste. What I mean is that it feels like you are pressing the participants for merit it a way, maybe it's not the case but this is how I felt.
Anyway, you put some effort to do it so,... I'm not a negative person

If that's the case I agree: telling them all to visit this thread is not done. The ones who use a notification service can easily be summoned by posting their name in this topic, and users who don't use such a service shouldn't receive a PM.

I tend to agree LoyceV, and I'm not going to be the one to report him. Although over the almost 60 participants he likely PMed there might be one or two you have a loose trigger, so I preferred to warn him about it.

IMHO getting our attention with less risk would've been posting in the campaign thread

The stats themselves are interesting and worth looking into, no question.

The number of Senior members is probably strongly reduced by the fact that barely anyone voluntarily leaves the campaign. It would be interesting to see what rank each participant had when they joined, but that's going to be a lot of work to dig up.

I received a PM from dragonvslinux about this, and although it was technically unsolicited, I'd say the forum rules aren't meant to stop this. There's a difference between: "Hey, here's a bunch of interesting things I'm working on, and I'd like to get your help" and "please sir can I buy 800 Merit or your account". I don't think this forum will become better if you have to ask permission to PM in public before asking someone a question by PM.

Sending unsolicited PM's is an offence on this forum that comes with a temp bann.

I'm not here to make assumptions on your motives regarding this, but you should be careful with the rules.

Reserved for more statistics

As one of many many members who applied for the ChipMixer Signature Campaign (CFNP), I became curious of the standards and other metrics of the 56 participants, so are some statistics to share. See credits, disclaimer and notes below graphs.

---