2019
| Month | Registered | Total at the beginning of the month | % increase | First user of the month |
| January | 22 234 | 2 516 483 | 0,88% | First user of Jan, 2019 |
| February | ?? | 2 538 716 | ?? | First user of Feb, 2019 |
Topic: Statistics of user registrations on Bitcointalk 2017-2020 - page 2. (Read 1787 times)
Added statistics for January 2019
2019
2019
Added statistics for December 2018
2018
2019
2018
| Month | Registered | Total at the beginning of the month | % increase | First user of the month |
| December | 23 504 | 2 492 979 | 0,93% | First user of Dec, 2018 |
2019
| Month | Registered | Total at the beginning of the month | % increase | First user of the month |
| January | ?? | 2 516 483 | ?? | First user of Jan, 2019 |
For the stats in December 2017 between the topic figure and the forum official stats.
I known the reason, that is due to the lack of official stat on Dec 2017 (only counted till the 13th December 2017, or nearly the first half of the Dec, not a full Dec).
Therefore, it's normal to see the big difference between topic stats and forum official stats.
Have you known why?
If you known it, can you share it here, please.
I known the reason, that is due to the lack of official stat on Dec 2017 (only counted till the 13th December 2017, or nearly the first half of the Dec, not a full Dec).
Therefore, it's normal to see the big difference between topic stats and forum official stats.
Comparing your stats to the forum’s oficial stats (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=stats) there are a few discrepancies:
< ... >
- December 2017 is off quite a bit (191 537 vs 63 756 official)
December’s number of registered users seems a bit small on the official stats, considering that BTC peaked on the 16th of December, so I always wondered if they were correct for December 2017. I've just seen that, oddly enough, they only go up to the 13 of December (clicking the detail on the official Stats), so yours seem coherent with events.
< ... >
- December 2017 is off quite a bit (191 537 vs 63 756 official)
December’s number of registered users seems a bit small on the official stats, considering that BTC peaked on the 16th of December, so I always wondered if they were correct for December 2017. I've just seen that, oddly enough, they only go up to the 13 of December (clicking the detail on the official Stats), so yours seem coherent with events.
Have you known why?
If you known it, can you share it here, please.
Quote
Forum official stats are not available for some reason for 2018.
Maybe they're testing the forum software or their own code for bots. I don't know how many accounts the forum software can handle but his could be a kind of attack to slow down the forum software day by day... Or, they write a code to create accounts, they have to test if if it's working or not. Also they have to run a stress test, to be sure what is the maximum amount of bot accounts they are able to create when a customer asks, they should be able to give exact timing, like: we're creating you 2,000 fresh accounts in 3 hours time... just wondering...
Maybe it's easier for the customers to just buy some already registered accounts instead of trying to register hundreds of them from the same IP (but if I remember well, recaptcha will stop them and their IP will be banned too if they want to register too many accounts).
So for an average bounty hunter, who's skills are coding rather than creating accounts, it's just easier to buy some of these accounts, and all he have to do is start running his own code, nothing else.
So to cut the long story short, why don't we just lock all the newly created accounts if they don't post in a few weeks time (I know there are newbies who are here to read first and they will post only if they feel confident about the forum, bitcoin, etc... and it takes time, but they are not the majority now unfortunately...)
Maybe it's easier for the customers to just buy some already registered accounts instead of trying to register hundreds of them from the same IP (but if I remember well, recaptcha will stop them and their IP will be banned too if they want to register too many accounts).
So for an average bounty hunter, who's skills are coding rather than creating accounts, it's just easier to buy some of these accounts, and all he have to do is start running his own code, nothing else.
So to cut the long story short, why don't we just lock all the newly created accounts if they don't post in a few weeks time (I know there are newbies who are here to read first and they will post only if they feel confident about the forum, bitcoin, etc... and it takes time, but they are not the majority now unfortunately...)
Weird numbers and there is a clear trend upwards from 71% to 80%, merit impact? <…>
I don’t think so. Merit should not lead people to create accounts but not create a single post (which is what I’ve measured). Likely it’s something like the newer the non-posting account, the less chance it has had to post over time. The metrics, going backwards in time, show less number of accounts with cero posts as we go back in time (likely because of what I mentioned above). There are a few exceptions though, that seem to surge when there are abnormal account creating periods (compared to previous months), and that have a higher number of 0 post accounts than expected:
- December 2017.. January 2018 (big boom)
- November 2015.. June 2016 (a few months after the account hack)
- January 2015 .. March 2015
I went over @Piggy’s dataset to see bot creating patterns and bursts. I think the largest I detected with recent dates was between the 28/09/2018 and the 29/09/2018, with over 7K accounts created in that period, where most of the usernames included upper/lower/number combinations.
I’m not sure why they do it. I think it may be a phased feature: First create a bunch of bot accounts (possibly not too tough), and then move on to trying to use bots to provide them dummy content for their posts (and join campaigns). The latter is likely way more difficult than the former, and many will not succeed, leaving bags of created accounts with cero posts. Of course I could be wrong.
Weird numbers and there is a clear trend upwards from 71% to 80%, merit impact?
But if only 1-2k are nuked there are still something like 20k just lurking, again strange, but probably they are leaving them to age a bit before starting to use them as bumpers
Although I see no reason for it...
80% leaves only 7000 real users if we remove another 90% for alts and another 90% for bounty only and again 99% for future shitposters
it's probably what Alex_Sr said, one in a hundred.
But if only 1-2k are nuked there are still something like 20k just lurking, again strange, but probably they are leaving them to age a bit before starting to use them as bumpers
Although I see no reason for it...80% leaves only 7000 real users if we remove another 90% for alts and another 90% for bounty only and again 99% for future shitposters
it's probably what Alex_Sr said, one in a hundred.<...>It is impossible to find out the number of genuine accounts - too many bots are registered. Perhaps genuine is 1 in 50 and perhaps 1 in 1000...
This could give us a clue: I’ve used @Piggy’s full dataset (covers full months up to October 2018) to count the number of registered accounts with 0 posts. Now there could be a number of reasons for registering and having no posts (don’t want to, nuked (*), etc.), but I’d say, more likely than not, many cases are botty created accounts.On overall average, 73,18% of all created accounts have 0 associated posts.
Code:
Year Month nAccounts 0Posts %0Posts
2018 10 39353 31859 80,96%
2018 9 45362 35917 79,18%
2018 8 54384 42815 78,73%
2018 7 69840 53517 76,63%
2018 6 77681 57388 73,88%
2018 5 91993 66755 72,57%
2018 4 86898 63823 73,45%
2018 3 97644 69923 71,61%
2018 2 112211 82573 73,59%
2018 1 214546 171502 79,94%
2017 12 191455 155404 81,17%
2017 11 97286 68276 70,18%
2017 10 89443 59339 66,34%
2017 9 46186 26730 57,87%
2017 8 42254 25514 60,38%
2017 7 41011 27543 67,16%
2017 6 32733 20032 61,20%
2017 5 23978 15127 63,09%
2017 4 15807 9820 62,12%
2017 3 14760 9495 64,33%
2017 2 12677 8227 64,90%
2017 1 13354 9003 67,42%
2016 12 11199 7484 66,83%
2016 11 11187 7254 64,84%
2016 10 9935 6780 68,24%
2016 9 9923 6595 66,46%
2016 8 11193 6832 61,04%
2016 7 11257 7794 69,24%
2016 6 20630 16177 78,41%
2016 5 16918 13434 79,41%
2016 4 18493 14798 80,02%
2016 3 24945 21438 85,94%
2016 2 40436 36777 90,95%
2016 1 39178 35480 90,56%
2015 12 39950 36841 92,22%
2015 11 44059 40887 92,80%
2015 10 68831 65930 95,79%
2015 9 7727 5046 65,30%
2015 8 10942 8105 74,07%
2015 7 12616 9489 75,21%
2015 6 9310 6630 71,21%
2015 5 8037 5571 69,32%
2015 4 8914 6094 68,36%
2015 3 38297 34399 89,82%
2015 2 34357 30799 89,64%
2015 1 20794 17206 82,75%
2014 12 8391 5061 60,31%
2014 11 7996 4490 56,15%
2014 10 8332 4606 55,28%
2014 9 10158 5825 57,34%
2014 8 11443 6699 58,54%
2014 7 11119 6434 57,86%
2014 6 11952 7129 59,65%
2014 5 14264 7685 53,88%
2014 4 17948 11318 63,06%
2014 3 33521 24153 72,05%
2014 2 25450 13680 53,75%
2014 1 26619 12079 45,38%
2013 12 31775 15383 48,41%
2013 11 19680 10776 54,76%
2013 10 2927 1562 53,37%
2013 9 5155 2738 53,11%
2013 8 6052 3410 56,35%
2013 7 7413 3764 50,78%
2013 6 9372 5197 55,45%
2013 5 15512 8771 56,54%
2013 4 18712 8986 48,02%
2013 3 7357 3453 46,93%
2013 2 3532 1794 50,79%
2013 1 3184 1859 58,39%
2012 12 2765 1691 61,16%
2012 11 2708 1763 65,10%
2012 10 3199 2067 64,61%
2012 9 2345 1268 54,07%
2012 8 2394 1230 51,38%
2012 7 2109 1197 56,76%
2012 6 2079 1318 63,40%
2012 5 2017 1265 62,72%
2012 4 2071 1417 68,42%
2012 3 2117 1518 71,71%
2012 2 1991 1275 64,04%
2012 1 2051 1287 62,75%
2011 12 1719 1304 75,86%
2011 11 1990 1545 77,64%
2011 10 2060 1469 71,31%
2011 9 2443 1706 69,83%
2011 8 3856 2511 65,12%
2011 7 5451 3278 60,14%
2011 6 14434 7318 50,70%
2011 5 5866 2947 50,24%
2011 4 2822 1864 66,05%
2011 3 2423 1760 72,64%
2011 2 1090 564 51,74%
2011 1 376 179 47,61%
2010 12 422 161 38,15%
2010 11 218 115 52,75%
2010 10 174 76 43,68%
2010 9 167 92 55,09%
2010 8 163 82 50,31%
2010 7 333 58 17,42%
2010 6 34 8 23,53%
2010 5 15 2 13,33%
2010 4 22 1 04,55%
2010 3 5 0 00,00%
2010 2 22 0 00,00%
2010 1 8 0 00,00%
2009 12 8 0 00,00%
2009 11 3 0 00,00%
2018 10 39353 31859 80,96%
2018 9 45362 35917 79,18%
2018 8 54384 42815 78,73%
2018 7 69840 53517 76,63%
2018 6 77681 57388 73,88%
2018 5 91993 66755 72,57%
2018 4 86898 63823 73,45%
2018 3 97644 69923 71,61%
2018 2 112211 82573 73,59%
2018 1 214546 171502 79,94%
2017 12 191455 155404 81,17%
2017 11 97286 68276 70,18%
2017 10 89443 59339 66,34%
2017 9 46186 26730 57,87%
2017 8 42254 25514 60,38%
2017 7 41011 27543 67,16%
2017 6 32733 20032 61,20%
2017 5 23978 15127 63,09%
2017 4 15807 9820 62,12%
2017 3 14760 9495 64,33%
2017 2 12677 8227 64,90%
2017 1 13354 9003 67,42%
2016 12 11199 7484 66,83%
2016 11 11187 7254 64,84%
2016 10 9935 6780 68,24%
2016 9 9923 6595 66,46%
2016 8 11193 6832 61,04%
2016 7 11257 7794 69,24%
2016 6 20630 16177 78,41%
2016 5 16918 13434 79,41%
2016 4 18493 14798 80,02%
2016 3 24945 21438 85,94%
2016 2 40436 36777 90,95%
2016 1 39178 35480 90,56%
2015 12 39950 36841 92,22%
2015 11 44059 40887 92,80%
2015 10 68831 65930 95,79%
2015 9 7727 5046 65,30%
2015 8 10942 8105 74,07%
2015 7 12616 9489 75,21%
2015 6 9310 6630 71,21%
2015 5 8037 5571 69,32%
2015 4 8914 6094 68,36%
2015 3 38297 34399 89,82%
2015 2 34357 30799 89,64%
2015 1 20794 17206 82,75%
2014 12 8391 5061 60,31%
2014 11 7996 4490 56,15%
2014 10 8332 4606 55,28%
2014 9 10158 5825 57,34%
2014 8 11443 6699 58,54%
2014 7 11119 6434 57,86%
2014 6 11952 7129 59,65%
2014 5 14264 7685 53,88%
2014 4 17948 11318 63,06%
2014 3 33521 24153 72,05%
2014 2 25450 13680 53,75%
2014 1 26619 12079 45,38%
2013 12 31775 15383 48,41%
2013 11 19680 10776 54,76%
2013 10 2927 1562 53,37%
2013 9 5155 2738 53,11%
2013 8 6052 3410 56,35%
2013 7 7413 3764 50,78%
2013 6 9372 5197 55,45%
2013 5 15512 8771 56,54%
2013 4 18712 8986 48,02%
2013 3 7357 3453 46,93%
2013 2 3532 1794 50,79%
2013 1 3184 1859 58,39%
2012 12 2765 1691 61,16%
2012 11 2708 1763 65,10%
2012 10 3199 2067 64,61%
2012 9 2345 1268 54,07%
2012 8 2394 1230 51,38%
2012 7 2109 1197 56,76%
2012 6 2079 1318 63,40%
2012 5 2017 1265 62,72%
2012 4 2071 1417 68,42%
2012 3 2117 1518 71,71%
2012 2 1991 1275 64,04%
2012 1 2051 1287 62,75%
2011 12 1719 1304 75,86%
2011 11 1990 1545 77,64%
2011 10 2060 1469 71,31%
2011 9 2443 1706 69,83%
2011 8 3856 2511 65,12%
2011 7 5451 3278 60,14%
2011 6 14434 7318 50,70%
2011 5 5866 2947 50,24%
2011 4 2822 1864 66,05%
2011 3 2423 1760 72,64%
2011 2 1090 564 51,74%
2011 1 376 179 47,61%
2010 12 422 161 38,15%
2010 11 218 115 52,75%
2010 10 174 76 43,68%
2010 9 167 92 55,09%
2010 8 163 82 50,31%
2010 7 333 58 17,42%
2010 6 34 8 23,53%
2010 5 15 2 13,33%
2010 4 22 1 04,55%
2010 3 5 0 00,00%
2010 2 22 0 00,00%
2010 1 8 0 00,00%
2009 12 8 0 00,00%
2009 11 3 0 00,00%
(*) According to @suchmoon’s post on banned accouts (see [MERIT][NSFN] We're destroying more merits than we're sending. Like, way more), between 1,2k and 1,7k accounts are nuked every month, thus causing these accounts to have 0 posts.
| August | 54384 |
| November | 35127 |
Wow, that's quite a drop and pure coincidence, but still -35.40% is so close to the fluctuation in bitcoin price since mid-August till now (6500>4000), around 38%
Probably it's not just price but also the introduction of the 1 merit requirement, the diminishing interest in ICOs and thus the demand for bumping bots but if this bear market continues we will probably see less than 500 new accounts a day.
I wonder how many of those are genuine...
It is impossible to find out the number of genuine accounts - too many bots are registered. Perhaps genuine is 1 in 50 and perhaps 1 in 1000...
| August | 54384 |
| November | 35127 |
Wow, that's quite a drop and pure coincidence, but still -35.40% is so close to the fluctuation in bitcoin price since mid-August till now (6500>4000), around 38%
Probably it's not just price but also the introduction of the 1 merit requirement, the diminishing interest in ICOs and thus the demand for bumping bots but if this bear market continues we will probably see less than 500 new accounts a day.
I wonder how many of those are genuine...
Added statistics for November 2018
2018
2018
| Month | Registered | Total at the beginning of the month | % increase | First user of the month |
| November | 35127 | 2 457 852 | 1,41% | First user of Nov, 2018 |
Added statistics for October 2018
| Month | Registered | Total at the beginning of the month | % increase | First user of the month |
| October | 39 354 | 2 418 498 | 1,60% | First user of Oct, 2018 |
Added statistics for September
| Month | Registered | Total at the beginning of the month | % increase | First user of the month |
| September | 45 362 | 2 373 136 | 1,88% | First user of Sep, 2018 |
I don't know the background, but I think farmers are not registering the new accounts only on demand. I think they are creating accounts here continously, and they sell/rent them when a customer drops in.
So to cut the long story short, I think they are using the FIFO method when they sell/rent their farmed accounts. This means when a customer gets some accounts from farmers, those accounts are quite old already (but without any posts). So if this is true, your statistics can be true that there are only a few accounts banned in a few months time after the registration.
If you are after the spammer accounts, I would do it just the opposite way (but I don't have the knowledge to the technical and programming part to e.g. write a query, etc...) If you could check how old the accounts who were banned at a specific time, it could show something different, I guess.
So to cut the long story short, I think they are using the FIFO method when they sell/rent their farmed accounts. This means when a customer gets some accounts from farmers, those accounts are quite old already (but without any posts). So if this is true, your statistics can be true that there are only a few accounts banned in a few months time after the registration.
If you are after the spammer accounts, I would do it just the opposite way (but I don't have the knowledge to the technical and programming part to e.g. write a query, etc...) If you could check how old the accounts who were banned at a specific time, it could show something different, I guess.
Are the nuked users marked also as Newbies, without any post? If mods nuke a newbie, who already posted something, all of the posts are deleted too. This means for me that the newbies with 0 posts could be partially nuked users also.
Nuked users are shown as "Brand new" (example).I'm curious how many users are nuked. I'll make an estimate based on a sample of the data: I start with the first post of the month, then add 10 to the userID. This means I scrape 10% of all users from http://bpip.org/, to get an estimate of the percentage of users that have been nuked in a month.
Update: I'm not sure if BPIP has ban-data from January 2018, and I didn't want to continue the slow scraping process.
I expected a large percentage of accounts to be banned, but it's really not that much. Most new accounts (about 75%) never made a single post.
That leaves just data for August 2018: I've scraped 10% of all accounts (starting at 2318753, ending at 2373137): 3 users have been Autobanned and 65 users have been Nuked (5439 accounts checked). That's only 1.25% of all accounts, or approximately 5% of all accounts that have ever posted.
I'm currently checking July 2018, then I'll stop. I'm curious to see if a higher percentage gets banned a month later.
Update: 18 users have been Autobanned and 167 users have been Nuked (6984 accounts checked).
In short:
2.65% of the accounts created in July are banned.
1.25% of the accounts created in August are banned.
UPD: Added statistics for August
| Month | Registered | Total at the beginning of the month | % increase | First user of the month |
| August | 54 384 | 2 318 752 | 2,35% | First user of Aug, 2018 |
Are there some statistics about the number of users that have been banned/nuked?
And in the case of banned members, about their ranks?
I think it would be interesting to see how many of the freshly registered users are shown the exit door daily.
I have a feeling that each time the mods are following the lists of LoyceV and others, after a few hours the number of fresh registrations spikes again
And in the case of banned members, about their ranks?
I think it would be interesting to see how many of the freshly registered users are shown the exit door daily.
I have a feeling that each time the mods are following the lists of LoyceV and others, after a few hours the number of fresh registrations spikes again
Are the nuked users marked also as Newbies, without any post? If mods nuke a newbie, who already posted something, all of the posts are deleted too. This means for me that the newbies with 0 posts could be partially nuked users also. (And I'm not surprised if the number of these kind of users are growing...)
I am curious to know the number of registrations of accounts that have actually made at least say 10 posts, and the number of people that have made their 10th post by month.
[...]The calculation was made on the basis of a sample of 500 accounts registered from 1 to 19 June 2018 (the age of all accounts is more than 4 weeks)
The sample began with 100 accounts:
Sample 100:
79% - 0 post - Brand new
7 % - 1 post
3 % - 2 post
4 % - 10 post and more
Sample 200:
75% - 0 post - Brand new
8 % - 1 post
4 % - 2 post
5 % - 10 post and more
Sample 250:
73,6% - 0 post - Brand new
8,0 % - 1 post
4,0 % - 2 post
5,2 % - 10 post and more
I think the error in the sample of 500 accounts is no more than 0.5-1%
74% - 0 post - Brand new
I'm pretty sure many of these accounts are owned by spammers, waiting to be needed to run a spambot. I would be in favour of banning all accounts with 0 posts a month after creation.Hi, I am a University student in Hong Kong. I am studying economics. Now, I am doing my honor project which is about the relationship between bitcoin price and Internet variables. The data of Forum Statistics is very useful for my project. Can provide the daily data? Thx
What data do you need exactly?This sounds like an interesting subject that deserves it's own thread to publish your findings from start to end. If you create one, please PM me the link. I may be able to help you with some of your data requirements.
John_BAKA
I think you don't need any forum's SMF (CMS) statistics for your project, old topics and public statistic is enough.
Quote
Can provide the daily data? Thx
Here it is:https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=stats
If you are looking for them, then I suggest you to choose some sections because for example bitcoin discussion is very spammed. Also it will be better if you often visit cointelegraph.
74% - 0 post - Brand new
I'm pretty sure many of these accounts are owned by spammers, waiting to be needed to run a spambot. I would be in favour of banning all accounts with 0 posts a month after creation.Hi, I am a University student in Hong Kong. I am studying economics. Now, I am doing my honor project which is about the relationship between bitcoin price and Internet variables. The data of Forum Statistics is very useful for my project. Can provide the daily data? Thx
What data do you need exactly?This sounds like an interesting subject that deserves it's own thread to publish your findings from start to end. If you create one, please PM me the link. I may be able to help you with some of your data requirements.
John_BAKA
I think you don't need any forum's SMF (CMS) statistics for your project, old topics and public statistic is enough.
Are there some statistics about the number of users that have been banned/nuked?
And in the case of banned members, about their ranks?
I think it would be interesting to see how many of the freshly registered users are shown the exit door daily.
I have a feeling that each time the mods are following the lists of LoyceV and others, after a few hours the number of fresh registrations spikes again
And in the case of banned members, about their ranks?
I think it would be interesting to see how many of the freshly registered users are shown the exit door daily.
I have a feeling that each time the mods are following the lists of LoyceV and others, after a few hours the number of fresh registrations spikes again
Jump to: