Quote from: theymos on February 11, 2025, 11:52:06 PM

I did a pretend reshuffle, and compared to the 136 users who were eligible for DT1 last time, with the above 2 changes, these users were no longer eligible: bavicrypto, be.open, Best_Change, comit, digicoinuser, ekiller, ezeminer, finaleshot2016, Gunthar, Harkorede, Heisenberg_Hunter, hybridsole, joniboini, Koal-84, Lachrymose, mandown, and witcher_sense. (Some of these users may have become ineligible for reasons other than the above two changes; I just compared the output today after the changes to the output on Feb 1.)

I'll try to find the reason for each of them:
bavicrypto: hasn't posted in the past 30 days
be.open: is included by 3 users with >250 Merit plus 3 users with >10 Merit (based on the pretend new rules)
Best_Change: drops from 10 to 8 qualifying inclusion-votes
comit: drops from 12 to 9
digicoinuser: drops from 10 to 7
ekiller: drops from 29 to 9
ezeminer: ................. I'll stop here. Manually checking them is too much work.
finaleshot2016
Gunthar
Harkorede
Heisenberg_Hunter
hybridsole
joniboini
Koal-84
Lachrymose
mandown
witcher_sense

Based on my (incomplete) check above, it's not a bad idea

Quote

What do people think of these two changes?

I think it's an improvement, but it's also going to be very easy to abuse: sending Merit to a few users every 3 years can be enough for some users to be eligible again. That might be a reason to make it Merit from 3 instead of 2 users, although it doesn't rule out abuse.

Quote

If your net DT1 inclusions is very positive, then you will almost always be in DT; if your net DT1 inclusions is very negative, then you will almost never be in DT

That's a good thing, right?

Quote

if it's within a few of zero, then it'll switch randomly back and forth.

Lauda comes to mind, ranging from DT2-strength (-8) to (+7) and everything in between for years.

Quote

This got me thinking that maybe it'd be more elegant to determine either DT1 or perhaps even all of DT by just directly computing a probability distribution based on net-inclusions (perhaps with other inputs) for every user, and then shuffling according to these distributions every month. But it's just a vague idea in my mind at this point; I don't plan to do anything with this soon, and I might never pursue it.

I assume that would mean there will be less users with "negative DT1-strength" on DT1. Now, most of the time only ~92 out of 100 DT1-members can vote for DT2, while the others can only vote for DT1. Having 100 "positive" DT1-members could be an improvement indeed.

Quote from: EcuaMobi on Today at 01:19:22 AM

However I don't see why inactive users should be excluded. Their previous opinions/trusts/lists aren't less valid just because they're inactive. Maybe I'd trust their opinions/trusts/lists less if they were active but didn't get any merit during those 3 years.

Their Trust and Trust list will still be equally valid, but their vote on other users to reach DT1 will be ignored. They can still be on DT2 themselves.

Quote from: ibminer on Today at 03:07:26 AM

I don't really see a good reason for inactive users to continue to be on DT1, they would not be keeping up-to-date on their lists and maintaining it, so I'd be fine with that.

Inactive users already can't be on DT1:

Quote from: theymos on January 09, 2019, 06:03:26 PM

- You must have been online sometime within the last 3 days.
- You must have posted sometime within the last 30 days.

Quote

Are you basing this only on net-inclusions and not exclusions at all?

My assumption: net-inclusions = inclusions minus exclusison.