4 ms·

Context? How long were they with .eth? Did they get hacked, did they get paid?

by bagels 5y ago

systemvoltage 5y ago
Also “Dropping” something can mean removing or adding (“New Nike shoes just dropped!).
- dewey 5y ago
  Not in this context where there's a "Before" and after column.
  - systemvoltage 5y ago
    Couldn’t see it on mobile, I realized now!
- vechagup 5y ago
  That meaning of dropped generally only applies in intransitive contexts. Here we have a thing dropping a thing, suggesting the older meaning of "dropped".
  - systemvoltage 5y ago
    “Removing” is more precise though.
  - dmurray 5y ago
    No, "X just dropped a new track/album" is something I hear all the time in a music context.
cormacrelf 5y ago
Maybe enough people used that username.eth auto-blocker that their engagement figures dropped a non-negligible amount. My guess is the original list to check reverted usernames against came from https://antsstyle.com/nftcryptoblocker/ https://antsstyle.com/nftcryptoblocker/ Note the stats on that page, before it was shut down: "So far, it has performed 52.8M blocks and 10.6M mutes on behalf of users." That was one of maybe 5 different tools. Compare that to ~200-300M monthly active users. [[~~Assuming everyone who used those tools is a MAU, those usernames were collectively reaching 20% fewer people as a lower bound.~~]] Yeah, I guess this actually is a drop in the ocean. All you can say is that they were reaching 50M fewer eyeballs cumulatively. Of course that's counting everyone more than once, because they block more than one person each. Anyway, I think it's at least plausible that the people in the "growth area" for engagement stopped engaging one way or another. Folks using these tools were most likely in this segment, and the fact that they existed meant people had figured out a simple rule for you could simply avoid listening to & engaging with at all, whether the tools did actual blocking or not. Many of those blocks were presumably people who were fed up with the amount of NFT/.eth content in their feeds, and had been providing some negative engagement (but system doesn't care, that's still engagement). I think there's a thin but possible case to be made that this idea worked and now people have to strip their .eth to stop haemorrhaging engagement. Another more likely theory is that this represents people who have lost interest and no longer want to make it a very visible part of their identity.
- quazar 5y ago
  I don't think you understood the word "block" in this context correctly.
  - cormacrelf 5y ago
    What? I know how twitter blocking works. Do you mean the word "drop"? Because I know what dropping .eth from a username means. Edit -- oh. Amendment incoming.
    - quazar 5y ago
      "Block" in this context means a pair of user doing the blocking and the user being blocked. In this context the number does not seem impressive.
- cbhl 5y ago
  If I recall correctly, there was also a lot of controversy over the personal views of some folks in ENS leadership. If someone does analysis of these users I'd consider whether their tweets indicate a trend of being on a particular side of said controversy.
xadhominemx 5y ago
changing their handles to include .eth was part of the deal for celebrities who marketed NFT drops
staindk 5y ago
Also... where is the accompanying data indicating how many Twitter accounts (in the same period of time) added ".eth" to their usernames? This list seems so useless without that other side to compare. If only 25 accounts added ".eth" you could start to make inferences. If it's some number at all close to 3900 you can't really. And if it's greater than 3900 then you're being incredibly disingenuous by only posting this side of things.
- ilamont 5y ago
  Via the author: The flip side here is that we observed 35,267 accounts with “.eth” in their display names who aren’t on this list (yet). https://twitter.com/travisbrown/status/1511668595826335746 https://twitter.com/travisbrown/status/1511668595826335746
  - staindk 5y ago
    Thanks, had not seen this. The initial tweet mentions 3.9k accounts dropped the ".eth" recently. The 'flip side' data to that would be looking at the same time scale I think - how many people added ".eth" during the same time? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Context? How long were they with .eth? Did they get hacked, did they get paid?

by bagels 5y ago

Context? How long were they with .eth? Did they get hacked, did they get paid?

systemvoltage 5y ago

Also “Dropping” something can mean removing or adding (“New Nike shoes just dropped!).

dewey 5y ago
Not in this context where there's a "Before" and after column.
- systemvoltage 5y ago
  Couldn’t see it on mobile, I realized now!
vechagup 5y ago
That meaning of dropped generally only applies in intransitive contexts. Here we have a thing dropping a thing, suggesting the older meaning of "dropped".
- systemvoltage 5y ago
  “Removing” is more precise though.
- dmurray 5y ago
  No, "X just dropped a new track/album" is something I hear all the time in a music context.

cormacrelf 5y ago

Maybe enough people used that username.eth auto-blocker that their engagement figures dropped a non-negligible amount. My guess is the original list to check reverted usernames against came from https://antsstyle.com/nftcryptoblocker/ https://antsstyle.com/nftcryptoblocker/ Note the stats on that page, before it was shut down: "So far, it has performed 52.8M blocks and 10.6M mutes on behalf of users." That was one of maybe 5 different tools. Compare that to ~200-300M monthly active users. [[~~Assuming everyone who used those tools is a MAU, those usernames were collectively reaching 20% fewer people as a lower bound.~~]] Yeah, I guess this actually is a drop in the ocean. All you can say is that they were reaching 50M fewer eyeballs cumulatively. Of course that's counting everyone more than once, because they block more than one person each. Anyway, I think it's at least plausible that the people in the "growth area" for engagement stopped engaging one way or another. Folks using these tools were most likely in this segment, and the fact that they existed meant people had figured out a simple rule for you could simply avoid listening to & engaging with at all, whether the tools did actual blocking or not. Many of those blocks were presumably people who were fed up with the amount of NFT/.eth content in their feeds, and had been providing some negative engagement (but system doesn't care, that's still engagement). I think there's a thin but possible case to be made that this idea worked and now people have to strip their .eth to stop haemorrhaging engagement. Another more likely theory is that this represents people who have lost interest and no longer want to make it a very visible part of their identity.

quazar 5y ago
I don't think you understood the word "block" in this context correctly.
- cormacrelf 5y ago
  What? I know how twitter blocking works. Do you mean the word "drop"? Because I know what dropping .eth from a username means. Edit -- oh. Amendment incoming.
  - quazar 5y ago
    "Block" in this context means a pair of user doing the blocking and the user being blocked. In this context the number does not seem impressive.
cbhl 5y ago
If I recall correctly, there was also a lot of controversy over the personal views of some folks in ENS leadership. If someone does analysis of these users I'd consider whether their tweets indicate a trend of being on a particular side of said controversy.

xadhominemx 5y ago

changing their handles to include .eth was part of the deal for celebrities who marketed NFT drops

staindk 5y ago

Also... where is the accompanying data indicating how many Twitter accounts (in the same period of time) added ".eth" to their usernames? This list seems so useless without that other side to compare. If only 25 accounts added ".eth" you could start to make inferences. If it's some number at all close to 3900 you can't really. And if it's greater than 3900 then you're being incredibly disingenuous by only posting this side of things.

ilamont 5y ago
Via the author: The flip side here is that we observed 35,267 accounts with “.eth” in their display names who aren’t on this list (yet). https://twitter.com/travisbrown/status/1511668595826335746 https://twitter.com/travisbrown/status/1511668595826335746
- staindk 5y ago
  Thanks, had not seen this. The initial tweet mentions 3.9k accounts dropped the ".eth" recently. The 'flip side' data to that would be looking at the same time scale I think - how many people added ".eth" during the same time? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯