Visibility of SNDB data for general users

News: Welcome to the Canadian Paper Money Forum.

custom signature tags denoting how many notes you have entered to the Serial Number Database

is not a bad idea (for carrot or reward), but I think an even greater incentive would be allowing a contributor various levels of access to the stats/data.  Currently knowing how many notes I've added to the SNDB or where I rank does little for me, whereas knowing how many, and in what ranges notes* have been entered, would be much more interesting.  Even if graphs, pie or distribution charts, (for SN NOT plate #s) would be interesting -- esp for rarer prefixes like BTV or APM.

*  I mean for all notes entered-- not just mine.

I would have to echo some of Walkthewater's comments.

I know all the notes that i entered is interesting but not not beneficial since i already know the info about what i can enter or did enter. I think the idea of the SNDB is a great idea and could over time be very influential if people feel that spending time entering these numbers is time well spent. With the current setup i personally feel that the amount of work required in regularly entering notes without seeing the big picture of all notes entered is a very tough sell. Knowing about all the notes entered would make me want to make the extra time needed to enter these note. The other thing is if i enter notes and people can see all notes entered I rather not have them know what notes i entered simply for security reason. I don't think that someone would want to let the world know(on line) that he has added Hundred of Thousands of money to the SNDB.

I like the idea that if one clicks on the Prefix listing that we could see all the notes entered.

Am i asking for too much? lol

MG
 

I like the idea that if one clicks on the Prefix listing that we could see all the notes entered.

I would agree with this...

I like the idea that if one clicks on the Prefix listing that we could see all the notes entered.

This data is already available to active researchers who require the data for whatever project(s) they are working on.

It is not (currently) made available to all users because of the sheer amounts of data already in the system and the expected multiple times that amount that will be in the database in the future. I also do not see a need for anyone other than an active researcher to see all of the notes in the system. Perhaps some summarized charts and graphs and such, but the raw data is completely useless to the average user.

So unless someone can provide me with a very compelling reason as to why average users would require seeing all of the notes that are entered (ie: specific serial numbers, position numbers, etc) as opposed to just summarized charts and graphs of some sort, then this probably won't be changing any time soon.

I mentioned charts and graphs a few times... Generally speaking, I have no problem releasing summarized data to users in the form of charts and graphs so long as they can be generated using some form of cached data or otherwise in a processing-inexpensive manner. A graph that takes 10 seconds to load every time someone clicks on it is not going to be used because for those 10 seconds, the rest of the website experiences a performance hit and it also impacts other customers of our hosting company whose websites reside on the same physical server. I have to be conscious of performance. This is one of the reasons why I introduced a 5-minute cache to the total data on the front page of the SNDB. The query takes several seconds to run, but if I cache the data and just read from the cache, it takes significantly less time.

So I guess the next step would be to determine what sorts of charts and graphs would satisfy this observed desire to see all the data in the SNDB?

I've split this post based on the two separate subjects. The original subject was a proposal to create signature tags for members to use based on SNDB contribution levels and the new subject is visibility of data in the SNDB for general users.

...

As for charts and graphs and statistics available to general users, I think one easy statistic that could be made available is simply how many notes of a requested prefix are recorded.  For instance, if a user wants to know how many BTV $10 notes are recorded, they select BTV from a drop-down list, and the DB returns a number just for that prefix.  If the user wants to know stats about a whole range of prefixes, they would need to query the DB one prefix at a time.  Would that take up too much memory?

[edit]Part of post moved to another thread by mmars[/edit]

For instance, if a user wants to know how many BTV $10 notes are recorded, they select BTV from a drop-down list, and the DB returns a number just for that prefix.

My preference would be to know that exact serial numbers that were entered not just the total numbered entered.
This way everyone can obtain that info not just the select few.

Anyone agree with this?
FRIEDSQUID

The Serial Number Database does not provide specific or detailed data to general users for a) performance reasons, b) confidentiality and c) because doing so could be exploited for purposes inconsistent with the aims and objectives of the SNDB. It is NOT a register of all known notes, and it is NOT a population list to determine rarity for people to set prices.

The SNDB is a 100% NON-COMMERCIAL research tool. Any attempts to use it for commercial purposes, actual or perceived, will be denied outright.

That's the way it is regardless of who agrees or disagrees. This matter is not up for debate.

I definately agree with you. I don't know about anyone else here but I try to keep record of all the bills that I come across. It would defnately make it easier to make sure that I'm not missing anything, if we were to have access to specific bill information. I definately do not want to use any of my note information for commercial purposes, I just like to review what I have come across. Also, Im not argueing, just replying. But I can definately see how it would be hard for the memory and performance of the system. W :)ould it be very expensive to create a seperate area for people to see their info, not everyones? Maybe if we signed an agreement saying we would not use the information for commercial purposes and we made some sort of donation to get the site up?
         Not trying to be pushy, just curious.

My preference would be to know that exact serial numbers that were entered not just the total numbered entered.
This way everyone can obtain that info not just the select few.

Anyone agree with this?
FRIEDSQUID

I cannot think of any good reason why a non-researcher should be entitled to know the serial numbers of individual notes in the database.  Can you come up with a reason?  Fairness is not a good reason, and neither is plain ol' curiosity.  If you're not a researcher, meaning you don't have any purpose in advancing knowledge about Journey series printing and distribution practices, then you don't need access to the information like a researcher.  As unfair as it sounds, researchers and non-researchers are not equal and thus do not deserve equal levels of access to the information.

I know this one will be controversial, but I have to agree with mmars, but on a similar and different angle.

a) There is no practical purpose for someone to need to know the specific numbers, this is true.

b) It would not be a stretch to imagine that divergent and errant conclusions could be made by some.  To undo an errant claim as we know, is very difficult.  The people who are in a position to draw the proper conclusions should be used and thought of as an asset to the hobby, as specialists.

c) On the note of fairness, when GP gets insert reports, he does not share them with others.  He has good reason for such, and the highest point being that it is in the best interest of the hobby that only verified conclusions get out.  Giving information out, to be fair, presents the possibility that people who are less than experts may promote dangerous conclusions, thus weakening the overall validity of the project overall.  And with this SNDB, it has nothing to do with even insert notes specificaly, but simply to do with ream boundaries.  Myself, being several years experienced in the area of the matricies and the odd ways they change things around with regards to numbering, would never recommend number reports to be presented for analysis to someone who is not very well versed in the understanding of the printing process and the matrix design.  I follow that by saying I definitely do not know it all either, but there is a solid foundation to build upon.
As well, I am not closed to someone vying to learn more and potentially have access granted, that is really out of my hands.   Should everyone be able to see?  I vote no, in the name of protection of the integrity of the meaning of the data.

I cannot think of any good reason why a non-researcher should be entitled to know the serial numbers of individual notes in the database.  Can you come up with a reason?  Fairness is not a good reason, and neither is plain ol' curiosity.  If you're not a researcher, meaning you don't have any purpose in advancing knowledge about Journey series printing and distribution practices, then you don't need access to the information like a researcher.  As unfair as it sounds, researchers and non-researchers are not equal and thus do not deserve equal levels of access to the information.

I find this to be very difficult to accept. Can I think of any good reason why a researcher should be entitled to know the serial numbers of individual notes in the database?

I sure can!

I find it interesting to be told that we cannot have access to individual serial numbers because researchers and non-researcher are not equal and thus do not deserve equal levels of access to information. I find this statement to be very elitist and dangerous. Does this mean that only a select few can make claims because we are told only theses people can understand how bank notes are printed? Are the rest of us not intelligent enough?  How is one to believe others claims based on the info of the BNDB if the info isn't made available? I find it very interesting that "your" research is heavily dependant on the help of every member on this site and yet you can't find any good reason why non-reaserchers can't see the info? How about.... without the average "non-researcher's" info you have.... nothing.

Like is mentioned earlier being told to spend all this time to enter notes into the SNDB and to be told such a statement as the one above is the opposite of selling the idea to others in entering notes and personally i know of many that would agree with me and that's unfortunate because we account for alot of information on a regular basis.

MG

As unfair as it sounds, researchers and non-researchers are not equal and thus do not deserve equal levels of access to the information.

So am I to understand that I do not deserve to be treated equally because I am not a researcher but any information that would be provided by me will be used by a researcher who says I'm not an equal....and why the H%^# would I want to
help someone that thinks less of me.....

Please understand that I don't want to see anyone being deprived of data if they have a good use for it.  I never said that good reasons to share the data publicly do not exist, I said that I can't think of any good reasons.  The onus is on someone to come up with a good reason that we can all understand.  If you have a good use for the data and can think of a reason why you should access it, then I'm all ears.  I am not trying to sow discord among users of the database.  Over the past two years, I have done research on my own with little to no help from noone.  I collected data and formulated theories that I proved with the data, and then I shared my information both through my website and via the CPMS Newsletter.  To this very day, I have kept the raw data that I used for my studies displayed publicly on my website.  I was never a proponent of keeping secrets, especially since I had ideas that I wanted to share with other people.  I have thrown my support behind the SNDB and my data has been uploaded into it.  BWJM saw the importance of my research and generously created an online tool that makes data collection easier.  People who never read my research articles in the CPMS Newsletter, never visitted my website, and never expressed one iota of interest in position numbers would probably not start caring about my research or anything being done by any other researcher.  I'm sorry if most contributors feel that they need to be provided with incentives to contribute to the SNDB.  There are other good reasons to contribute.  The high-low lists are now incorporated into the database, and anyone who finds a note that becomes the highest or lowest known for a given prefix will automatically see their contribution reflected in the high-low tables.  The SNDB is also a convenient tool for checking whether you have any special notes like rotators, radars, repeaters, and inserts.  I know I have not memorized every insert note range by heart.  Just the other day, I came across a $10 BTL SNR that I didn't know was an SNR until I ran it through the SNDB.

BWJM continues to put time and hard work into making the SNDB better for everyone, and that's why he asked for suggestions and put forward his own ideas. For instance, he asked about signature badges for forum members showing the number of notes contributed and rank.  While he could do all the work himself and make every decision for us, he is asking for our inputs into a system that is supposed to benefit all of us.

I'm not an elitist.  I'm just a guy who spent two years doing my own research by myself and discovering information that nobody knew previously.  Most people who collect paper money get their information from some outside source of one kind or another.  Some of us go beyond buying a Charlton catalogue to inform ourselves.  The catalogues and the CPMS Newsletter don't write themselves.  If everyone had equal knowledge, then there would be no need for a pricing panel.  No need for the catalogue at all!  Unfortunately, some people know less, and some people know more, and the latter people are called upon to share their expertise.

If you believe you have strong research interests in Journey Series notes, there's nothing from preventing you from contacting BWJM or other high-profile members of the hobby, sharing your ideas, and getting help from researchers who share a common interest with you.  But opening up the database to everyone doesn't make a whole lot of sense.  There are a lot of parallels between the SNDB and the rare note registers published by the CPMS.  I've seen plenty of examples where information from the latter has been lifted and misrepresented for personal gain (mostly on eBay).  The information in the SNDB is not static; it is very dynamic as more information is put into it every day.  It would be too easy for someone to come along, lift some data on a particular prefix, and claim that the prefix is rare according to the data in the SNDB.  I don't want to see that happen, and I'll bet a number of other people would be quite unimpressed if the SNDB was exploited for profit.

The SNDB is still relatively new, and we're trying to help increase interest in it, not the complete opposite.  Every contribution has value.  I'm all for discussion of how it can better serve its contributors, but then I'm not in charge of it.  I'm a contributor just like everyone else.  The question has been asked: Why does the average contributor need access the discrete serial number and position number data in the database.  I would love to hear some constructive answers instead of a lot of divisiveness and complaining that the system as it exists is not already perfect.

- M

The "not equal" wording has hit a nerve with some, but we must rememeber that, while we are all equal in dignity as human beings from birth (don't make me get all spiritual on y'all here), we do NOT have equal talents and abilities.  For example, I play guitar, but not as good as Jeff Healy (rest his soul).  It's just the way it is.

On a more relevant example,
I would not bring my car to an auto dealership for service where the secretary got "equal treatment" in what he/she was able to do, with the certified technicians.  That is the reasoning that needs to be stressed, for it has nothing to do with anyone being better than another person, or especially someone being LESS of a person because they don't have current access.  And nothing is written in stone about who has access.  It is not some big secret, it is simply a mass amount of numerical data.

An important point was brought up about people potentially misusing the information for financial gain, which is a true and realistic risk.  While no one is pointing fingers, we would all be in a better position if the data was only released in controlled situations, to reduce this possibility.  The higher goal of this is simply for the benefit of the hobby. 

What do we get out of it? We get the satisfactions of knowing that we are contributing some possibly critical data with regards to ream boundaries.  As well, Brent has taken the time out of the goodness of his heart to add the special features like new hi/low indications, as well as replacement indicators.  If this does not serve as a big enough motivator, then I am sorry, and as far as I am concerned, you don't have to enter notes.  No one is twisting anyone's arm. 

Mmars raises some points about doing research on his own without help or much interest from others.  Point being that it pretty much went unrewarded, other than having the publications, and the solitude in knowing that his research was groundbreaking with regards to reams/boundaries.  A motive derived from the desire to find solutions is what we all need to have if this thing is going to reach it's full potential.  I know that countless hours of unpaid research went into his work, as did mine, in the earlier Mystery articles, as well as time spent on phone teaching and discussing the matrix design to a few.

If any of us are waiting to see immediate fruits of labour with this project on a large scale, then it is my thoughts that there will be disappointment.  Data dissemination takes time.  The bonuses Brent added to the system, are exactly that, bonuses, and in my opinion, we should be thankful for that as it is.


Now, what is driving me?
a) I have mass access to upper denominations, therefore I feel I have somewhat of an "obligation".
b) I know that it is for a higher function
c) It is for the benifit of the hobby, and other collectors.

Have I made a cent off this? No. In fact, bank fees, cost of carrying cash, and time spent in banks flipping bills, plus gas of course, probably cost a fair bit. I don't even want to crunch the numbers.

Anyway back to this whole "not equal" phrase.  Human beings are not equal in what we can do, or what we know.  We are equal with regards to our human dignity, and all being creations of God/Creator, or whatever you want to say.  Anyone want to talk faith to me, let's do that privately.  The point being, that saying that we are not equal with regards to ability or function, is very accurate.


Okay, I hope people can just remember why this SNDB is here to begin with, and have some fun getting new highs or lows or finding replacements and what not, all the while contributing to a mojor project.


Peace everyone.
H

 

Very nicely said, Hudson.

I almost forgot to mention that Hudson  provided me with extra data and feedback for my research in the past two years.  If not for him, I probably would never have started!  Apart from his help, the time I spent researching was a lot of wandering in the wilderness.  As I had articles published in the CPMS Newsletter, I sat back and waited for feedback from collectors at large, feedback that never came.  I didn't know what the lack of response meant.  I wasn't fishing for compliments, just looking for an indication that other people were looking at my research and getting some kind of understanding from it.  Given that very few people were overtly interested, I find it kind of paradoxical that some people now want to have open-ended access to all of the raw data in the SNDB.  It's BWJM's decision how he wants to grant access.  If he wants to reward frequent contributors with increased access, that's fine by me.  That way, nobody is obligated to contribute, but the people who do contribute get added benefits.