[metrics-team] non-stacked exit and guard capacity graphs

[nusenu]

> Let's do an experiment. Tell me one or two time frames for which you
> believe that non-stacked graphs would work better than stacked ones, and
> I'll make these graphs manually. Then we decide together whether it's
> worth adding these graphs or graph parameters. I actually don't know the
> answer myself, and I'm curious myself!

I made one manually and you can see it here:
https://miro.medium.com/max/1108/1*_WVdqy4y1xpiB2fl9OBtWw.png

(from https://medium.com/@nusenu/the-growing-problem-of-malicious-relays-on-the-tor-network-2f14198af548 )

 
> Note that my main concern about adding more graphs or graph parameters
> is not coding effort. It's about usability. If we make graphs more
> configurable, we'll have to make sure that people actually understand
> these configuration options.

I used to find the old (bigger) graphs more usable than the new and smaller once.


> Also note that the main audience of these graphs are people who cannot
> make their own graphs, which I believe doesn't include you. If your main
> reason for making this feature request is having a better graph for
> yourself and for "debugging" the network, I'd rather help you write an R
> script that you can run locally. Of course, if we conclude that having
> these new graphs or graph parameter would be beneficial for other users,
> let's consider making these changes for everyone. But let's do the
> experiment first!

Thanks for your thorough answer as usual.

One reason I'd like to see it on metrics.tpo is that I can point to it 
as the authoritative data source.
 
 

-- 
https://mastodon.social/@nusenu
https://twitter.com/nusenu

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/metrics-team/attachments/20200107/b3b41eeb/attachment.sig>