This is an automated archive made by the Lemmit Bot.

The original was posted on /r/nanocurrency by /u/tech32spn on 2024-02-15 20:47:09.

Original Title: Do most popular Nano Network Explorers exclude spam transactions from their statistics ? Spamming, although not impacting other transactions, totally misled network health indicators and statistics (CPS, time/trx, backlog, etc).

This is particularly true when massive dust transactions with same pattern are identified, which we could consider as “spamming”, as opposed to (very legit) “isolated dust transactions”.

As a paradox, many Nano skeptics used the misleading/wrong Nano statistics during the last (failed) spamming attack as argument that the network was severely impacted, while the opposite took place with a network working as a charm for legit trx “only”, meaning everything that matters !