Topic: ㅤ - page 2. (Read 761 times)
You can easily get on that list even if you never merit a banned user... they could get banned after you merit them.
I've been on there before, I'm more surprised I am no longer on there now!Quote
we don't really have an "official" way of finding out who's banned
Merit them, then check the list 
Quote
it's kinda pointless to expect that merit sources would consider it.
It's not something to worry about if you just Merit good posts. It might be Merit abuse if someone mainly Merits users who get banned later, but users with good intentions shouldn't worry about it. 
Good posts should be highlighted, even if the user was banned (even though there's a list of shame for Meriting banned users).
You can easily get on that list even if you never merit a banned user... they could get banned after you merit them. Not to mention that we don't really have an "official" way of finding out who's banned so it's kinda pointless to expect that merit sources would consider it.
If a post is accurate and would be helpful to those who come across it on the forum then it deserves to be merited whether or not the user is inactive or a hoarder. Merit sources are expected to make the effort to spend their smerits, regular users are advised to, but it's their prerogative to choose whether or not to. I'd rather have multiple hoarders posting quality content than regular merit distributors who do not post quality (I understand that there are users who do both).
The same applies to banned users in my opinion. Merit is not reward for good behavior but for quality content, if such content is still visible and still helpful, it is worthy of merits.
Secondary motives of merit creation (circling) shouldn't invalidate the primary objective (encouraging quality content). More merit sources can always be added along with their merit stash increased.
The same applies to banned users in my opinion. Merit is not reward for good behavior but for quality content, if such content is still visible and still helpful, it is worthy of merits.
Secondary motives of merit creation (circling) shouldn't invalidate the primary objective (encouraging quality content). More merit sources can always be added along with their merit stash increased.
if I see that a user has been banned for a long time, I will not send him merit, because that makes no sense. He will no longer need him. Yes, and in the discussions when this issue was raised, all the same, most were inclined to the fact that it makes no sense for banned users to send merits.
I get what you mean from the perspective of a forum user who needs Merit. My perspective, coming from a Merit source who always has a hard time "unloading" all sMerit, is that Merit is deserved by posts, not users. Good posts should be highlighted, even if the user was banned (even though there's a list of shame for Meriting banned users).I usually don't send Merit "so that they can distribute it themselves". That's just a side-effect of Meriting a post.
There's another reason for my stance: sMerit isn't scarce. Theymos can create as much of it as he wants.
Sending merits to a banned account is completely useless and I rarely see any banned account receiving merits once they banned. But it doesn't really matter to check the merit sending history while you are meriting, if they don't like to send their merits then its they choice and even theymos clearly mentioned holding sMerits has no real benefits.
I'm not a merit source as well but I have read dozens of merit related topics here in the meta to know that merit sources do some kind of background checks in the user before they send their merits. Some merit sources do read the post history of these members if they only find that only one post was helpful/useful and the rest are from bounty campaigns or spam threads they don't continue giving that person a merit. Some merit sources on the other hand check merit summaries of these people to see if there is a merit abuse going on but I have never read any merit source not giving merits just because they are hoarding merits.
the total merit sent will be one less than the total source merit available
One less than double the total source merit available.
During my time here, I have given out many hundreds of merits, more than some merit sources. It would be nice to be able to spend more merit, but that is a different matter.
When I send merit, I am highlighting the post, I am signaling to others that I believe you should read the post because it is useful, insightful, helpful, or there was a lot of effort put into it.
Assuming that all sMerit is sent every month, and assuming there is no sMerit at the beginning of the month, the total merit sent will be one less than double the total source merit available, if everyone receives an even number amount of merit. In practice less will be spent because not everyone spends all their sMerit and some people have an off number of merit.
Edit
Fixed. Thanks.
When I send merit, I am highlighting the post, I am signaling to others that I believe you should read the post because it is useful, insightful, helpful, or there was a lot of effort put into it.
Assuming that all sMerit is sent every month, and assuming there is no sMerit at the beginning of the month, the total merit sent will be one less than double the total source merit available, if everyone receives an even number amount of merit. In practice less will be spent because not everyone spends all their sMerit and some people have an off number of merit.
Edit
the total merit sent will be one less than the total source merit available
One less than double the total source merit available.
the main thing is that the post is useful.
This.As for typical members I send merit to, I don't check to see what they've done with their merits in the past. For one thing, it would be time-consuming to do that, and for another I just don't care all that much. So ultimately if I know for a fact that a member is completely inactive or a known merit hoarder, I might pass them over if I see a quality post made by them, but I don't have hard-and-fast rules as far as that goes.
legendary
Activity: 2156
Merit: 2100
Marketing Campaign Manager |Telegram ID- @LT_Mouse
For example, when evaluating posts, if I see that a user has been banned for a long time, I will not send him merit, because that makes no sense.
I do not think anyone check a profile whether they are banned or not when sending merits. There has no tag of banned user in the forum. I doubt a lot of people use personalized script to check status.If anyone takes such time to check user status, if they are banned or not, if they are active or not, no one would distribute all of their merits.
On top of that, merit should be given to quality post so that readers can identify the quality posts when they visit a thread. So, after all, I should give priority to quality rather than all other aspects.
Half the time I don't even pay attention to the username I am meriting, let alone if they are a merit hoarder, inactive, banned, and so on. I've even merited a user that I have then reported a few minutes later because it turned out to be plagiarism.
Being completely pedantic, but actually you are both wrong. Given that sending any amount of merit results in exactly one half of that merit becoming available to the recipient as sendable merit, it is in essence an infinite series which converges on 1. Therefore, 8 merits when fully distributed (approaching infinity) result in 8 sMerits.
8 smerits if distribute well will result in 8 - 4 - 2 - 1 - 0.5 = 15.5 smeris in total and only 15 smerit can be distributed.
The bottom line was that from 8 merites you can get 7 more, so I was not mistaken about anything, maybe the translation is not entirely clear.
Since I'm from Croatia and I speak Croatian, my primary desire is to help with merits local Croatian members of this forum for posts in Croatian that others can't understand and reward with merits.
That’s why I decided to become a merit source and apply here.
In the Croatian part of the forum, I started a topic where local members can report their quality posts on this forum, in both Croatian and English.
If they meet the quality criteria, I reward them with a merit.
This means that only active local members can get merits.
Of course, I also reward the good posts of other members on this forum, especially in the beginners section, with the desire to help new members.
That’s why I decided to become a merit source and apply here.
In the Croatian part of the forum, I started a topic where local members can report their quality posts on this forum, in both Croatian and English.
If they meet the quality criteria, I reward them with a merit.
This means that only active local members can get merits.
Of course, I also reward the good posts of other members on this forum, especially in the beginners section, with the desire to help new members.
< ... >
I have some of such data too. Till last Friday merit data dump, there are some stats (see below). Notice that there are 20161 users who only received merits (includes permanent banned users).- Number of users who only earned at least 1 merit: 20161
- Number of users who only sent at least 1 merit: 7576
- Number of users who earned AND sent at least 1 merit: 15032
- Number of users who earned OR sent at least 1 merit: 42569
AND? the essence of this has changed? I didn't count all the halves. The bottom line was that from 8 merites you can get 7 more, so I was not mistaken about anything, maybe the translation is not entirely clear.
Sorry. Your calculation is fine but you made a typo or write incorrect info, merit source only receive smerit from theymos. It is what I want to contribute and help you to correct it.6-month restructure is only a plan of theymos. Just a plan.
<…>
I seldom pay attention to that fact, although recently I caught myself meriting a profile (that deserved it), but whom I spotted has barely sent any, despite receiving plenty. That’s his prerogative, and since the posts were contributive, I went ahead.This is the list of those profiles that have sent less number of merits in relation to the amount of merits they have earned (some for obvious reasons), having earned at least 200 Merits:
Code:
user_id name MeritReceived MeritSent Ratio url
3 satoshi 2329 0 0.0000 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=3
143 laszlo 380 0 0.0000 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=143
2436 Hal 756 0 0.0000 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2436
43526 ocminer 236 0 0.0000 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=43526
106374 deadsea33 243 0 0.0000 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=106374
130792 sidehack 585 0 0.0000 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=130792
886352 RichDaniel 283 0 0.0000 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=886352
905442 TheBobyHunter 244 0 0.0000 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=905442
917021 fine99 250 0 0.0000 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=917021
1432750 gallisiardi 205 0 0.0000 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1432750
1533708 mgoz 210 0 0.0000 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1533708
37522 Tomatocage 208 1 0.0048 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=37522
364237 Kialara 256 2 0.0078 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=364237
19971 -ck 353 3 0.0084 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=19971
42880 Shawshank 214 2 0.0093 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=42880
212012 nopara73 274 3 0.0109 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=212012
26945 GameKyuubi 555 10 0.0180 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=26945
24792 Phinnaeus Gage 558 13 0.0232 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=24792
38894 SaltySpitoon 1148 38 0.0331 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=38894
980501 Artemis3 954 37 0.0387 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=980501
1285294 TERA2 212 10 0.0471 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1285294
366233 wndsnb 257 13 0.0505 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=366233
412662 tonych 363 20 0.0550 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=412662
1115697 realr0ach 211 12 0.0568 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1115697
65269 likehiro 252 17 0.0674 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=65269
1701092 Husires 298 23 0.0771 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1701092
109482 jseverson 228 19 0.0833 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=109482
647331 PassThePopcorn 206 19 0.0922 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=647331
1726270 Mamaecrypto 215 20 0.0930 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1726270
338591 Thirdspace 226 22 0.0973 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=338591
1730428 bakasabo 216 22 0.1018 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1730428
324365 jstefanop 251 26 0.1035 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=324365
1656984 thierry4wd 217 23 0.1059 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1656984
2550169 Jean_Luc 368 44 0.1195 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2550169
140582 gbianchi 291 38 0.1305 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=140582
381705 cellard 212 28 0.1320 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=381705
1208052 frankbitcoin 274 39 0.1423 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1208052
1056258 mithrim 309 44 0.1423 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1056258
1099535 dolphriends 275 40 0.1454 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1099535
36044 kano 292 43 0.1472 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=36044
1108331 explorder 380 58 0.1526 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1108331
379920 dmwardjr 264 42 0.1590 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=379920
2578892 Jawhead999 447 72 0.1610 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2578892
1273026 Bagiira 209 34 0.1626 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1273026
823344 Traxo 327 55 0.1681 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=823344
11425 gmaxwell 3171 555 0.1750 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=11425
5797 grue 219 42 0.1917 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=5797
1052653 ui_zakharchenko 225 44 0.1955 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1052653
316604 CryptoImperator 203 41 0.2019 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=316604
879277 Coding Enthusiast 1317 273 0.2072 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=879277
1003345 ChipMixer 273 57 0.2087 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1003345
2538373 whotookmycrypto 208 44 0.2115 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2538373
405464 mocacinno 1470 313 0.2129 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=405464
1069508 aleksej996 229 49 0.2139 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1069508
239328 jack0m 210 45 0.2142 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=239328
1002739 OneNattyLitecoin 235 54 0.2297 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1002739
657456 Nomad88 218 51 0.2339 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=657456
1626490 safar1980 363 85 0.2341 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1626490
2724574 FP91G 268 64 0.2388 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2724574
352429 BitcoinPenny 716 172 0.2402 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=352429
374061 Kakmakr 477 115 0.2410 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=374061
1090672 Smart man 506 122 0.2411 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1090672
As I understand it, when theymos created the merit system, he meant that after the merit sources received merit from him, they in turn distributed them to users. And users who received merit from the merit sources also distributed them to other users.
It is a role of merit source but not a mandatory task they have to finish each month. Being a merit source and distribute sMerit to others are kind of free task so that merit sources are free to handle all smerit allocated to their accounts.Quote
In total, a certain scheme turned out that 8 merites issued for merit sources turned into 15 merites in total, because the merites distributed were always divided by 2 and new smerites were obtained, which continued to spread to users.
8 - 4 - 2 - 1 = 15 merits
You are wrong. Merit sources only received smerit and they are not received a single merit for being merit sources. Your calculation, consequently, is wrong too. 8 smerits if distribute well will result in8 - 4 - 2 - 1 = 15 merits
8 - 4 - 2 - 1 - 0.5 = 15.5 smeris in total and only 15 smerit can be distributed.
Quote
But some users break this scheme of distribution of merites, leaving them with themselves and without sending them to anyone else.
Last year, theymos restructured merit sources and he said he will recalculate things each 6 months.Quote
For example, when evaluating posts, if I see that a user has been banned for a long time, I will not send him merit, because that makes no sense.
Sometimes, you don't know that user is perma banned or not if he did not wear an avatar. If he wears an avatar, you can only guess if you don't dig deeply and investigate. Honestly, I don't think there are reasons to do such investigation before sending my smerit to others.Quote
So now the question itself: Do you pay attention to those users who never send anything to anyone when sending them a merit or you don't care, the main thing is that the post is useful.
satoshi, Hal, and some others have received many merit and they deserve that. No need to take their (in)activity into account. 
Sorry for interfering with your topic even I'm not a merit source, allow me to share my idea.
If you want to hear my opinion, this would be my reason.
I will not choose who the users are, (if I'm a merit source) I will give merit those post that something contributed to the community and help a lot of people IF they deserve to have. I'm usually more interested in an open topic post that gives technical and fundamental advice related to crypto stuff. And, I will not merit old topics, more likely fresh topics much better.
If you want to hear my opinion, this would be my reason.
I will not choose who the users are, (if I'm a merit source) I will give merit those post that something contributed to the community and help a lot of people IF they deserve to have. I'm usually more interested in an open topic post that gives technical and fundamental advice related to crypto stuff. And, I will not merit old topics, more likely fresh topics much better.
But some users break this scheme of distribution of merites, leaving them with themselves and without sending them to anyone else. For what reasons they do not distribute them, it is not known, maybe they are just too lazy to do this, or maybe they are very demanding on the quality of posts and are looking for posts of the Satoshi level to evaluate.
Since they aren't merit source, probably they had a high standard of giving merit. If they got this merit because of worth it post, there's no problem. But it would be better if no one will not hoard merit(s). It's different with me, I usually spent out when I got merit. We have nothing to do about this, their merit, their right how to spend with it. the main thing is that the post is useful.
This.
All that other stuff is a waste of time and makes merit sending too complicated. It doesn't matter what the recipient will or will not do with the merits/smerits. The purpose of the merit system is to award posts, not users.
The only thing that I occasionally check for is plagiarism - if I suspect that the user sounds unusually eloquent. But I'm sure I've merited some plagiarised posts over the years. Shit happens.
I am not a merit source but whenever I am to send merit, i do try to check the user's merit history. If they are merit hoarders, I don't send anything, and also in most cases i send Merits to recent posts so it's very rare for me to send to inactive or previously banned profiles.
Jump to: