Topic: 3 Merit Stat After a Month of Merit (Read 867 times)
Amazing post, and now i am enlighten to this merit, and to what happen every month to the merit system. Thank you for your information. I hope that i will receive merit..
Sharing the data used for this analysis will help to back up your findings, because everything needs to be put into consideration. The info graph shows that people of lowers ranks, get more merits, but i have seen some accounts of most especially Jr. Members still in the position and having lots of activities, yet no merit.
Data i think will justify your findings.
Data i think will justify your findings.
Qualifying is a very difficult issue. I've posted a lot of posts yet I'm unable to get the Merit. Merit is very difficult to achieve.
Sorry to say but the "real number" is waaay lower
as you can see https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.31227162
Your stats are good if anyone do things in the right way but as you can see only 1 guy can move around 500 merit, (1 GUY/135000 members).
Now imagine only if 1% will cheat what happens.
as you can see https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.31227162
Your stats are good if anyone do things in the right way but as you can see only 1 guy can move around 500 merit, (1 GUY/135000 members).
Now imagine only if 1% will cheat what happens.
I'm wondering, OP did you take this into consideration when calculating your numbers? I'm wondering if you accounted for banned accounts, people caught or tagged for abusing merit. Where did you get your 135k members to calculate, was this everyone that has received merit up to the point of your calculations?
I would be much more confident in the numbers if I knew that known merit abusers were left out of the equation, or even factored as a 0. It also might be interested to eliminate any 0's or absurdly high outliers for the sake of realism. You'd be able to say something along the lines of "Users that have received at least 1-merit average X merit."
Guess no, cause is hard to check and a lot easier to report data without watch them
Great job, its clearly now, thanks. Only i have this question how you calculate 135k members, its amziing work.
The scheme is great, it would also be interesting which boards/ sections of the forum give the most merits, to those people who desire to get a merit know where the chance to become merited is the most high.
Really great info! You are definitely someone I need to follow for more statistical info on merits. I added this page to my thread where I am trying to centralize all the best posts about merit data to help out newbies interested in gaining merit.
Since you have written what is without a doubt some of the best articles on merit, your almost 1/4 of all the topics I have on there right now.
Thank you for what you are doing to help out the community!!
Since you have written what is without a doubt some of the best articles on merit, your almost 1/4 of all the topics I have on there right now.
Thank you for what you are doing to help out the community!!
In my point of view, it will be better if zentdex can make further analysis about average post-length (character counts) of each ranks. This one will help us to have clear picture about what's going on with merit system, merit circulation, and quality of each ranks (naively based on their post-length). Of course, threads which are too long don't mean that they are high-qualitied, but we should have those statistical figures at first.
It's not the thread length that counts, but the way that the point(s) are put across. A post should be concise and informative, and not overly verbose.
Statistics showing post length would not be meaningful, and it might be difficult to avoid including quotes.
Nice work on taking time to do this. It's is a start for more accountability and transparency in the forum. Also with this I think we would now have less threads in the Meta section about not getting merits. Question, is there a way to see how the merits are being given? I have seen a couple threads indicating at merit recycling etc. Maybe with your data we can account for those abusing the merit system. With regards to this particular information, it would appear that the higher the rank, the more merit received - this further asserts the claim that low ranking member's are finding it diffult to receive merits or it could be that they aren't putting in the genuine hard work to get those merits. All in all, bravo and hope you can keep this up.
Hello both zentdex and Snappycoco,
In my point of view, it will be better if zentdex can make further analysis about average post-length (character counts) of each ranks. This one will help us to have clear picture about what's going on with merit system, merit circulation, and quality of each ranks (naively based on their post-length). Of course, threads which are too long don't mean that they are high-qualitied, but we should have those statistical figures at first.
Thanks zentdex.
~ snip ~
So I guess, it seems like this merit system is kinda hard for those whose at the bottom. We should do our best as newbies. Lol.
I would like to join current discussion about merit system in the topic created by zentdex, which is actually interesting. I agree that lower-ranked members in the forum seems to get lower merits after the launch of merit system. I am not sure about reliability of zentdex data analysis, but I highly appreciate his works.In my point of view, it will be better if zentdex can make further analysis about average post-length (character counts) of each ranks. This one will help us to have clear picture about what's going on with merit system, merit circulation, and quality of each ranks (naively based on their post-length). Of course, threads which are too long don't mean that they are high-qualitied, but we should have those statistical figures at first.
Thanks zentdex.
So I guess, it seems like this merit system is kinda hard for those whose at the bottom. We should do our best as newbies. Lol.
What is this copper stuff?
Read this: Newbies can now pay a small fee to enable imagesBy popular demand, newbies can now pay to have some of their restrictions lifted. If you pay the fee, you become a Copper Member, and you can post images. That's the main point of this: allowing newbies to post images. Additionally (and these might change depending on how things go), Copper Members currently have these bonuses:
- Some of the same permissions as Member-rank members, such as reduced signature styling restrictions. (But none of the PM-related restrictions are currently lifted, such as the style limit or per-hour PM limit.)
- Your "you must wait ____ seconds between ___" counter is reduced by 75%. So if you're naturally of Newbie rank, you only have to wait 360-75% = 90 seconds.
[...]
You can buy it here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=credit;promote
- Some of the same permissions as Member-rank members, such as reduced signature styling restrictions. (But none of the PM-related restrictions are currently lifted, such as the style limit or per-hour PM limit.)
- Your "you must wait ____ seconds between ___" counter is reduced by 75%. So if you're naturally of Newbie rank, you only have to wait 360-75% = 90 seconds.
[...]
You can buy it here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=credit;promote
What is this copper stuff?
Copper membership gives rights to the newbies to post images, but they have to pay a fee. I think it also removes some limitations to send PMs.
What is this copper stuff?
Sorry to say but the "real number" is waaay lower
as you can see https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.31227162
Your stats are good if anyone do things in the right way but as you can see only 1 guy can move around 500 merit, (1 GUY/135000 members).
Now imagine only if 1% will cheat what happens.
as you can see https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.31227162
Your stats are good if anyone do things in the right way but as you can see only 1 guy can move around 500 merit, (1 GUY/135000 members).
Now imagine only if 1% will cheat what happens.
I'm wondering, OP did you take this into consideration when calculating your numbers? I'm wondering if you accounted for banned accounts, people caught or tagged for abusing merit. Where did you get your 135k members to calculate, was this everyone that has received merit up to the point of your calculations?
I would be much more confident in the numbers if I knew that known merit abusers were left out of the equation, or even factored as a 0. It also might be interested to eliminate any 0's or absurdly high outliers for the sake of realism. You'd be able to say something along the lines of "Users that have received at least 1-merit average X merit."
I think that introduction score of merit, will reduce quantity of spam on a bitcointalk. Now posts will become more substantial. But it would be desirable that merit would be given after user activity . For example, 100 points activity would equal 1 merit. It is possible?
Sorry to say but the "real number" is waaay lower
as you can see https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.31227162
Your stats are good if anyone do things in the right way but as you can see only 1 guy can move around 500 merit, (1 GUY/135000 members).
Now imagine only if 1% will cheat what happens.
as you can see https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.31227162
Your stats are good if anyone do things in the right way but as you can see only 1 guy can move around 500 merit, (1 GUY/135000 members).
Now imagine only if 1% will cheat what happens.
I'm not sure where you'd get all these raw data but if this is accurate as of 135, 369 members of the forum after a month.
Then, this is very helpful. As many participants also can check the stats of the Merit System and its effectiveness so far.
Now, to those people that are complaining that the System is not moving - there you have it.
Then, this is very helpful. As many participants also can check the stats of the Merit System and its effectiveness so far.
Now, to those people that are complaining that the System is not moving - there you have it.
Thank you for your suggestion. I excluded other information so that the most important part will be highlighted, but it seems worth mentioning to include the population.
Ahh, this helps me understand the data and percentages a little bit better. Out of 135k users, almost 120k of them were Member or less. I think this would skew the data a bit, because without equal representation within the data, or at least close to it, you cannot expect a good sample for comparisons with the higher rank. I know it might make the calculations seem more realistic if you include 135,000 users instead of 10,000, but the comparisons that would be drawn from equal populations within each would seem more representative.
Although, I don't know how representative these percentages of each rank are for the entire forum, so it may more or less be negligible, but for me it might be more helpful to have equal numbers of each rank when doing the data to get a more uniform representation for comparisons and conclusions.
Thats really interesting to see how the merit distribution is going on in the forum. It was unexpected to see copper members receiving the higher number of merits, and wondering how they got more as we dont see much members with that status. There are only 1% of the copper member and still they have got huge merits. Unexpectedly seniors and full members are not working up to the mark because they are having average merits as compared to other ranks. More is expected from the seniors because that is the rank where people are more often knowledgable at this stage (expected to be) and write the quality content.
yes is very interesting infographic
and newbies can see HOW merits are distribuited
anyway, we need more merits source
Jump to: