Topic: 3 Merit Stat After a Month of Merit (Read 880 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.

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.

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!!

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,

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.

Read this: Newbies can now pay a small fee to enable images

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?

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.

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.

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.

yes is very interesting infographic

and newbies can see HOW merits are distribuited
anyway, we need more merits source

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.

very interesting infographics.

These clearly would indicate that the merit system is working and people
from all ranks are receiving merit.

I would recommend that all further merit queries and complaints should be
directed to this thread !

Thank you for your suggestion, I will try to include the percentage of topics that are merited in the next month stat. I intentionally include copper members. The copper members are excluded in the ranks; maybe next time I will append them to their specific ranks.


I have specific names in each rank who received the highest merit; I am just bothered if I will include all the stat results in a single infographic. Thus I prefer to separate other results and post it in the next few days.
Member is included in the bar chart; it’s in the 4th position from left to right.

These data are publicly available in this forum; I just go into several profiles of forum members. Currently, I have no downloadable version of it. But if you want more statistic, you can talk with vod thru [email protected], he got more data than I have.

There are more than 1.8M profiles, and I just see 1.6M or 89% of those due to cloudflaire issues. Out of those, I have recorded active user and excluded ranks like Brand New, VIP, Donator and others. Thus I ended up with 135,369.

Yes, I agree with you, it’s troubling to see the average, that is why rather than keep it on my own, I share it with other members. I am on a member rank, and I am looking for an answer when (pessimistic and optimistic) could I possibly reached further ranks due to merits. I can’t find answer thus I do some small research.

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.

Sometimes the lower ranks gets more merits than the higher ranks are not getting enough credit probably are not reliable or constructive one and the lower ranks provide a more accurate or constructive one, wel this is only estimated right mate, but base on what I have analyzed junior, full, or legendary are the ones most of tge  time getting merited.

Data collection is not about basing all information of merit giving in all accounts here in bitcointalk.org so stop asking why I am not receiving merits base on this report, are you stupid or something?

Data collection is collection of information based only on what's is available, like this data, perhaps he uses only 1000 accounts per rank or per categories to come up with the results, that's why it's not 100% percent accurate. But it is true.

It seems jr and newbie received the advantages of very few, most of them have been high-level members get, explain what?

It would be very helpful to draw conclusions if we knew the breakdown on the demographics of your data. I would be able to draw some conclusions or at least ask some questions if I knew what % of your analyzed users were pertaining to which rank. It seems Newbies and Jr. ranked members have taken home a disproportionate amount of merit, but of course this would be dependent upon how many were included in the data.

The lower ranks have much lower merit per user, but a much higher % of total merit and I'm wondering why this is the case. It is obvious that there are more of them, but I wonder if this is indicative of anything deeper. I wonder why Members are averaging more than Full and Senior, unless there is a significant outlier skewing the data.

We're going to have to give merit a lot longer before we see all of the initial effects fade away and actually see how it will function long-term.

Nice and crispy info, I am just curious to know the data source. Where did you get the data? 

Getting a certificate of merit really is a very difficult and challenging if the merit accounts do not want to share with others. That makes increasing the rank on the forum really difficult.

Very interesting infographic.  Can you post your method for retrieving all that data.  Thank you! 

I did not receive any Merit in all post counts. Maybe I need to work harder and find more information to hope for merit.

How did you get the raw data to do this analysis?  Is there a download available?

It is good see the average newbie/jr. member are well on their way to the 10 they need to rank up to member.  But it is troubling to see the average Member, Full Member, and Sr. Member scoring so low on average when they need 90, 150, and 250, respectively, to rank up.

That copper would be nullius!

i would also like to point out that members rank was not included in the second graph.

Another one, where and how do you acquire these data? just curious. Thanks.

You shouldn't have to include "Copper" because it's a membership and not a rank. And you should add "what is the percentage of topics posted about Merits"