Topic: 5 lists for merit earners: Initial merit drop to the next recognized rank - page 4. (Read 2807 times)

I didn't do the calculations for that member, but for reference, I gained 28 activity points in the first two days of membership, after that it reverted to the standard 14/14 rule. I believe that this is the fastest you can pick up the initial 28 points.

I think these three can be added to your 0..100 list:

user_id   name   posts   activity   merit   rank   DateCreated   MeritReceived   MeritDiff
667927     Paractor   269   269   133   Full Member   2015-11-27 09:16:54.000   133   0
1268116   vlad230   515   168   138   Full Member   2017-10-31 16:36:47.000   138   0
1038794   deeperx   985   182   359   Full Member   2017-06-20 17:47:21.000   359   0

They were created before the trimeframe window I used as a safe to list the 19 cases I gave you before, thus they didn't show up. All three cases seem to have gave gained all their Merit without an actual initial Airdrop.

On the other hand, this case should probable be excluded strictly speaking:

user_id   name   posts   activity   merit   rank   DateCreated   MeritReceived   MeritDiff
1381008   LastJedi   280   182   122   Full Member   2017-12-05 02:10:06.000   112   10

The user seems to have has an initial airdrop of 10 Merits, which is weird considering the date creation of the account (05/12/2017), which is at worst 52 days before the Merit System kick-off (night of 24/01/2018). That in theory means that activity would have been less than 60 at the time, and therefore should not have been a Member yet during airdrop (thus I expected to see no airdrop). There must be something about how activity kicks in that I still haven't got a grasp on...

Aah, I see... It seems, indeed you are telling the truth. Sorry mate. I will remove the isQuestionable tag.

---

update: Done @Alex_Sr

- What if he is not physically ok. No one just doesn't know his current situation. I really hope that he is both mentally and physically healthy.
I do agree that he might be an ALT.

I think I must be the only person who put nullius on ignore. I thought he was a shooting star, and an alt that had been sent here as a wind up. Look at his profile.

Name:    nullius
Posts:    933
Activity:    168
Merit:    725
Position:    Copper Member
Date Registered:    March 29, 2017, 08:17:00 AM
Last Active:    April 24, 2018, 11:02:30 PM

What we need here are good stable members who will support the forum, and not temporary visitors, who are here to do a bit of ego stroking.

His profile link should be made sticky in meta so that others can also follow and learn from his posts. I will be bookmarking this post to check his posting history  myself later when I have some time.

I am happy to see that more than 1000 people became members here from jr members after merit system.

Fixed. 254 + 6 + 10 = 270.

Confirmed started from 0 or from 10?  

Yes, he might not started at 0 but still he gain more than a hundred, and now he's also on the verge on getting more out of his styles in posting and gathering data. He might also be of help for you to know some other accounts that you wish to know and have it documented. Although LoyceV was already good enough to do things that's necessary for you profile but still having a lot more people will do more awesome thing

I can confirm he started from 10 Merit.
Last Friday:
He now has 270 Merit, and received 6 since Friday.

Thanks for the shout out mate. I appreciate your positive input.

zentdex - has s/he started from 0 merits. Looking at his profile (November 20, 2017) seems like s/he was already a member and started with initial 10 merits. Can anyone confirm?

I think nullius will be on every list that you will make Even if he's a human, but still he's totally out of everyone's league here. Hoping to find someone like him or even better to him.

As for the data that you need I think you should also include zentdex.

I would love to create more list like the 0 to 100+, sepreate table but same format. I am thinking of three more lists:

100 to 250+
250 to 500+ and finally
500 to 1000+

I would appreciate if any of you DdmrDdmr, LoyceV can provide me the raw data.

---

Update:
Also a list of 10 to 100+ merited members.

LoyceV called dibs on detailing these cases, so I believe the right thing to do is wait for his data and simply use my aggregate as a contrast.

Can we have a full list till full members? I think we can skip the Members.

A very late greeting for you mate, as for me, I didn't seem to be active this lately but still I'm watching your posts recently and almost all of it has a quite good representation of demonstrating Merits on how it was.  Another fellow made it on the ranks, I guess it wouldn't be less possible if some people are having such posts like yours. Congrats

You're right. You can backtrack using the initial airdrop as a measure for the initial Rank. I did it like this at some point in a post from way back, but somehow got confussed now with the initial sMerit <> initial Merit (obviously).

Based on what I can see, if I'm right, we have:
 
- No one has made it to Legendary
- 8 to Hero (from Sr. Member)
- 33 to Sr. Member (from Full Member)
- 21 to Full Member (from scratch; two more than on a list I found yesterday with older creation dates), and another additional 53 to Full Member (from  Member)
- 1.614 to Member (starting from Jr. Member or below).
-> I'm only listing regular ranks here, since I don't know how the initial Merit played out with Copper Members, VIPs, and so on.

The above data is based on all historical records, and not using as a safe baseline a certain date of account creation onwards.

Since you're going to detail the users I'll stop here, but the above could serve to cross-reference our results to double-check.

Screen captured for the record:# #

xtraelv, use search option and find related topics about your concern. If my memory serves me right then we already have a topic where we talked about plagiarism and citing. Don't ask question here and there which makes you sounding stupid. Please back off!

These people proved themselves to the community, they care about the community. They are not shamelessly using bitcoinTalk and its resources to promote some shitty/shady exchange.

You have problem with me not with others. Deal with me! Let them enjoy on what they are good at.
You still have following time left.


PS: I see you removed the original tag and tagged me with a new one without even waiting for my feedback where I gave you 7 days of time to finish your investigation. Seems like you have done with your investigation but too coward to wait for my response? Or it's a Moral hazard from your side?

---

update1:
Good to see that you are working to improve yourself: Most iconic bitcointalk threads. archive
But again, if my memory serves me right then there is already a similar topic. Your the search option.

update2:
Legendary profiles of bitcointalk.  <=== Thought to save your time.

Content has got much better since the introduction of the merit system, however regarding users ranking up slower; That's working as intended, although it might be true that only exceptional members are going to rank up multiple times we should see an improvement in this when there's a few hundred merit sources.  



Low amounts of merit being traded between alts isn't a problem as they'll likely run out of sMerit before they rank up any of their accounts. If they are trading a large amount between their accounts then this should be fairly easy to recognize. The users that feel they need to trade merit between themselves aren't likely to put in the effort to get external merit either.

On the whole, the Merit System seems to be working as a double-edged sword:

- On the one side, less people are ranking-up (and I’m not just talking about the younger members), and at a slower pace too. Those that do rank-up, put quite a bit of effort into it, so from the Forum’s content perspective that is something favourable.
- On the other side, numbers are pretty low, and even worse if we dissect the profiles of ranked-up members and determine that a large amount are DT tagged or suspicious to say the least.

Talking about suspicious cases of merit abuse and plagiarism, as can be seen on this thread and multiple around, we can encounter endless loop situations where by one is detected as suspicious and reported multiple times overtime for the same facts, even if the case is cleared or, at least, not proven wrongful without a shade of doubt.
Here again, we have the double edged-sword:

-   If they are not re-reported, they may be left aside as unresolved and thus remain exempt.
-   If they are re-reported it’s easier for them to be looked into, but innocent cases could incur in the endless loop situation.

Since there is no "global ledger" with the cases and their status of resolution, and a protocol that is guided by it’s use, endless loop situations will occur. But because there are no crystalline rules on how to proceed, so will the abuse continue as a means to bypass the difficulties of getting merited.

As shahzadafzal stated, the posts your quote always reference the article source, so there is no real issue here. Most of the news sections do the same, or even sections like "the wall observer" where it is often done in a graphical manner. Informative posts that cite the source should be that, informative, and could lead to getting good debates in motion.

Don't want to repeat what has already been discussed in another topic https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.32771539


P.S. Statistics of my reports are available to administrators

mdayonliner, do you have any more questions?

Maybe you don't trust the forum administrator which is appointed xandry staff of the Russian section of the forum?