Topic: Another merit metric that could be considered in ranking. (Read 629 times)

I agree to this. What's @Jetcash trying to imply here is that we need to be more considerate, or I would use the term "flexible" when it comes in giving merits. For example, person A is a person who is a genius, whose grades are always top notch, and then there is person B, whose grades are just average. Person A would not see person's B opinion or suggestion interesting most of the time, because their level of understanding have a very huge gap, so what's happening right now in the forum is pretty much discrimination, instead of helping those in needs, they are ignoring them.

Please don't get me wrong here, I am not saying that we should give merits freely, of course we need to choose on who are deserves it, my point is, if a post does not help you, that doesn't mean that it is not helpful to the other members of this forum, to make this short, exploring all the thread (if possible) will gives you the idea that even in the "spam threads", there are still a lot of good quality posters that are helping others but being ignored because they post on a thread where you treat it as a "spam threads"

I think instead of down grading merits to encourage people to post in multiple boards.

If the idea was to use a multiple for many board merit earner people would accept it as a good idea.

Ie. merits earn rank exactly like they do now so a one board merit earner gets a multiple of 1 for his merits.

since merits would rank up exactly like they do that one board guy would not be punished.

A 2 board merit earner gets 5 free merits.
A 3 board merit earner gets 10 free merits.
A 4 board merit earner gets  15 free merits.
A 5 board merit earner gets 25 free merits.

so on and so forth.

Thus no punishment for the specialist one or two board merit earner.

And a reward for guys like me that have merits in a lot of boards.

Since

1000 merits still make a legend
  500 merits still make a hero
  250 merits still make a senior member

this variation of your idea 💡 is simply all win win. no stick just carrot 🥕.

Why do people always have to assume extremes. If all you ever read are books on Rat Rods, then you are going to miss out on a lot of life. Conversely, you can have a rewarding and fulfilling life, even if you have never heard of a Rat Rod.

My point is that you should find the best threads in four or five of the boards here, and not spend all of your time in one corner.

So I'll be:

• Meta Master
• Reputation Master

The former will piss off ch, the latter fits my Switzerland-image. But please don't This list will eventually get very long for many users.

It reminds us to rethink of how users became merit sources.

- Automatically allocated by the admin since 24 Jan 2018.
- Merit sources who applied for all boards, and they did not emphasize which boards they will focus to distributed sourced-merits.
- Merit sources who applied for limited boards, who will try to keep promises and distribute their sourced-merits on boards they promised to focus on when applied.

Merit-deserving posts are always deserving ones (they are good posts), whatsoever boards they posted on. It is only difference between merit-sources and how they do their works.

It is unrealistic to require all sources to decentralize their sourced-merits over all boards on the forum.

I think this metric could be used in a different way.

Let's say you got 500 merit from the Bitcoin Technical Support section. Then add a custom title, Bitcoin Tech& Support master.

So everyone who had acquired more than 500 merits in a single section can be displayed as custom title or something like this.

Nothing wrong with that. If someone feels better and more confident writing only in his native language, and even rank up, so be it.

Generally, forcing people to write on boards they know little about, or have no interest in is a bad idea, as it can only ruin it for those seriously interested in the topics. This problem is very obvious in gambling board, where bunch of members write about stuff they know nothing about, just to meet post quota for their signature campaign. Making post that makes sense in topic you know little about is already hard, imagine if you have to get some merit for that..

there are users who became hero members just by posting in their local board, you'd rarely see them in other boards (unless participating in bounty). I somewhat agree.

I agree that it's more difficult for a newbie to earn merit. But it's completely normal. The newbie should prove himself first. For example a newbie register and posts some statistic at his first post should't get merit.

If a same post is made by a newbie and a user with more than 2000 merit, most of the times, the newbie has lower chance to earn merit. It's not just because the merit sender thinks that the poster might be a scammer. A post made by a user with +2000 merit is read much more than the post made by a newbie. Some users (including me) might skip a post made by a newbie when they don't have much time to real all posts. But this problem can be solved very soon if the user proves himself.

In my opinion, there is no need to make it more difficult or more easy to rank up. The current system is good enough. Even if there is any problem (I don't think there is a big problem), that's with how smerits are spent not with the system.
I have seen many newbies (especially in beginners & help and Bitcoin Technical Support boards) earn merit only for asking a question. Maybe that's not enough and we need more merit sources focus on low ranked members. Maybe Instead of threads asking how to earn merit we need some threads discussing how to spend smerits.
Generally, I think most of merit sources are doing their work well and all newbies have big chance to become a legendary.

I agree with your opinion. A Turkish proverb says: Each lion roars in its own dumpster. or "The power of the lion becomes evident from where it sleeps."
I mean; Each user is strong in their own section.

Merits should be equal, just as every idea is equal...

I've developed my own trading system. It is a combination of HODLing and scalping based on wicks. If I could think of a catchy name for it, then I might start a thread for discussion. I can't use "jet" in the name, as it isn't a get rich quick system, but it is a slow way to build your Bitcoin pile without any risk ( in my opinion ).

I would merit this  but you don't need any points.  I  do not look at every  section.

It is time consuming.  I speak only english  so if I merit it will be for a post in english.

I used to try to read and merit in bitcoin discussion  very hard to merit there as many threads are created to make signature payments.
I don't actively trade so trading becomes hard to read and merit.
I have some time today to poke around some other spots to try and give away points.

Merit isn't necessarily an endorsement. For Newbies, it's enough for me if the post shows a real interest. I usually check for plagiarism, and if looks legit, I Merit them. I think I'm doing a good job selecting Newbies who aren't spammers. In the last 180 days, I've only sent 3 Merit to users who are now banned (Lol: theymos leads that list with 145 Merit).

I agree that good active contributors should be rewarded, and I try to do this whenever I can. Several other sources do this as well, and this is why you may see a block of merits being awarded to a post which may not warrant the award. It is to encourage the poster. I think TMAN was called to task for doing this when he bulked an award for a dozen posts into a single post. The problem is that it is quite time consuming to keep checking post history, and I've now got someone helping me by suggesting members that I should check for regular quality contributions.

I don't know who the merit sources are but notable users that have tons of merit usually have long logs of merit they've sent in the last 120 days. Problem is that merit is being assigned to exceptional users/posting quality and not to those who post "good enough" which creates a disparity. I don't think you should be stuck at full member or Sr. member for 4 years because you aren't exceptional. Now, to be clear, I don't think you should earn merit for posting just "good enough" but rather merit should be given for exceptional posting. This is why I believe there needs to be some other aspect or metric involved in ranking up apart from earning merit to users who aren't necessarily exceptional. Another issue that arises is that we can't control what boards merit sources or merit givers browse, nor should we. This again will create disparities in where merit is assigned. Someone posting in Bitcoin discussion might not get the same exposure versus someone posting in Meta. This seemed to be a problem in local boards as well but has gotten better with more merit sources. Nonetheless, the issue still exists.


Fair enough. I'm with you here.


Definitely agree with adding more donor ranks as long as there is a timely pathway for members to earn the same benefits free. More revenue for the forum while members who want to contribute get to reap the benefits.

This is why I made the suggestion. In fact the fault lies with the merit awarders, who are creating this popularity, and obscuring some of the threads that support the original purpose of Bitcoin Talk. Some merit sources state that they don't have enough merits to reward all of the posts they would like to, and other sources state that they can't find posts to reward.

Bitcoin, crypto and world economies are going through some very radical changes, and it would be great if this was a forum to discuss these. Unfortunately, the significant topics don't attract contributions from the movers and shakers, and all we seem to be able to do is to post links to their YouTube videos, and topics in other media reports.

Most of the replies seem to  be focused on increasing the difficulty in ranking, but my main point is the need to move away from the obsession with the structure of BT, and to encourage and reward discussion about the world outside BT.

At first I thought this was going to be a thread about having another rank for high merit receivers. I do like the idea of a new rank for the top-earners, especially when becoming legendary is far too common these days.


I think ranking up is already difficult enough and there's no need to over-complicate it further, but you could do something with this on the proposed reward badges ie once a person has got x amount of merit from a certain board they get a little badge related to that section. You could also do something with the reports once a user has reported x amount in that sub. Not sure how difficult it would be to implement but it would be nice to see rewards and badges for certain things, especially reporting which doesn't really come with any benefits currently and is a thankless task.


Agreed. It is difficult, especially for average or even good posters. You probably basically have to be an exceptional poster to rank up to a higher rank within a reasonable time-frame. I still think we should implement more donor ranks like Silver/Gold Member with the added benefits of becoming a higher rank all but in name (you wouldn't literally become a Senior or Hero but get the benefits of becoming one ie a bigger signature and avatar etc). I think this would stop a lot of people needlessly fishing for merits and I'm sure a lot of people would prefer to cough up a bit of money to 'skip the queue' as it were. Give the money to charity if the forum doesn't need it and then it's win win.

I don't understand the obsession of making it harder to rank up on the forum. There's been so many suggestions of ideas that unnecessarily complicate the merit system and make it more difficult to rank up as if it isn't already difficult. If you are a newbie starting off and actually contribute to the forum, your chance of making it to legendary are pretty slim despite contributions of constructive posts because people don't tend to merit newer members, including myself. I've mentioned this in a previous post, but sending merit to someone is an endorsement of their content so sending merit to a newbie is banking on the fact that the person isn't a scammer or shitposter. Not many notable members are going to take that risk nor should they.

There needs to be a combination of a ranking system involving merit and activity but also a system where they can act independently to rank up. Having an activity requirement on top of a merit requirement to rank up is tough and forces people to only post content that's popular enough to earn merit on certain boards. I get that if you don't want aged accounts being able to rank up by spamming you would need to have some merit requirement. In that case, I don't think it'd be a bad idea to lower the merits needed. If you're an already established member that posts quality content, you're going to earn plenty of merit because you're a popular user. Anyone below that is going to get the short end of the stick.

Okay, that is an understatement I get like 2-5 deletes a week hahaha. I just realized though... It's because I reply instead of edit a previous comment to add more information. I probably should have realized that months ago.






Awww Phil and LoyceV..... I was making a post today in mining software like usual lol.... I was like WOAH I got more merit points what did I do. Did a drop a funny meme that blew up... Hmm I don't remember. I then found this thread...

So first off thanks both of you of acknowledging I am good and passionate about a specific topic. Like Philipma1957 said I for example would be A++ in some section but I recall a year ago maybe more asking about trying to convert to native segwit wallet and had to get help from a bunch of people because of the massive amount of fees... You would think a user who has been here since 2011 would be on top of these things. But then again I am hodl gang and I don't really check out section outside of mining. If I do go outside my section I rarely post because I am generally not to sure of myself and don't want to give misinformation. I think 95% of my posts are in Mining and Mining software. Pretty much everyone knows me in those two sections.

Anyways Phil your and A++++++++ in my book haha

I don't think that's necessary. An extra merit metric would put more constraints to the system as more conditions have to be passed.  ie: who gave who and where it was given. For now, The merit system and activity metrics are enough until proven otherwise.

Yeah I agree with  your take on mining section.  I like frodocooper and he is a very hard working mod.

But He deletes a lot  I get at least 1 or 2 deletes a week on the mining section. ( I post 50 posts a week in that section. I am guessing it is 50 a week.)

Once in a while I will pm him and argue my point.

But yeah it is  a very tightly modded section.

I think under  50 different people post there in a week.

Not  that there should be 1000 different people but more then 50.

I lot of regulars can be discouraging in that section.

I used to post a lot in altcoin mining  section
but it is kind of dead now.


nine threads from 2016 to 2020  just over 600,000 views in total

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/number-9-ninth-altcoin-thread-back-to-the-moon-baby-5144362 thread 9    14,000 plus
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/8th-alt-coin-thread-or-what-to-do-now-that-asics-are-all-over-the-place-3843565 thread 8    81,000
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/happy-new-years-seventh-alt-coin-thread-2674194 thread 7    33,000
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/sixth-alt-coin-thread-i-forgot-to-mod-last-thread-2138550 thread 6    79,000
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/fifth-alt-coin-thread-last-four-got-too-big-2019146 thread 5    46,000
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/fourth-alt-coin-thread-last-three-got-oversized-1877588 thread 4   108,000
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/third-alt-coin-thread-last-two-were-too-big-builds-links-thoughts-etc-1799555 thread 3     41,000
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/my-second-zec-xmr-eth-thread-builds-info-links-thoughts-and-photos-1584973 thread 2   147,000
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/my-1-gpu-now-11gpus-5rigs-for-ethereum-45-days-of-mining-photos-thoughts-1429151 thread 1    50,000


So if a guy does just this above  and earns a lot of merits  helping a lot of people get into mining  and he only does this just this we  need to help him not say  you are not diverse.

Those threads are pretty cool a lot of info and history in them.

Sorry if that's what it looks like. Might be my wrong understanding of this part out of your reply: "since also there can happen to exist intelligent and useful posts" - "can happen to" sounded to me like these kind of posts are rare but possible. But now that I think twice, that might actually be true.. I just got my mind trained to avoid the useless replies coming from members just re-writing an earlier reply to rise their post count, so I'm trained to only see posts with an actual value. Didn't mean to offend you or anything. That's just the way I read it.. and I like debates a lot!

I did get your point from the start, hence the second paragraph of my reply to you: "and Offtopic, of course, has topics unrelated to BTC". I just think it'd be unfair to eliminate the possibility of sharing some merit with an user you believe has a good point just because it's an Off-topic reply/thread.

Somehow instead of trying to get what I mean, you always try to get something against my posts lately.
I must have been done something wrong against you?  

Joke aside, my point was that those could be examples because they are not necessarily Bitcoin related.
Also my point was that there can be also in those subforums posts which deserve merits (hence the wording about intelligent and useful posts!!!)
I also said that overall the idea (of not meriting all subforums) is not so good ("questionable")

Clearer now?

Edit: Probably my wording could have been better indeed. I'm happy we are on same page now.

Why do you assume off-topic posts are non-intelligent and useless? Knowing that most sig campaign threads I've seen do not count Offtopic and P&S posts, spammers & merit farmers will probably stay farther from Offtopic than from the Mining section for example.

Merit shouldn't be disabled for Offtopic and P&S imo. Although it's "BitcoinTalk" and Offtopic, of course, has topics unrelated to BTC, if an user wants to support a member's idea they should be able to give them a merit as a "thank you for writing this post".


And still, how would that be fair? I understand what you mean by diversity, but I can give myself as an example: I don't care about my post count and yet, although I check the Mining board on an almost hourly basis, I have no God damn topic to reply to. Even if I wanted to, I don't have any reply for a topic because my mining knowledge is very, very limited.

Spammers will always find a way. If you think diversity is the solution, well.. spammers will post on every board possible and so let's say welcome to a forum full of megathreads.

But before talking about diversity, we have to talk about a different issue: people giving merits to spammy users are to blame for it. A newbie would uselessly spam, whether it's on a single board or on the entire forum, if nobody would give them a reward for it. That's why I try my best to check out an user's profile and post quality before giving a merit. Give it to a sh*tposter and they'll just continue sh*tposting.

In the end, if an user has to post everywhere on the forum to get merit and rank up, every user spamming Bitcoin Discussion and Gambling megathreads will start doing it on the entire forum. Sh*tposting spreading like a damn flu through all the boards, trying to hunt for merit.

Edited this post a few minutes later to fix repetitive & missing words.

As much as I respect Jet Cash, I have to also disagree.  I don't think it should matter one whit where a member earns his merits, and if that information were taken into account in the ranking up process, it would make it much more difficult than it needs to be--and it's already incredibly hard for members to get to Full Member if they registered after the merit system was implemented.

Not everyone got into bitcoin for the same reason, so I think what you said might be an unreasonable expectation.  The more people who are enthusiastic about bitcoin, the better, and it doesn't much matter to me where their enthusiasm comes from.

I think you guys are reading more into my suggestion than I intended. I wasn't suggesting that you had to receive merits on all boards to rank up, but more that rank improvement should be harder if all of your merits were earned on a single board. The requirement to receive merits from a variety of awarders was intended to try to avoid upranking members of spamming groups, and not to create a "classist" forum.

Also, I think there should be a bit more diversity on some boards, and a bit less on others. Bitcoin discussions is one that could benefit from a bit more interest in Bitcoin as a project, and not as a free money faucet. Mining is one that could do with some attention as well. It seems to be elitist, and not newbie ( to mining ) friendly. I've made a few attempts to learn about mining as an educational exercise, and not for income, and the threads were deleted. I appreciate that discussions on setting up 1,000 ASICs on a solar farm is interesting, but it is a bit out of my income and ability ranges at the moment. Also, the mining board should come out of its cellar, and help us to understand the changes that are happening at the moment - the BCH tax on mining rewards for example, and the proposal for mining pools to allow members to select the use of blocks that they find. With China controlling over 50% of the hash rate, this change could be significant to preserve decentralisation.

My point exactly.  I am lucky in that I am somewhat of a generalist I do a lot of things at B+ level.  There is a place for me here because of this.

But there are people that are really good at one thing.  I have a friend he is a banker  and he is really good at banking/trading bonds/loans.

He is A+  maybe A+++  if he posted here he would be a star in the trading section of the forum but that  is all he is really really good at.

So why should he be punished for being really good at one section?

The idea is to blend him  A++   and a programer A++  with a guy like me  a generalist. 

I would prefer  that approach on the forum.

   If you look at me  mosts of my merits are in mining.

 It is not that I am best at that I am a B+  and I post a lot in that section so I earn a lot of merits in that section.


I do get the idea  that being able to do   posts with merit in six sections well would be nice. 


But  not at the price of punishing a guy that is brilliant in
coding firmware for miners.


This user has solid firmware mods for mining

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;u=34816

He is a specialist  he deserves  those merits  and he has helped mining btc  for many people.

this is the only post with a merit https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.53151788

that is not in mining in the last 120 days.


But his firmware work is outstanding.


January 14, 2020, 04:04:07 AM: 3 from favebook for Re: Bitmain introduces the Antminer S17 Pro, Antminer S17, and the Antminer T17
January 13, 2020, 07:29:55 PM: 2 from Biodom for Re: Bitmain introduces the Antminer S17 Pro, Antminer S17, and the Antminer T17
January 13, 2020, 01:24:20 PM: 2 from HagssFIN for Re: Bitmain introduces the Antminer S17 Pro, Antminer S17, and the Antminer T17
January 13, 2020, 10:25:57 AM: 2 from philipma1957 for Re: Bitmain introduces the Antminer S17 Pro, Antminer S17, and the Antminer T17
January 13, 2020, 06:31:30 AM: 5 from frodocooper for Re: Bitmain introduces the Antminer S17 Pro, Antminer S17, and the Antminer T17
December 29, 2019, 09:14:31 PM: 3 from frodocooper for Re: "MP TEST FIRMWARE!" on S17 / T17 series control board?
December 23, 2019, 09:14:21 PM: 2 from frodocooper for Re: New s9k firmware
December 11, 2019, 11:21:58 AM: 1 from philipma1957 for Re: Duty, Tariff, VAT Rates
December 10, 2019, 10:24:51 PM: 2 from TheYankeesWin! for Firmware for S17 - 85th/s and T17 - 65th/s T17 44t@45w/t • AUTO-TUNE • Asic.to
December 10, 2019, 10:15:54 PM: 5 from frodocooper for Firmware for S17 - 85th/s and T17 - 65th/s T17 44t@45w/t • AUTO-TUNE • Asic.to
December 05, 2019, 11:56:55 AM: 3 from philipma1957 for Re: Bitmain to release S17E 64TH
November 29, 2019, 10:57:47 PM: 4 from frodocooper for Re: SSH Unlock & Signature Check Removal Tool • For Antminer S17/T17 and S15
November 29, 2019, 10:52:29 PM: 2 from frodocooper for Re: New Antminer S15 T15 overclock firmware
November 29, 2019, 12:42:47 AM: 2 from philipma1957 for SSH Unlock & Signature Check Removal Tool Antminer S17/T17/S15 No Installation!
November 28, 2019, 07:08:31 AM: 2 from frodocooper for Re: Bitmain to release S17E 64TH
November 28, 2019, 06:49:31 AM: 3 from frodocooper for Re: SSH Unlock & Signature Check Removal Unlock Tool • For Antminer S17 and T17
November 27, 2019, 07:44:03 PM: 1 from BitMaxz for SSH Unlock & Signature Check Removal Tool Antminer S17/T17/S15 No Installation!
November 27, 2019, 12:52:33 PM: 2 from philipma1957 for SSH Unlock & Signature Check Removal Tool Antminer S17/T17/S15 No Installation!
November 26, 2019, 07:26:15 AM: 2 from frodocooper for Re: Well the 2018 btc diff jumps are over so what will 2019 bring us?
November 24, 2019, 09:18:27 PM: 3 from frodocooper for Re: What to do with all the old s-9s.
November 24, 2019, 08:56:09 PM: 5 from frodocooper for SSH Unlock & Signature Check Removal Tool Antminer S17/T17/S15 No Installation!

November 22, 2019, 04:05:17 PM: 1 from LoyceV for Re: The Bitcoin Forum is 10 years old!

November 17, 2019, 09:23:09 PM: 2 from philipma1957 for Re: Antminer S9 Volt Rocket Ship firmware mod! ~ALL S9 MODELS INCLUDING S9i S9j~
November 17, 2019, 09:01:37 PM: 2 from frodocooper for Re: Antminer S9 Volt Rocket Ship firmware mod! ~ALL S9 MODELS INCLUDING S9i S9j~
November 17, 2019, 09:01:14 PM: 3 from frodocooper for Re: Antminer S9 Volt Rocket Ship firmware mod! ~ALL S9 MODELS INCLUDING S9i S9j~
November 11, 2019, 09:13:59 PM: 3 from frodocooper for Re: Antminer S9 Volt Rocket Ship firmware mod! ~ALL S9 MODELS INCLUDING S9i S9j~


So he is a specialist and good for the forum.

The ranking system went to a self-obtainable one, to a socially approved one (implying more dedicated time than before, and better content, along site the tipping of this thing called Merit). The proposal seems to veiledly point towards first class Merits, obtained by those being really Bitcoin centred, as opposed to those obtained on other boards or content derivate types. Consequently, one's Rank would fall into the same scale of perception, which I don’t see any benefit in, lest it be to distinguish ones from others depending on their knowledge on Bitcoin.

As I mentioned earlier today, perhaps thought could be turned into alternative features such as a virtual Bitcointalk CV built from taking on courses and such, where one would be able to focus in a didactical manner on acquiring knowledge (I’ve got here in mind here those corporate or consultancy repositories of online and collaborative courses). Of course that is a whole different approach, and costly if taken to the extreme, but would spare the Ranks from being classist, whilst forging knowledge and display of that knowledge through a Bitcointalk CV. Maybe a bit wild and over the top, but it would be nice in my opinion to have a Bitcointalk Academy of its own.

Bad idea. It will end up with people posting on boards they don't like because they need 4 "Beginners board Merits" for the next rank, while they have enough "Altcoin board Merits" already.
Let's not do that. All Merits are equal!

I also agree with you
Honestly, this suggestion for making more specialist section to earn merit is not good. Force people do what we want usually make the users feel unfriendly or difficult.
Each users have potential technique, they will post in sections they feel they can.

But, the good point of this suggestion, every newbie will have many knowledge because they will learn hardly to understand about mining, analysis, and technical. I also a newbie, till now i don't understand about mining, analysis, and technical.

You might be a good mining technician, but you should still be aware of Bitcoins role in the world economy. Without that knowledge, you won't be able to make good mining investment decisions. One advantage of BitcoinTalk used to be that it brought together various specialists for discussions, but that doesn't seem to happen as much now.

This could work only partly, in a way like the subforums where's no signature shown: some certain areas (Off-Topic, P&S, name it) which are for chit chat and not really Bitcoin related could be a target for "no merit areas".
But even that would be somewhat questionable, since also there can happen to exist intelligent and useful posts.

I'm not sure u understand the main objective of the post. Are you suggesting the forum indicates (maybe on the user's profile) which boards the merits were earned from? Or it should be an added parameter to ranking up as is indicated in the topic title?
I would disagree in both points, the later would be almost impossible to implement and I do not think the former is important. Anyone interested in learning where a certain user got merits from can do so manually.

I for example get merits on boards which I spend the least time on. I like to visit the more technical boards, but do not have sufficient knowledge to engage in most of the discussions as yet, so I do more reading than replying.

Sorry but this would be a very bad idea.

Look at the real-life situations, not everybody is a doctor, an electrician, a pilot, and a farmer.
Why should somebody who is only interested in mining and does one hell of a job there giving real advice be forced to talk about speculation and gambling or being restricted to stay a member of a full member because he hates politics?

Members who come and pick up merit or two from different boards when they finally nail one answer out of a myriad will be able to become "legendaries" while real contributors who have done a million times more for the forum would be left at the bottom.
Of course, for most of them, ranks don't really matter but I still see it as some kind of injustice.

I tend to agree with this.

We are bitcointalk.org

So if someone posts only in bitcoin mining section.

Making hundreds of good posts earning 1000 merits that member is doing well for bitcoin.

Making good posts in meta with real value is good for bitcointalk.org So a person that is mostly earning there hopefully directly helps bitcointalk.org


While it may be good to do both  sections and while i would argue mining ⛏ btc is the most important section the reality is a good post earning merit is exactly that a good post earning merit.

I think 🤔 I have 13 sections of bitcointalk with merits.
But I post always have.
I value btc and cryptography so I post all over.

This thread 🧵 wants posters to be generalists not specialists.

I disagree with op. Bitcointalk has room for both kinds of posters earning merits.

I agree with you to a certain extent, but after Junior level, then members should be capable of contributing to a variety of boards. It gets more difficult when members are solely miners, technicians, or speculators. The mix of members awarding the merits is probably more important. but maybe the bounty hunters will club together to create the mix anyway.

I think a post deserving merit from someone else point of view deserves it no matter where the post comes from. It's subjective at some point.
I don't know if it's a good idea to "force" people posting on some categories to rank up. You will probably show a lot of shitty posts popping up only for this purpose.

It seems to me that the main emphasis in the hunt for merit is the size of one's merit pot. I believe that it would be beneficial for the forum to consider the source of those merits. For example, were they all gained on one board, and if so, was the board a technical one, or an off topic or announcement one. I think the breadth of appeal of a member to others in the forum should be considered as well. Perhaps there could be a minimum number of different awarders for each rank.