Topic: Do you merit based on post or on the account history? - page 4. (Read 1454 times)

Merits shouldn't be tied to any limitations provided that the information are useful then there is need for such person to receive merits except for someone newbies who doesn't put efforts in making post rather creating posts that looks like merits begging or, trying to create similar post others has already created. Like i can see, there has been a particular method by some newbies creating post in other to catch people attentions when I see such I just skip.

But writing an article or an essay doesn't implies how quality a post should be because some times i finds it very difficult to sit down an began to read those lengthy articles instead of the poster to sum it and give just few words to enable reader understand it fully at summary sections.

In my opinion, that is probably the best policy.

Nobody should be actively rewarding scammers with merits or anything else but the same applies known account-farmers and spammers too.

Having said that there are far too many cliques within the forum where members have probably given merits when they read the name of the member but that does not make it tantamount to anything untoward.

What one member could conclude as a post not worthy of a second glance could be deemed as excellent by another whether based on the post or the account history or even both. Maybe that is why there are several merit sources to have a wider scope of understanding to what is actually being posted.

The correct one should be sending merit based on the post I read. I guess other would agree with me. But you should know why some people check profile before sending merits. I believe there are a lot of sold accounts, spammers, merit abusers, alt account around. Some forum members does not want to help these kind of forum members by sending merits. Even though a guy deserve merit for a specific post, I would still ignore him if he is a shit poster in general or a abuser. I have suspected a couple of local forum members of abuaing merits and I refrain sending them merits. If I feel a user does not have alt accounts, does not abuse merit, I am happy to send him a merit if his posts worth it.

To be on the safe side, I’ll just reply to your comment. 

I won’t be replying much to this thread since it’s more like a survey, and every answer is valid.

I’ve read a lot before that could be considered complaints or observations that some users won’t give merits to others they don’t like, or they have favorites to whom they always give merits...maybe because they know each other in real life or are part of the same group. It’s nothing new, and there’s nothing wrong with that as long as the post is deserving of merit. Even if it’s not, there aren’t really any rules in the forum stating it's a violation. In short, merit is like freedom.

I read the post first.  If I think it's novel information, or otherwise hard to come by, I consider it meritable.

But before I give merit, I would check the account name.  I don't believe in rewarding active scammers if they happen to hear something interesting and post it. 

I merit individual post often rather than going through the user post history or merit record but in the aspect of those ranking up I often go through their merit history or see their tag before sending merit to such, it's just a way of avoiding notably farmers and possibly shitposter/spammers.

individual post only

I use merit for what's intended for and that is content, so account history is not part of my consideration its not easy to create good content that generates appreciation,, so I gave it to them, but not from those proven scammers with many visible red tags, neutrals and red tags out of unverified accusation are ok with me.

No, I never check account profile, post history and etc. Merit just isn't such big deal that I would waste my time checking such things
Only exception can when meriting newbies. Don't want to rank up spamners, bounty hunters or cheaters who use AI for their posts.
I just have to admit that I click merit button too rarely, sometimes I just forget about it .

I don’t look at rank or post history before meriting a post. I don’t think a lot of people consider rank a big factor because Satoshi keeps getting merits even though the account is not active. I send merits to posts that I find helpful, interesting and sometimes funny. If I come across a topic and someone has already commented what I wanted to say, I usually merit the post.

Ive merited some regardless of their position or rank as long as Ive like the comment or topic he posted or imparted with the community. Sometimes a witty post could also be a likeable approach and also meritable.

For me we should based it on the quality of the post rather than the users post history were awarding merits for its content and not because of the person who posted it. Only my opinion.

What attract some people to merit a user is just a particular post the person come across, after you have read  what the person has written for the post that attracted your attention, you might check he or her subsequent posts to check if any need to be merited, because I could remember when I was a newbie in forum, after I have made different post for long time, you will be surprised that someone will just review your profile and merit all your posts, it has happened to me severally, so I believe that theirs some people who merit a single post and their is some who merit based on Profile.

If i read a post and i want to merit it, i'll just go ahead and do so, why do i have to go through the accounts post history just to merit a post i just read and i felt deserved merit. If i were to be a merit source, and i wanted to send a lot of merits to a particular user, then i would go though their post history and dump merits on as many posts as possible, but since i am not a MS, and i have limited Smerits, i just merit posts and that's that.

I think , people that  merits base on quality post  in the community are getting it right because it will make other to go back to learn more to improve in quality post, but there are some Newbies in this community today are good in quality post but they are still lacking merits base on the merit source are few in this community. To me, I will prefer to merit base on your activeness and quality post in the community, because there are some users who are good in quality post but they are not too active in the community which such people should be limit in merits earning, but those that are active and good in quality post should be feed with merits to encourage them, this is my opinion.

If I see someone give a great response to a question, someone helping others when they responded, someone close to ranking up, a response I agree with sometimes, or when I post a thread and people participate in the discussion are some of the reasons I'll send a merit.

The final reason I posted up there where I'll merit based on participating in a thread is subjective. I will not merit everyone, once I start seeing users who post a trash response just to get a merit, I'll not merit that user. I realize the merit system made it a little tougher for some to rank up, but I also feel it's not really hard to do still.

I don't usually try to merit some of the higher ranked/respected users as they don't really need it. Some aren't in sig campaigns and could probably care less if they get merit or have so much respect in the community they could care less. I try to reserve merits for those that there is still value in getting them. Some users kinda make it obvious when posting a thread that they are making the thread only to gain merits vs actually being interested in the subject they posted about. If you are going to make a thread, at least participate in the thread more than making the initial post.

I am not a merit source, so if I run out I don't get a refill monthly. I have yet to run out to this point, but It'll happen eventually.

Unless you are on my ignore list, I look at the quality of the post and the account rank. 6 merit for a JR member means a high quality post, unlike 6 merit for a legendary account. The account history is reviewed in case I want to send +5 merit or enough to rank-up.

I'm curious to hear how you determined that there are these two ways for users to decide who to reward with merit. 

I mostly give merits to posts that I think they deserve, not to users. it happens that some user who has negative feedback and proven to have bad attitudes sometimes writes a very useful and constructive post. I think that in such situations we should be objective.
Several times I gave merit without checking, but those were those who needed a small amount of merit for the next rank, while they earned enough merit to rule out the possibility of accidental.

Different people with different criteria for sending out merits, that is the beauty of diversity. Inasmuch as there can never be just one way of viewing what qualify as merit deserving post, I think its up to people to use their discretion to chose posts they believe to be merit deserving. Personally, I do not consider the ranks of the person, the history or anything, rather the content of the post. As a non merit source, the few merits at my disposal is always shared based on the content of the post in line with my conviction that they deserve to be merited. My method may not be perfect but it gives me satisfaction I need.
 

Both, the post quality and the way the user sent merit.

I only want give merit to user who're not in a part of local friends or gangs because if I give more merit to them, it means they will share their merit in bigger amount.

I don't care with negative feedback, how active the user is, how many positive feedback they received, how big their power in DT network, how popular the user is etc etc.

A few minutes ago, I read an answer that completely corresponds to my views.


Sometimes posts are just good, you shouldn't be a bore to demand from yourself the question of how high-quality a post must be for me to pay attention to it and deserve it.
People are different; I can give merit for humor, for sincerity, for a useful, but at the same time very simple post. However, those huge unreadable posts, to which many newbies devote a lot of time, are difficult to pay attention to, and most often, in the opinion of the prospectors, are not appreciated.
So be simpler.