Following the advice given in another thread, I have decided to lock this thread.
It seems to have turned into a personal attack, and I don't really want to end up in ping-pong of bringing adverse comments back into context.
Topic: Don't forget to give merits to the thread starter (Read 289 times)
I've seen several threads with a good starting post, ands lots of merits for the replies, but none for the thread starter.
If the guy hadn't started the thread, then all those good merited posts wouldn't exist.
If the guy hadn't started the thread, then all those good merited posts wouldn't exist.
I think we should give merits irrespective of:
1) Whether it is the first post in thread.
2) Whether it is the reply to the thread.
However, members posting the reply earlier may be given some importance.
It dosen't matter how good quality the post is if it serves no purpose.
90% of the post about merits is things that have been repeated over and over again
A post or a thred can be of good quality and still be just spam, and spam deserve no merits no matter how well it's written.
90% of the post about merits is things that have been repeated over and over again
A post or a thred can be of good quality and still be just spam, and spam deserve no merits no matter how well it's written.
That applies to other sections as well. Most of the questions in Bitcoin discussion section are also repeated.
It dosen't matter how good quality the post is if it serves no purpose.
90% of the post about merits is things that have been repeated over and over again
A post or a thred can be of good quality and still be just spam, and spam deserve no merits no matter how well it's written.
90% of the post about merits is things that have been repeated over and over again
A post or a thred can be of good quality and still be just spam, and spam deserve no merits no matter how well it's written.
I've seen several threads with a good starting post, ands lots of merits for the replies, but none for the thread starter.
I have a different opinion. I think, you have more chances of getting merits if you are the thread starter. If you post the same content in a relevant thread as a reply, less members will notice it.
If the guy hadn't started the thread, then all those good merited posts wouldn't exist.
This is true but the point of opening thread is that you are asking some doubt.
Maybe your thread starters are starting to lose their value.
Clearly you're chasing Merit, as your Avatar illustrates. "Lengendary Awaiting Merit Points" is borderline begging.
I think you should talk less about merit and more about actual content related to Bitcoin and blockchain. To do that you need to get out of Meta and get into the real world.
Cheers.
Clearly you're chasing Merit, as your Avatar illustrates. "Lengendary Awaiting Merit Points" is borderline begging.
I think you should talk less about merit and more about actual content related to Bitcoin and blockchain. To do that you need to get out of Meta and get into the real world.
Cheers.
That was posted some time ago, and it was as a result of the crowing by some legendaries who were boasting that they didn't have to earn merits.
Hahaha, The merit system started exactly 1 week and 1 day ago, that's not "some time ago"...that's last week!
"Result of some crowning by some legendaries who were boasting"? LIES! You state in THIS POST that you, alone, created the moniker!
As I have pointed out many times, merit doesn't make much difference to Hero members and above. We all have the same sig benefits.
Clearly it does, for you! How else can you explain being a Hero member with an Avatar that did read "Legendary Awaiting Merit Points"!??!
Great notifications over some threads.
Merit from below must be given a credit to the starting in the thread to make everyone fair.
It looks like the starting miserable and no sense topic for itself. But only the following who will reply can receive merit. What is the point.? Still wondered to in this thread.
Merit from below must be given a credit to the starting in the thread to make everyone fair.
It looks like the starting miserable and no sense topic for itself. But only the following who will reply can receive merit. What is the point.? Still wondered to in this thread.
I think that only the posters with their quality posts worth to receive merit. S.o create a good starting post thread, he's worth for some merits, the same for who make good comments. A thread with many quality replies not mean that thread creator has a good starting post
I've seen several threads with a good starting post, ands lots of merits for the replies, but none for the thread starter.
If the guy hadn't started the thread, then all those good merited posts wouldn't exist.
If they deserve it then hopefully it will receive merit, maybe the standard of the merit sources are not fit to the thread maker and it happens that the replies of others are more reasonable than the started topic. I'm still not familiar with this merit system and how it is working, and I have a lot of questions.But for now I just want to familiarise it and be at peace though Jr like me are the most affected by this new rules. If the guy hadn't started the thread, then all those good merited posts wouldn't exist.
If Forum start giving Merit to the thread starter , Then everybody will start a thread for Merit. I guess this will cause more problem and more spam. On the Contrary , I will say to everybody to "lock" there thread if they already received the information they needed to prevent more spam.
And more important , before starting any thread, person should take pain to search that information first . It will help in one less spam thread.
And more important , before starting any thread, person should take pain to search that information first . It will help in one less spam thread.
I totally agree there will be double thread or similar subjects people will stop doing a research anymore if the subject is already existed and they will just open a thread to generate merit, this forum will become a spam community with a lot of useless thread.
If Forum start giving Merit to the thread starter , Then everybody will start a thread for Merit. I guess this will cause more problem and more spam. On the Contrary , I will say to everybody to "lock" there thread if they already received the information they needed to prevent more spam.
And more important , before starting any thread, person should take pain to search that information first . It will help in one less spam thread.
And more important , before starting any thread, person should take pain to search that information first . It will help in one less spam thread.
Well of course I agree with that. But what if the thread starter makes a well reasoned statement, and follows it with an explanation to provoke comment.
In that case, do you have an example that you can reference? It sounds like you've seen this somewhere already.
Maybe your thread starters are starting to lose their value.
Clearly you're chasing Merit, as your Avatar illustrates. "Lengendary Awaiting Merit Points" is borderline begging.
I think you should talk less about merit and more about actual content related to Bitcoin and blockchain. To do that you need to get out of Meta and get into the real world.
Cheers.
Clearly you're chasing Merit, as your Avatar illustrates. "Lengendary Awaiting Merit Points" is borderline begging.
I think you should talk less about merit and more about actual content related to Bitcoin and blockchain. To do that you need to get out of Meta and get into the real world.
Cheers.
That was posted some time ago, and it was as a result of the crowing by some legendaries who were boasting that they didn't have to earn merits. I've changed my avatar back to the cat , and removed the comment. I didn't realise it would be misconstrued. As I have pointed out many times, merit doesn't make much difference to Hero members and above. We all have the same sig benefits.
I've been very active in Meta because I truly believe that moderration has to be increased alongside the new merit system. I'm also spending too much time in looking for posts to give sMerit. I'll cut back on that as well as it seems I am posting too much.
I give merit for the post to the poster, not the thread starter.
If someone posts a thread that just says "What is bitcoin?" and someone comes back with a great answer, I couldn't bring myself to give merit to the guy who said "What is bitcoin?"
It's only been a few hours! Give them time
If someone posts a thread that just says "What is bitcoin?" and someone comes back with a great answer, I couldn't bring myself to give merit to the guy who said "What is bitcoin?"
No replies or opinions - well that says something about the attitudes to the merit system.
It's only been a few hours! Give them time
Well of course I agree with that. But what if the thread starter makes a well reasoned statement, and follows it with an explanation to provoke comment.
No replies or opinions - well that says something about the attitudes to the merit system.
But what if the thread starter makes a well reasoned statement, and follows it with an explanation to provoke comment.
Maybe your thread starters are starting to lose their value.
Clearly you're chasing Merit, as your Avatar illustrates. "Lengendary Awaiting Merit Points" is borderline begging.
I think you should talk less about merit and more about actual content related to Bitcoin and blockchain. To do that you need to get out of Meta and get into the real world.
Cheers.
I give merit for the post to the poster, not the thread starter.
If someone posts a thread that just says "What is bitcoin?" and someone comes back with a great answer, I couldn't bring myself to give merit to the guy who said "What is bitcoin?"
It's only been a few hours! Give them time
If someone posts a thread that just says "What is bitcoin?" and someone comes back with a great answer, I couldn't bring myself to give merit to the guy who said "What is bitcoin?"
No replies or opinions - well that says something about the attitudes to the merit system.
It's only been a few hours! Give them time
Well of course I agree with that. But what if the thread starter makes a well reasoned statement, and follows it with an explanation to provoke comment.
I give merit for the post to the poster, not the thread starter.
If someone posts a thread that just says "What is bitcoin?" and someone comes back with a great answer, I couldn't bring myself to give merit to the guy who said "What is bitcoin?"
It's only been a few hours! Give them time
If someone posts a thread that just says "What is bitcoin?" and someone comes back with a great answer, I couldn't bring myself to give merit to the guy who said "What is bitcoin?"
No replies or opinions - well that says something about the attitudes to the merit system.
It's only been a few hours! Give them time
No replies or opinions - well that says something about the attitudes to the merit system.
I've seen several threads with a good starting post, ands lots of merits for the replies, but none for the thread starter.
If the guy hadn't started the thread, then all those good merited posts wouldn't exist.
If the guy hadn't started the thread, then all those good merited posts wouldn't exist.
Jump to: