Topic: Here Is One Reason Why Legendary Members Get So Many Merits - page 3. (Read 1801 times)

I disagree with the idea that frequent posting will get you merits; instead, it all depends on the quality of your postings, not the amount; I've seen users with 10 merits in their first three posts, as well as those with over 2000 posts with zero (0) merits. It would have been different if campaign members were required to earn at least 5 merits per week in order to remain in the campaign, rather than a weekly post count.

If we remove all the legendary ranks and ranks of heroes that participate in the signature of companies with payment in bitcoin, then there are those who like to write about the Wall Observer, and very rarely go beyond it. There, too, if you noticed, there is an active exchange of merits for ordinary communication.
And another part of the legends, these are participants, most likely with purchased high-ranking accounts, participating in the signature of companies with payment in altcoins. It is there that such a "fantasy" is raging that the posts are literally similar to each other, with the same idea, for example, Bitcoin is the father, and Ethereum is the mother of cryptocurrencies. And so in each topic a hundred times.
When comparing, of course, the merits are received not by human robots, who have 6 accounts and write nonsense, but by those who answer the topic and have a reasonable conversation, and most of them are participants in expensive signature companies.

Any labeled data is better than unlabeled!  To be fair I did mention right after this one potential issue of how people give merit for different reasons, and then literally how it might be neat to model and mine out why users give merit.  We do have the data on who gives merit to who and the information within those posts...

But just as a general mining project the model should still be able to tell multiple stories.  There was a paper and then  this old data mining challenge on Kaggle regarding the 'random acts of pizza' subreddit in modeling altruism, that is what it was about certain posts convinced people to buy or not buy someone a pizza.  We found various factors within the result model such as politeness, gratitude, and so on.  

We might just end up with a decision tree which basically has a branch for each reason someone gives merit including 'fake merit/merit farming' where people give a shill account merit..

Edit:  Also we are data mining so noise/variance within individual posts kind of doesn't matter.  We are looking for general trends in big data and the techniques we use let them bubble up from the natural messy and varied nature of the individual post subsamples.

Say what?  I can't speak for Bestchange's campaign, but as far as Chipmixer goes, it's got a reputation as one that's extremely selective as far as accepting only members who have a proven history of making posts of above-par quality--not the other way around, i.e., its members don't make better (or even more) posts because they're in the Chipmixer campaign. And believe me, there's no forcing of anything going on.  Some members consistently make fewer than 50 posts/week, and other members who make way more than they'd get paid for.

You think?  I'm not so sure, because people give merits for a wide variety of reasons and even from one merit source to the next there are different standards as far as what constitutes a merit-worthy post.  The only consistent criterion I could see would be length, with a well-answered question (of any length) coming in at a close second.

Legendary members only require 1000 merits to achieve this status but not equal amount of activity is needed and you need 775-1030 activity as there are some legendary members who have more than 1000 merits but with only 800-900 activity.


So this is table points which determines activity and time required to achieve each rank on the forum for better understanding.

I know human nature that we sometimes envy those who are making progress ahead of us and same way newbies see legendary members of the forum but they need to know we all have to make our way up the ladder and there is no favourism in this and the only way you could do it is by making effective contributions on the forum and writing quality posts.You would not find any legendary abusing the merit and if there is discussion going on legendary who have accurate knowledge will provide the correct answer whether short or long but if newbies making very low or off topic discussion are not eligible for merit at all.You can see the clear difference between it yourself.Envying or blaming is easy but when you do the research you will find proofs for them as this thread discuss in detail.

There could be some members who are into this practice but most of the legendary and high rank members motivates the newbies and low rank members to achieve high rank with hard work and best contributions so that's why they have made multiple merit giveaways thread but those who are completely into spam posting will ignore and other's who will try to make analysis will find their way to rank up.

I see the point. I know that newbies tends to hate above ranks like legendaries because they get more merits compared to them. Some newbies even make it look like legendaries stole the opportunity for them to earn merits and because of that newbies hates legendaries.

For that reason, they would try and drag down legendaries because they knew that they aren't capable of the things that legendaries are.

Honestly, i myself have been wondering why legendaries get so many merits before when i started but because i understood why, i did not think that it was unfair since they are good at making high quality posts and that most of their post can help others effectively.

Newbies should learn to respect above ranks because they have been commited to bitcointalk for a long time and they are more knowledgeable. They are veteran who helps other users to come up with a solution to a problem encountered. Newbies should focus on studying to become better instead of complaining because it's a waste of energy. Nothing is unfair, legendaries work so hard too and they deserved it if they are given a lot of merits.

True. I have also observed during my short experience on forum that Legendry and hero members show their appreciation by giving merit when somebody helps out fellow members on this forum. Secondly, since this Forum is associated with Bitcoin so any good quality post about Bitcoin price prediction, it adoption by institutions also attracts attention and gets good merits.

Adding 'merit modeling' to one of our tasks (bitcointalk visualization and analytics).

It is great because it gives us a solid labeled dataset regarding what people like about posts. 

There is a problem in that how do you filter out 'merit farms' from actual meritous posts so we could use things like Ranking to choose our sample for modeling. 

I wonder what the model would tell us about merit givers...  I am sure there will be clusters of merit providers who are interested in different types of merit...

But doesn't Bitcoin come to you by itself? it's magic money, you click a button and you generate some Bitcoin. Rinse and repeat until you are rich.

Maybe an altcoin bounty campaign. It's going to be hard for someone whose knowledge is equal to 0 to get into a bitcoin-paid campaign. Especially with no or a single merit received God knows how.

Check out n0nce. I think I spelled the name correctly. He is active in the technical bitcoin sub-forums. That user became a Jr. Member recently but he has over 300 merits which would make him a Sr. member if he had the required number of activity points.

I completely agree with this.
In fact it seems to me that many newbie members come to this forum with the intention of trying to earn some btcoin but unfortunately know almost nothing about it.
It's very difficult to participate in a discussion about something you know nothing about and can't contribute anything useful to.
That's why many newbie members repeat things already said or write nonsense, but unfortunately there is no help here because this is a rare forum where you can make money by writing and many don't want to miss such an opportunity.
Such members will not get merits, of couse, but may be able to enter into a less demanding signature campaigns, which is most important to them.
Merits are a good decision from a forum administrators because it separates quality members, who contribute to this forum, from members who are here only for earning money, and can't contribute anything useful to this forum or community.
Of course, there are also newbie members who work hard, have the right attitude and over time have a chance to become respected members of this forum and get merits for their contribution to the forum, and even eventually become legendary members.

Now when you mentioned it, does anyone know how many of the current staff members are merit sources? Those who are active anyways. Based on the names under the sub-boards, only MiningBuddy seems inactive for a long time. The rest seem to be around on a regular basis.

I think this is just a coincidence, since DS_ selects users in such a way as to make the most extensive and high-quality advertising coverage, including local sections. And of course, users who are active in the appropriate sections and who were accepted into the campaign sooner or later think about becoming a m'source (well, or submitting an application). Moreover, I would not include the forum staff in this statistician, since they have become the default m'sources.

Here is another thought. Users don't get more merits because they got accepted in the ChipMixer or BestChange campaigns. They got accepted because of their merits, which are tied to the quality of the posts they make. Better posts = more merits. Everything else, such as becoming a merit source is just a natural sequence of events.

On the other hand, participants of spam and scam campaigns, such as that of 1xBit, don't care about the quality of their posts. Hence, they aren't awarded the same way. You also wouldn't expect them to become merit sources.   

Wow, I almost fell out of my chair when I read this. 96% of CM participants are merits sources ?? I'll have to check that.
So of the 55 participants of the CM campaign, 28 (5 of which are Staff members) are indeed merits sources.
Of the 25 participants in the Bestchange campaign, 6 are merits sources.
You can deduce what you want from these numbers, but you have to take into consideration that the CM campaign is 137 weeks longer than the Bestchange campaign. Probably a small insignificant detail.

Can somebody also provide us with stats of individually earned Merit after recently accepted members (maybe last 10 members) got accepted to Chipmixer and Bestchange campaigns. I haven't noticed much about bestchange but that of chipmixer has to be obvious that after you gain enrollment into the campaign, you tend to get merited more and most times the high ranked members are the benefactors.

I understand that different worthy reasons could be the cause for the increase of merits for this newly accepted users like their posts now getting the exposure it deserves for its quality etc but I'll just love to see that stats and if possible differentiate the ranks.

I don't think this can be said to be a valid reason why such legendary members earn the amount of merits that they do. Even if we're to take frequency of posting into account, I think there are quite a lot of lower ranked members who post quite a lot as well, some of them are on one bounty campaign or the other, but what they come up with is more often than not, shitposts, and they earn zero merits for their 'efforts'.

And then again, there are also legendary members who make a lot of posts, but earn little or no merits, what matters is what is being posted, it is the quality that counts, so I think that is what should be highlighted, rather than how many times they post, cause many a user (notwithstanding the rank) can post as many posts as they want per week without earning a single merit for it.

It's tough to distinguish between those who wear sigs and those who don't, but do Chipmixer participants have more merits? Yes, (96% are merit sources, so getting some is simple), but I can't say the same for Bestchange participants.

ChipMixer has no minimum post requirements. In theory, you would get paid for writing only one post per week, but that's surely not something that works in their favor. 50 is the upper limit, you are right about that. BestChange pays up to 25 posts weekly, and if I remember correctly from my brief spell in that campaign, there is a minimum requirement of 10 posts.

But other campaigns have a 25 or 20 posts minimum requirement meaning you need to fulfill that to get paid. Hence, that can't be the reason why most or why the best replies are from CM and BC members. 

Can someone tweak the stats a little by deleting legendary members with signatures? Most of them are from Chipmixer and Bestchange's campaigns, and some of them are from the rest of the campaigns?
These campaigns force members to create 50 or 25 topics per week, so the frequent posting will make them get merits regardless of the topic.



Also, some merit sources give it to Legendary members because they don't need it and will therefore redistribute it instead of beginners who may not know what to do with it.


Generally all of the above are observations and cannot be relied upon as reasons.

This is one of the most obvious reasons for which many newbie lacks merits because they are not getting into depth of the topic and posting irrelevant content or simply ignore what the topic is about and keep repeating what other above Posts have said whether they ar wrong or not.I can also quote many such replies where you will find similar craps.Like in one LN threads if you are discussing about channels and different wallets but some members will be posting like you need to consider the transaction fees as they are high and all other garbage stuff.So undoubtedly they are writing up with zero intent of knowing what the thread is about.So no merit for them.

There are many threads in bitcoin discussion section like in which @OP has said something else but the replies are generally off topic and you will find one or two legendary members giving the correct answers.So what do they think that do they deserve merit or legendary member who is appropriately answering to the doubt.