Topic: Here Is One Reason Why Legendary Members Get So Many Merits - page 4. (Read 1825 times)

Those kinds of posts drive me nuts, and I put both of those members on ignore.  One of them is even a Sr. Member from 2015, and taking a look at his post history, he has a habit of posting absolute crap.  He probably could have become a Legendary member had he just posted more after he registered, in which case he'd be an exception to the "rule" being discussed in this thread.

I totally believe that, and I think that's been the case for a long time now--with the exception of 2017, perhaps.  There was a large influx of new members because of bitcoin rising in price so fast, and many of those accounts have become dormant since then.

Here is a good example of the difference between experienced users who pay attention to what is written and provide quality answers, and those who just post for the sake of posting and other ulterior motives.

How to recover my account with my coins
To sum up:

• OP lost his phone where he had Trust Wallet installed.
• He purchased a new phone and reinstalled the Wallet.
• He tried to recover his account by entering his seed, but once restored, his Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash didn't appear in the balance.

After that, you have two normal and helpful comments from high-ranked users. Below that, you can find things like:

This is explained in the OP.

This dude is talking about contacting the support of "the exchange" he used to help in the restoration of his account.

I deliberately removed the names of the users who wrote those two posts. Although, they can easily be found in the thread. The intention was not to shame them, but to show that everyone has a choice. You either approach a problem the right way, and offer help and feedback (if you can), or you don't. In this case, the legendary members did so, those of lower ranks failed. 

Legendary Member Ranks are really doing their jobs perfectly.But as a Member rank there are many users who trie to help others as much as they learnt.
Hope One day I will be a Legendary in Forum.
Again I want to give respects to hard working and helpful Legendary ranks from the core of my heart.

As we know merit doesn't deserve the rank or user. Merit deserves only the post we have been creating. So I want to add 'contributor' after the Legendary. This means all Legendary hasn't been receiving merit, we might say Legendary contributors have been receiving merits more than lower rank comparatively. Yea, OP already mentioned the reason. Legendaries are more experienced and they help others quite faster than lowers ranks in the right way. It's a natural procedure of merit circulation. So at the end of the day, good contributors will receive merit based on their contributions. We shouldn't blame for that, rather than it will be wiser to inspire ourselves from them to contribute to the forum.

Nice explanation by the way.

If you are an expert in a field you work in, you will establish a reputation in the community. If you know how to solve technical problems, you deserve to be rewarded. On this forum, that reward is merits. It's not a monetary reward, but a sign of recognition and gratitude.

Every person is different I guess. I can sleep safer at night knowing that if I have certain doubts or questions, the likelihood that I will get the help I need in those sections is high. I think that is more important than anything else this forum has to offer. Not because I am planning to mess things up or because I am careless, but bad things happen sometimes. But that's just me. You might have other priorities.

It would be great if more sub-boards had that importance. But it's not my fault they don't. Look at the crap being discussed in the Altcoin Discussion board or most of the topics in Bitcoin Discussion.

Well I'm not proposing that this should be the criteria for handling out merits but I mean the way the board is been hyped you'll think everyone contributing there are some genius and with the amount of merits you see thems recieving from the board you mightn't think otherwise meanwhile if you look dipper what you highlighted is what's ongoing.

I feel like users putting in similar efforts as others on other boards are getting more appreciated on the board, same as higher ranks generally on the forum which shouldn't be the case. I understand that we're trying to push the ideology of getting involved in more Bitcoin related discussion but don't you think the playing field should be fair to all. I don't understand why similar discussion with same relys have to be over merited over and over again.

I think I know what you are saying. People come and ask similar questions and have the same problems as other members had in the past. Those who know how to solve them offer some guidance and are rewarded with merits. Although the problems are somewhat similar, those who ask the questions and need help, still expect and hope someone will help them. It's an ongoing process and I don't think those individuals shouldn't be rewarded with merits just because 5 months ago someone else had that same problem. If merits were to be awarded only for brand-new ideas and thoughts, we would hardly see any kind of distribution.

I guess many people distrust newbies. They think they are alt accounts of other members or maybe banned members who came back. It's strange to see that someone who says he is brand-new to crypto knows some peculiarities about the forum from a few years ago, understands trust, the merit system, etc. That's one reason why the things you mentioned might be happening.

This might just be my reason but I think the merits been distributed on the boards you highlighted like Development & Technical Discussion and Bitcoin Technical Support are just (actually don't know the word to use that will be appropriate) but let me try explaining. I visit there often and I must say some users contributing on the board are exceptional but some posts gets lots of attention (merit wise) that aren't worth it. Repeated discussion ongoing yet the reply get flooded with merits like they're actually new thoughts and those benefiting are the higher ranks.

Back to topic, Legendary don't always get merited because they deserved it. You can see a reply from two different ranks which the lower rank was before the higher rank yet the high rank gets merited and the lower rank gets nothing. I'm not assuming, evidence are all over the forum. Experience is what is helping some high ranked accounts here and not because they're as smart as they look. The questions/discussion repeat themselves which offers a second chance to look smart and the old users capitalized on this. Maybe we should stop looking at how posts are been structured to look quality and actually look at the content of the posts, you'll realize the newbies are quite smart in their reasoning.

The most of the threads are shilled with the same magical thoughts and such threads are filled with spam posting and keep repeating the same content sometimes even in same words.The main thing is you don't need to write long wall of plain text which have not any relevant information about the post by @OP and just want to complete signature campaign requirements but even if you write up quality post in 3-4 lines only then it's merit worthy.The legendary members are doing the same thing like they are providing you with the correct information summarised in short not posting anything without any valid proofs so they got merits for it instead of newbies.

Therefore, I do not shout at every corner how to treat newbies correctly. On the contrary, I am always very skeptical about them, as I see a lot of deception. There are far fewer newbies to the forum than alternative accounts. If you have "checked" my story, you will easily be convinced of this.

I cannot tell if you replied based on what you conceived in your mind or you replied to what I posted. If it's the former, your reply is fine and beautiful, but if it's the later, it's either you didn't read the post or you deliberately tend to off point.
When I opened the thread NEWBIES! Earn your first MeritI didn't believe how you tackled that thread and I was forced to lock it. Coming here to speak on same matter is a gross hypocrisy.
However, my pattern of giving merit has not defeated the forum rules and besides I am a new Eva newbie striving to grow. You are an established member and well known in the forum. How much have you helped NEWBIES? We have seen the threads of many Legendaries like @Ognasty @Ratimov @DdmrDdmr @The Pharmacist @CryptopreneurBrainboss, the likes of @Pmalek @LoyceV @Fillippone to mention but a few helping newbies. But I couldn't find any of yours.
I went through your merit status and I observed you only give merits when any of  three things happens. But I'll reserve that for now.
So, you are in a better position to help newbies. Do it now and wait for me to grow to atleast Sr. Member and see what I will do.
Just a few newbies I merited, @Ratimov listed my name with them suspecting they are my alts. This cannot happen to you no matter how many newbies you merit. It's a clear indication that you are in a better position to do so than myself. Thanks!

Everything is rightly said, and very beautiful. But all good deeds, the proverb says, must begin with us. But why, in your statistics of donated merits, over the past six months, I have not seen single merit given to the newcomer?
Does it seem someone has already asked this? No?
Sometimes our good thoughts and aspirations go against our actions, unfortunately. It's bad when words are not on friendly terms with deeds.  

Who is a Legend?

Merriam-webster dictionary defined a Legend as "a famous or important person who is known for doing something extremely well".

Oxford concised dictionary says "a Legend is a very famous person, especially in a particular field, who is admired by other people ".

With the above two definitions, we should be convinced that.
1. Legends receiving the highest number of merits is normal, besides they also give the highest number of merits.
2. Legends always answering the first question is normal because they are most knowledgeable about crypto and also the forum experiences. They do it extremely well according to Webster.
3. According to Oxford, Legends are admired by other people. How can you admire someone without meriting him?

I said it before that anything to be asked for is consideration or mercy,(which some Legendary members are doing, by deliberately giving more merit to lower-ranked members). If due process is followed, more than 50% merits will always go to the Legends and it's normal. It should be a motivation for me and other lower-ranked members. Yes, because if senior members for instance recieve more merits than Legendary members, no one will practically work to earn a Legendary rank. The highest should remain the best.

I think Legendary members get more merits than newbies because of their posts and replies are more constructive, solution oriented and carries the needed information. The replies from high ranks are constructed with the OP in mind. Legendary members know which boards has the highest merit circulation to post, for instance the discussions in Btcoin technical support, Development & Technical Discussion board, Mining board is very technical and it is not easy to participate in it, and many newbies do not have the technical knowledge of crypto to publish in the technical boards and therefore you will find many merits going to senior members, hero and Legendary members.
This is why merit threads to help newbies rank up are appreciated by members.

Here's a great example of why Legendary members receive more merit: this post, made by stompix, was the only one in that thread about El Salvador citizens protesting the legal tender status of bitcoin.  The thread was started by a Jr. Member and in the OP he said this:

That's part of the long post he wrote, but his thinking shows a clear lack of understanding of other people's point of view, and to me it just sounds like a blindly pro-bitcoin stance.  And if you read the other replies in the thread, most of the replies made by members below Legendary adopt the same "those protesters are wrong" attitude.  And there's this part of the post made by Ucy, which baffled me:

That statement is almost elegant in its symmetry of wrongness; bitcoin's volatility is frequent, though perhaps not in the last month, and fiat currencies are so much less volatile than fiat that the comparison is just ridiculous.  Ucy makes some good posts, but this one is just....wow.

I tend to think lower-ranked members are younger in general, and that might not be a really bad assumption.  Higher-ranked members  have been on the forum longer, and they were obviously younger when they registered.  The older you get and the more experience you have with bitcoin, in life, and on the forum, hopefully the more insight your posts will have--and I think that's true in a lot of cases.  But for lower-ranked members, I don't think they have as much experience in those areas in general (and I stress that, in general), and their posts reflect that. 

Add to that the fact that most newcomers only want to use the forum to make money (in general), and you get the result that most of their posts are made with minimal effort and thought.  Hence, they don't earn as many merits.

This is absolutely right, I believe this forum will be more full of spam when the merit system has not been introduced, only just activities will count for ranking, and smerits were given to each members according to their ranked after merit system was introduced, some members will even abuse the airdrop merit given at the time. I have seen many lendary and hero members that were giving the merit airdrop but just at exactly 1000 and 500 merits respectively till today and nothing more. Yes, it is very obvious to see some accounts that are here just for bounties and shit posts.

You are just spilling out the facts and there is nothing like getting hurt in it man.For instance i have come across many senior,full,hero and even legendary members who have not received single merit in the past 120 days or even from the introduction of the merit system.The reason behind this is simple they have not made any quality post and are simply running in sheep race of shitposting or spamming up.The merits are simply awarded to you for your effective contributions to the forum and quality posts and sooner or later you realise this fact the forum would be witnessing more ranked up members.

But still lot are lagging behind it and simply want to complete their signature campaign requirements and writing up anything without reading above discussion and just want to write what is in their mind and think they would be awarded with merits which is wrong pre-assumptions.Simply treat this as discussion forum and learn from it and reflect the same in your posts.

No doubt when you have good amount of merits and some name on the forum you could help it into getting more merits but if you look closely at the post history of that members you would come to know they are already making up some quality posts on thr forum.How do they get up such merits like 3000,2000,6000 and even 8k merits on the account and are recognised by every member of the forum? The answer to this is simple that they have made best and useful contribution to the forum in past and currently also which has helped them to reach that levels.You would not merit any post if there is nothing much of important in it so human nature of exchanging merits is fine because they are going to the deserved ones.

There is also a psychological thing, when one has good number of merits up his sleeve you are more likely to reward them, recognition helps too.

Your assertion that "If you are a legendary member, you need to have received a lot of merit, 1000 if you are a new era newbie, or a minimum of 500 if you created your account prior to the implementation of the merit system" is highly misleading, especially when followed by "If you have received a lot of merit in the past, you are likely to receive a lot of merit in the future, assuming you maintain your posting habits" because the airdrop was not given for post quality and the vast majority of those airdropped legendaries are not likely to receive a lot of actual earned merit. That's all what the data shows.

I don't have a personal bias against legendaries, just stating the plain fact that most of them are shit. Sorry this hurts your fee-fees.

Nice analysis and you are right in this manner and we can have a look around merit distribution easily.The legendary members get more merits because they are providing more relevant and useful information to the members in detail which is needed to be deemed as quality post.I have personally merited legendary and hero members because i found their post more useful and giving the correct information in detail like providing links and explaining with images to newbies to help them.

If i found something unique and quality post made by some newbie or low rank members i visit his profile to check what kind of posts he is making and if any good and quality posts are found merits are delivered to them by many members which is aim for the merit introduction system.But you will see very few obliging to this quality posts sigma rule and then complaining that merit system is being abused but that's not true.Legendary members are making notes and spending time to write their posts with proper information so that right information is delivered to members but on other side newbies are not reading any rules and making mistakes and saying we were not aware to gain merits.

You will see many topics such as will btc grow,is btc dead,I lost my keys, bitcoin vs altcoins and many crap topics which have been discussed many times but still newbies are making such posts and think they will get merits for the same.Give forum your time as legendary members were once also newbies and they have gained knowledge and learn a lot and reach that rank which they deserve.So keep up your work and you will also gets merits with effective post contribution.