Topic: Is the merit system flawed? - page 4. (Read 877 times)

I gave you a merit for this post - https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.29707887

I wouldn't have seen it if I had not looked through your profile. It's in the frog pond (serious discussion), and I don't bother to look there. It's an unfortunate fact that you have to go where the awarders go, if you want to pick up some merits. This won't change until new and junior members are restricted ti their own boards, and this will reduce the rubbish on the main boards in my opinion.

Yes they can beg for merits and pay for merits however its frowned upon by the community, they might even get a negative trust for that. Can they still farm accounts? The system will allow you to generate a new account but whats the use of account farming if its hard to even get a merit for 1 account. Its not that people don't want to hand out sMerits, people have different standards so don't expect anyone with sMerits to give to those you think deserves it.

I'm pretty much stuck at being a full member, never been handed out any merits, although I always strive to post as best I can, so I guess in that regard the system is working. I was sick of the "nice project sir", "when moon sir" people spamming across the board and being financially incentivized to do so. However, I think the sMerit distribution is a little too strict. For example, I had 4 sMerits the day the system was implemented. Sent'em out that very day. Haven't gotten any since. I guess that should be fine tuned so we could hand out more to those really deserving. If they're too scarce, they can be a tool of coercion and corruption.

You certainly need to be above avg Joe to rank up, so 90% of this forum is quite locked in rank progression. Or you need to be a good friend of someone with lots of initial merits. Then you can progress very very quickly

That's why I sometime back suggested to Decay Default Merits so that people remain motivated.
But  awarding Merit is totally subjective and there is no well defined guidelines.
Only thing I guess it is containing people in  rank, busting account farmers (as account farmers tried to give merit to their alts and busted) and broke some people life.

Main Flaw in merit is somewhat its Binary nature (either you get merit or will not get merit) and due to this nature of merit ,Average Joe and Shitposter now share the same stand (same rank as both are not able to progress).

No idea if  Theymos started this system to stop the rank progression of Average Joe and shitposters or shitposters only.
If shitposters only then system is flawed but if it is for both then system is 100% working fine.

Actually I'm gonna go ahead and side with the OP over your "rephrasing"

I want to be legendary and I assume OP would like to also.
It's the final step! The last Horah! The golden cup... and now I need 495 merit to go. Which will take forever.

Sure... Not all my posts are epic or worthy of merit, but some are. Yet I rarely, (like finding a legendary in your fav. MMorpg) receive any.
Which leads me to believe I will never make to that last step.

Which, ultimately leads me to Not care about merit at all - Which trully hurts the whole system because us higher ups have the most smerit to give away.

(Even though I am being dramatic and I probably wont lose any sleep over it)
I also think the system is flawed - Some sort of incentive should be developed for users to "give" merit also.

But it is still better than the before system

Apparently I don't have a solution, just a couple pennies to throw around

The incentive is that it allows me to incentivise other people into not shitposting, which directly benefits me and everyone else who wants to use the forum for serious discussion. Or it would if it actually worked to stop shitposters.

In this case, in the long run, there would be no signature campaigns anymore. No company would want to pay money for a campaign in a forum where sh*tposting dominates. Or they would pay almost nothing, just like for most "click-working" jobs.

It could be even worse: Google could blacklist the forum for "bad quality content" and lower its search engine rank. That would drive out even more users, lower the rates companies would like to pay for signature campaigns, etc. etc..

The alternative is clear: Signature campaigns could be banned entirely.

So everyone earning money with signatures should love the Merit system. It is, at least, an attempt to preserve the status of Bitcointalk as a leading web site in the cryptocurrency community, encouraging users to write quality content. That status has been earned in almost ten years, and it is constantly in danger - Facebook and Twitter would love to dominate the crypto community even more  . But only if this status is preserved, companies will continue to pay money to people in signature campaigns.

Now to the flaws: The only flaw is, maybe, the low liquidity of sMerits. Maybe we need more merit sources. Or a +1 button.

Hasn't this been discussed to death already?

Most things on bitcointalk are flawed.  The trust system, signature campaigns, scams being unmoderated, are all flawed IMO, but there are also arguments for, and benefits of, those things--and people find ways to abuse everything here, including the merit system.  The only reason people call it "flawed" is because it's difficult to get merits without resorting to buying them and, as actmyname has said, the main reason why people want them is so that they can squeeze more money out of signature campaigns with a higher rank.  

They used to be able to do this with only a time element.  Now that there's a quality-of-post element, the shitposters are up in arms because they have to actually get their posts merited, and they're finding out that their posts really, really suck.  It's a hard truth to face but an unavoidable one.

There is no incentive to me at all, that's true.  I gain nothing from giving out merts.  But I've seen what this forum was like before the merit system was introduced, and I'm grateful that it's now in place--that's what keeps me meriting posts when I have the sMerit to give.  Other people, who don't give a shit about the forum or anyone other than themselves, may try to sell merit or not give it out at all.  That's probably true of a lot of "shitposting villages" in Asia, where friends, coworkers, entire families, and even entire neighborhoods have built careers in shitposting.  Why would they give out their precious merit to anyone but someone they're in a campaign farm with?  The answer is that they wouldn't.

Flawed? Yes.
Should it be removed? No.

There is no benefit to ranking up apart from reducing post times if you intend to use the forum for useful discussion. Unfortunately, most users are seeking rank-ups to earn more in signature campaigns.

So why don't we rephrase these questions about the merit system?

"Can we make signature campaigns easier to enter?"
"Can I get paid more in signature campaigns with shitty posts?"

Merit system is cool! It drives people crazy. They want to buy merits. How much more of ridiculousness can one expect. This is intact the proof of the system working. People are trying to fine loopholes and what not for it. So come to think of it in the long run,it is not flawed.

There are no perfect system and every system can be gamed by people. One thing you dont see about merit system is it pushes people to be better forum-wise. It makes people contribute, engage, doing a good deeds like challenge, etc. You just dont see the bigger picture here.

It's good there since the establishment of merit to level up / rank. Because it increases the healthy competition and prevents multiple accounts ...

the purpose of theymos is very good, even worth the appreciation
just imagine if there is no merit system, surely everyone will invade this forum to spam, and of course signature campaign will be crowded with cheaters with multiple accounts,
although I myself have trouble getting merit, but I am still happy, because it's not just me who is difficult to get merit, you too 

I think merit system is just an experiment and the real thing is still not announced, honestly I always feel that this made system is incomplete, it was made so hi experienced people can share merits with new uses but the opposite is happening higher rank people are getting extra merits because of their experience. And many newbies are receiving any merit. No offence, have seen that some new users are getting merits but most of the users are getting nothing.

I think they just want to make sure that members will only make quality posts. I do not have any problem with that. But gaining merit is really a problem for me. I don't want to beg for merits, but I also haven't received any merit. So I really have no chance to be a Sr Member.
I think some members won't waste their time giving others merit coz it won't affect theirs.

I personally am not a big fan of the merit system for ranks on here, I think it pushes for people to simply beg for merit, account farm, or pay people to give them merit. As there is no incentive at all, for people to give away their smerit to others -- which doesn't make sense to me as people don't want to hand them out.

What do others see in regard to the flaws for the merit system? I'd love to see what some others think.