Topic: Is the new ERA of merit dying again? (Read 624 times)

Not exactly: I can get you a list of all users who received their first Merit after this date. See List of demoted Jr. Members who were ranked up again
All Jr. Members on that list ranked up for the first time after the new Merit requirements were implemented for them, the others on the list are mostly "collateral".

Where did you get it?
Can you give me full dataset of the merit system, started in January this year, please.
I need supplementary data for weeks before the 5th or March.
Thanks for all your potential help in advance.

Nice observation!
You can visit the post for more details

Medians should be used as a gold standard figure to measure the level of weekly change. I meant we should observe the change around the medians, which also called as true means.

@LoyceV Do you have any update data for all ranked up users after the 17-09-2018?

Theymos introduced the Merit & new rank requirements on the 24th of January, that is almost eleven months to today.
I would say people have gotten really aquainted to the system and how, where, when, why and to whom to give out merits.

If there is still any inconsistencies then it is not for lack of familiarity to the merit system.

That will happen automatically when we have more members here getting used to merit system on the forum. The merit system is still quite new and thus there are abuses or misunderstandings.

As the merit system gets older, people will get used to it and there will be less fluctuations.

My main concern would be the decreasing total amount of weekly circulating sMerit, and the number of people that receive them. The numbers seem to have shrunk back rapidly to figures similar to the pre-change of rules and additional merit sources. There is a difficult equilibrium to maintain here between post quality, the number of people who can rank-up, and the number of people active on the forum on the whole.

Regarding awarding merits to Legendries, I see no issue with it. Merit is a magnitude to express recognition for post quality/interest, and therefore it should only be natural that one should not place a barrier to favour/disfavour by rank alone, but rather by the post’s content. One may apply a different criteria to some extent though according to rank (i.e. be less demanding on Newbies/Jr. Members).
Arguably, Legendries do not require merit to rank-up, but since it is also (mainly) a means to recognize their contribution through their posts, then no one should be restricted from that.

Note: As we’ve talked about privately, the data on the Dashboard concerning number of ranked-up members is not wrong. The date filter on the Ranked_up Tab applies to the account creation date, not the actual date that the account ranked-up upon (the latter would require to backtrack TX by TX to find the associated dates of ranking-up, and I have not endeavoured that task on the Dashboard or elsewhere).

Merits should be handed out to anyone who has something worthwhile to add to a discussion,or has the capability to come up with a worthwhile new topic/thread..and if the higher percentage of users who do this are legendary members,then it's fine handing out all the merits to them

You guys need to stop awarding merits to help members to increase their ranking. The merit system was introduced to improve the quality of posting, and the ranking restrictions were introduced to reduce the activities of the spambies. It is important to used merit awarding to encourage good posting for the benefit of the Bitcoin Talk community. This means that Legendaries need feedback just as much as newbies.  When you look at the quality of posting by a few legendaries, you can see why it is important to encourage good posting habits. Even after all the negative comments about quote pyramids, you can still see some legendaries using them. You would think that they could control themselves to serve as good examples for the newer members.

Was to common , Legendary accounts are decreasing, we have more permaban than ranks up from hero rank

It’s not about what you think, it’s about what theymos thinks, and that will depend on what the community says and what is happening:

I honestly doubt the fact that an extra rank could be added to the forum..
Legendary rank to me should be the final rank attainable,and it doesn't come at an easy task,so we do not have the usual high numbers getting up to that rank,considering how many merits one has to earn.
I doubt theymos is actually thinking about this,there could be other tweaks,maybe a badge,wreath,crown etc on people's profiles when they reach such amount(2500 merits), but I think they'll still be legendaries(i can't think of any more suitable name than this)

I opened a thread about that some time ago (already locked):

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/do-you-think-it-is-fair-to-save-merits-for-high-quality-low-ranked-members-3529898

And I was also recently commenting on the subject on another thread.

To what has been said already on this thread and on those, I’d just like to point out that Legendaries also “need” merit: first because it is for them a way to see their efforts and contributions to the forum recognized, and second because it is quite likely that a new rank above Legendary will be implemented in the future, and I suppose the merit requirement for that rank will be very high, like 2500 merits at least.

marlboroza has ranked up Legendary last week.
Although only marlboroza has been ranked up since last 2 months, there are some more hero member is close to 1000 merits.

Isn't Merit being introduced for awarding in quality posts, not necessarily only for needy?

They can be alt. Or they might not understand the merit system. Some of them are definitely alt, but some of them think merit as only one of the requirements of rank up. Here the difference is and that's why they merit to same rank a.k.a needy.

From the above data,
Member send sMerits 12% to Jr member while Jr member send 40% to member. Almost every rank send the most sMerit to Member because the number of member ranks are the most.

No new Hero or legendary in the last two months.

Probably. But it must also be retribution.

Merit not only kept shit poster on the bay but it also kept large number of average Joe also in bay without any fault of theirs.
It is really worrying trend that even source merits are not getting used fully.

No idea, what steps Theymos is doing but I guess current situation is not good for forum.
 It is a natural human desire to progress and even  if earnest effort  did  not help then I guess in coming days ratio of shitposter vs average user will going to increase.



But still all the source Merits are not getting used completely. Might Theymos need to reshuffle the quota of everybody. Increase the quota of those who are using it fully and decrease of those who are not able to use it fully.

Any rank can be guilty of plagiarism, but it's extremely frustrating for me to find out that a noob who I was about to give merits to plagiarized the post--and that's because I badly want to merit newbies who write good content like Mister99 did. 

If bitcointalk attracted new members who could write intelligent, well-thought out, and interesting posts, it would be like a beacon of hope.  That's not happening however, and in fact the exact opposite thing is happening.  The forum is attracting people willing to do only the bare minimum to satisfy bounty requirements, and some of them can't even do that; hence, they copy/paste material from the internet.

My suspicion, too, is that when a Hero or Legendary account gets busted for plagiarism, the account has probably been hacked or sold.

Yeah you right you reminded to me this I've just awarded this guy with 3 merits , if you also have to check for plagiarism is a nightmare. But I don't think the problem is on the newbie rank, but on the Member-Hero range.

I'd rather see merits sent to Legendaries (whether it's 24% or 50% or whatever) than stay unsent. Those Legendaries might spread it further.

Keep in mind that (a) merits are not scarce - we might be too lazy to send them but there is no lack of them; and (b) the primary purpose of merits is to award them to good posts and ranking-up is just a bonus. Nobody "needs" merit to participate in the forum.

Also what xtraelv said. Don't overthink it. Apply to become a merit source if you haven't yet.

I sort of try to do that when handing out merits, though usually I give merits out one at a time just out of habit.  My source sMerits aren't getting replenished as fast as I figured they'd be, so I've been using up my own supply of sMerits lately.

Just speaking for myself, of course, but I haven't lost interest at all.  It's just that I haven't been very motivated lately to visit sections like Economics and go through posts there.  I also wanted to check out Bitcoin Discussion, too, but since I know that's going to be an exercise in frustration I've been putting it off.

The problem remains as it's always been:  there aren't enough posts worthy of merits, especially by lower-ranked members, and it's a pain in the ass to find the good stuff.  Good posts are the middle piece of meat in a World Trade Center-sized spam sandwich in most threads in those sections I mentioned. 

And I was just about to give a Newbie a merit earlier today, and guess what?  His post was plagiarized.  It was Mister99 in case anyone is interested.  So there's always that problem to deal with.  It's a lot more work than you'd think to be a conscientious merit source.

People need to think less about it and just send merits when they think a post deserves it.

There is the risk to overthink it and that causes a chill effect.

There is a huge amount of airdropped unused merit still out there.

I meant maybe is better to give less to legendary and more to lower ranks, I also give merits to legendary but maybe is better give a 1 merit instead 2 to legendary (especially if merit sources) and 2 instead 1 to lower ranks.
I can be wrong about it.

Merit giving most times vary(in percentage),due to the state of the forum at that very particular time, like for example,the case you mentioned about more merits being given during the period of the enhanced newbie restrictions..
The restrictions seemed to spur noobs on to make quality stuff on the forum, and the resultant effects of that was more and more merits,and with an obvious increase in sources at that particular period,coupled with an increased willingness of high rankees to hand out merits to noobs who were at least putting up an effort
  Hence it lead to an increase in the merit giving process...
This isn't correct,not all legendary members are really quite more knowledgeable,though a larger percentage are, most legendaries are simply on that rank based on longevity on the forum(which is also an achievement in itself)
 You can't really call a merit being handed to a legendary as unnecessary,and they actually do need it for quite some reasons
 Firstly forget about ranking up or anything of that sort,merits are acknowledgement for quality posting,or helpful assistance,every user wants his or her posts to fall under such categories irrespective of ranks..
 Also such high ranked members need more merits inorder to generate Smerits,so they'll be able to acknowledge someone else's post for it's quality by meriting it(hence contributing their own quota to the development of the forum)
Also high rankees need merits to boost their earned merits,which is obviously a boost to their ego as opposed to air dropped ones..

Hello, folks, I was looking at new start from the introduction of new merit sources and numbers are very discouraging.
First of all, I want to analyze the total number of merits that have been spent since 17.09.2018 or the day when about 30% of additional merit sources have been added to the previous list of merit sources.
I have my personal data but I will use @DdmrDdmr dashboard so everyone can look at it.

On the 1st week, we had the all-time high, with a spike of 9587 merits! The cause of this is Enhanced newbie restrictions & requirements when a lot of Jr. Members with no earned merit were de-ranked to newbie status and to rank up again they needed 1 merit.
Some of them bought merit, some of them abused their alts with one main account and some merits did a great job ranking up some good users.
The result of this was the spike of merit.



After that, we went down week after week till on the week from 09-10-2018 to 04/11/2018 with only 3321 very close to 3186 on the week from 27/08/2018 to 02/09/2018.
This is astonishing to me, and I don't really understand why.
Ok, bounty social media abusers already ranked up again with only 1 merit on 1st week of the new ERA but now with so many sources why we have a very low circulation of merit?
Some sources must be afk or have lost the interest on this reward system.

More Graphs!

(I've removed Admin, Global Moderator, Staff, Donator, Brand new ranks from the equation)





Problems:
As we can see here we have around 36000 merits spent from 17.09.2018 and the 24% are used on Legendary ranks.
I understand that Legendary can probably write more quality threads but I think the overcap merit is almost trashed merit since they don't need it. Don't you think is better to use it on Newbie-Hero Members?
I wrote this since almost every merit source has legendary rank and this means a huge percentage of this 24% comes from the sources.
Why members and Junior members tends to rewards the same rank and ignore higher ranks? Can we assume a lot of them as alts?

In the end, I want to report the Number of ranked up users on last 2 months according to the dashboard's website.

Edit: Those numbers from the dashboard can be wrong on the next chart, we need @LoyceV for the correct number!



What do you think about this situation? We have 35 more new sources since August but we have only ~150 merits more than the all-time low week!



(PS. and offtopic but I don't want to open a new thread for this! Lauda is now removed from DT2 list, we need more of them on reputation board. I've reported around 500 users overall, need someone to tag them all! -> https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.42378900)