Topic: Is this not merit abuse really ? (Read 1998 times)

Removed means what?

If someone is found for merit abusing then they will get red tag but they are not going to get ban for merit abusing and when the merit sources found abusing or selling their merits all their merits can be removed.

abusive people should be removed!

Meh, on retrospect, I was just being hypersensitive. Now the main irritant for me is merit begging and having to double check posts for copy paste.

It's really sad to see QA has been removed from merit source.  . It's just happened because of his fan. I was replied only his thread that he shouldn't spend merit for like 'nice' reply. But unfortunately some of his fan strongly attacked me and insult too. My fault was, I had added my post link for example and they thought I am trying to gain merit. I have just tried to defend, really my intention wasn't make sound against him and I believe didn't.

@All.

This thread has lost track now. Actually "OP" is created for "dice-bet" abusing merit or probably bought and sold them. Instead of focusing on it, we are distracted to "QA" or in short towards "Merit Source".

Will not like to comment "QA" 30 merits giveaway but somebody dragging "bones261" for just giving 1 merit is unfair.
1. Merit sources are human they can do error to.
2. One Merit is the least amount they can give. If they like some thing, I guess they(or any forum member) can give 1 Merit without any need to defend himself/herself.

Actual problem I see the "Air dropped" smerits, that did not expired. After more than 9 months of the system, some user still have them and they are occasionally using them to promote newbie to Jr. member (might be there own alt accounts) or might be selling also as in suspected in case of Dice-bet.

I totally agree with you Lauda as it's not allowed, by rule, to beg for merit, but this statement from Theymos can be interpreted in many ways;
So what should be those stupid things involving merit, and less than selling merit that doesn't desrerve a Tag

Sounds about right. We're replacing spam posts with merit begging posts; indeed a very helpful policy. Liberalism strikes again.

Abusing merit via alts deserve an immediate RedTag, but let's remember about accounts being tagged for "begging for merit" which falls also under acceptable category deserving RedTrust but also a something stupid (less than selling merits) that destroy reputations of many users.

That's absolutely untrue. Abusing merit via alts falls under the acceptable category. If the system disallowed punishments for users that a clearly abusing it via alt accounts, then the system would be a joke and shouldn't exist in the first place.

In this case, many DT members should not be in DT for much longer. I can't remember how many profiles had been tagged because of merit issues (not selling). I think DT members have to review some of their judgements.

That's not what theymos said:
Saying they shouldn't be tagged by DT if they're not selling Merit isn't the same as saying they should be tagged when they do sell Merit.

Although admin reply to bones261 but this is applicable for all. Not only for bones261, this is just example. Admin already mentioned, if someone not involved with abuse like buy sale merit then we shouldn't tag them. Otherwise it should not consider merit abuse according to theymos. For us we could tag that merit abuser not trustworthy, but if a DT want to tag then there should be strong evidence. DT just can't tag someone for that he don't trust. He is the responsible person and red tag will reflect on tagged profile. Since admin agree to spread merit over forum, then I don't think DT need to tag them also (if not involved with merit sales).


It's really not good that someone earning  merit by doing nothing and someone not earning even working hard. That's the main problem. Intention of merit to build decent forum, but people just think intention is rank up. So they are abusing it.

@LoyceV post edited.

I think it is not needed. theymos didn't ask people not to talk about merit abuse or not to tag them. It's your choice.
theymos responded specifically in case of bones261, IMO.
As per the rules of trust (No mandatory rule almost), I can give positive/negative feedback in general terms and of course, the general terms include merit abusing. If a people can abuse merit system, s/he is not trustworthy in my eyes and there is no problem with tagging him/her. If you think, someone is abusing merit, why don't you tag him?

He should be removed as merit source in my opinion. He seems to be mistaking merit for candy that he will give to anyone who asks for it.

I mean seriously:







All given 30 points by QuestionAuthority. Giving it out to anyone who asks for it is reckless and it defeats the entire purpose of the system.

Yes QA is little bit careless about spending smerit. Its clear that his intention isn't abuse the system or involved with sale or trade. Because even he didn't join signature, its means he isn't greedy abut it. I just got all point from admin reply. I am glad to see that admin care about members. He don't like to dry smerit due to unspent. Obviously this is a good intention.

However I will not lock this thread since admin reply here with few important things. So others peoples will able see that. And I almost clear about aim of admin regarding merit system.

Perhaps if you disagree with how someone doles out their merits, the proper term is merit carelessness, rather than abuse.(If no financial incentive seems to be tied to it.) I really don't think QA handing out merits in a giveaway on Wall Observer is abuse. Although I do agree it is a bit careless.

That is list of accounts who sent merit to accounts which are banned, nothing else. Just ignore it.
Nonsense.
I don't see any reason why anyone should tag you. You are not:

1) selling/buying merit
2) exchanging merit between alt accounts
3) ranking up alt account farm which will be later used for all kind of shady deals(scamming, payed bumping etc) which is anyway very hard to prove unless it is obvious

Thanks for clear everything. So I don't think we should highlight merit abuser on future is there isn't strong evidence of merit sale. Obviously spend merit is better than dry it. Especially for merit source. I believe merit source aren't involved with sale or abuse. On the other hand they are doing a job like without salary . However I am going to delete all negative feedback from merit abuser since admin are not encourage.

Thank you for the encouraging words. I'll do my best not to fret. It's the curse of an INTP personality type. I'm always second guessing myself. 

If they complain about amounts, tell them to complain to me. It's best if sources try to exhaust their source allocations, even if it means giving posts higher amounts than is typical. If you have 150 source merit and you only see 3 merit-worthy posts in a month, then I'd rather you over-give each of them 50 merit than let the merit expire. That way there are more people capable of sending merit, and the "merit economy" is less top-down.

If a DT member tags you for something stupid involving merit (ie. probably anything less than selling merit), then they're not going to be a DT member for much longer.

Aside from that, if people complain about whether things deserve merit at all, then that's something to perhaps think about, but if you conclude that they're wrong, then that's that. You don't need to stress about it or defend yourself constantly. It's conceivable that someday you and I will end up disagreeing too much about this stuff and I'll remove your source status, but it's really not a big deal.

The topsendban list is just a first indication of abuse, and many excellent people are on it. Your place on there acts as a sort of benchmark: eg. chandra12 has a similar score there, but whereas you are an extremely active merit-giver with a diverse selection of posts merited (most of which anyone would agree with), chandra12 only has two large merit sends. His behavior in comparison to yours while having a similar topsendban score is what creates a strong abuse impression.

I appreciate the work of you and other sources who take it seriously!