Thanks for the reminder of that other link. I feel it is lopsided as the merit sources for the most part circle jerk their gifting of merits amongst themselves with little to no trickle down to the lower ranks (all of which has been discussed ad-nauseam in the past and needs no further discussion here) - (plus it doesn't really identify those who are inactive)
(and as another aside, although my "generosity" is close to "200" I can assure you that "for sure" number used to identify merit sources is very VERY wildly inaccurate).
Topic: [List] Merit Sources without activty in the past 20 days (Read 688 times)
Thanks for the previous update - I was looking for another list and came across this one, so I figure I'll ask for another update if possible? (no rush mind you).
If OP is too busy, maybe you ask @Coin-1 do this, since he already has a pretty much up-to-date topic on merit sources: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/top-200-the-most-generous-users-giving-merits-4523027
All he has to do more is to also check the last login date of the (bolded) users (and subtract the dates).
Is it possible to request an update to these figures, please?
Hello Timelord, hope you are doing well 
Ups, I somehow missed that one, sorry for the delayed answer, I will do an update in the next few days, together with the list of the Top inactive accounts, and some other old threads that are worth updating.
Thanks for the previous update - I was looking for another list and came across this one, so I figure I'll ask for another update if possible? (no rush mind you).
Sure, I'll make an update as soon as I come back from vacation.
There are many threads I've abandoned the last 1-2 years due to lack of time.
Is it possible to request an update to these figures, please?
Hello Timelord, hope you are doing well Ups, I somehow missed that one, sorry for the delayed answer, I will do an update in the next few days, together with the list of the Top inactive accounts, and some other old threads that are worth updating.
Thanks for the previous update - I was looking for another list and came across this one, so I figure I'll ask for another update if possible? (no rush mind you).
Here's an update:
I don't know who are merit sources, but those are the top senders over 1000 merit. I can filter them based on S/R Ratio > 1 if you guys want.
I don't know who are merit sources, but those are the top senders over 1000 merit. I can filter them based on S/R Ratio > 1 if you guys want.
| rank | Profile name | Status | Sent Meirt | Position | Last active |
| 1 | chimk | DT2 | 12114 | Hero Member | 745 days |
| 2 | bones261 | DT2 | 8712 | Legendary | 640 days |
| 3 | frodocooper | - | 7082 | Sr. Member | 305 days |
| 4 | TMAN | DT2 | 6510 | Legendary | 704 days |
| 5 | nutildah | DT2 | 6463 | Legendary | 92 days |
| 6 | Flying Hellfish | DT2 | 6214 | Legendary | 216 days |
| 7 | Vod | DT2 | 5168 | Legendary | 194 days |
| 8 | Blacknavy | - | 3843 | Legendary | 319 days |
| 9 | cabalism13 | DT2 | 3448 | Legendary | 57 days |
| 10 | QuestionAuthority | - | 3371 | Legendary | 508 days |
| 11 | SyGambler | DT2 | 2970 | Legendary | 58 days |
| 12 | Globb0 | DT2 | 2891 | Legendary | 67 days |
| 13 | marlboroza | DT2 | 2046 | Legendary | 228 days |
| 14 | Last of the V8s | DT2 | 2007 | Legendary | 459 days |
| 15 | 600watt | DT2 | 1923 | Legendary | 338 days |
| 16 | Micio | DT2 | 1860 | Legendary | 319 days |
| 17 | Alex_Sr | DT2 | 1255 | Hero Member | 615 days |
| 18 | squatz1 | - | 1227 | Legendary | 183 days |
| 19 | VB1001 | DT2 | 1183 | Legendary | 296 days |
| 20 | nullius | - | 1129 | Copper Member | 290 days |
| 21 | gentlemand | DT2 | 1098 | Legendary | 435 days |
| 22 | Lauda | - | 1046 | Legendary | 483 days |
| 23 | redsn0w | DT2 | 1031 | Legendary | 771 days |
Is it possible to request an update to these figures, please?
Hello Timelord, hope you are doing well Ups, I somehow missed that one, sorry for the delayed answer, I will do an update in the next few days, together with the list of the Top inactive accounts, and some other old threads that are worth updating.
Is it possible to request an update to these figures, please?
Not active over 1000 mert senders which are sourses : ...
Honestly, this is a real trying time for a lot of people because of the pandemic. When I don't see members online for days I worry for them and begin to think if the worse has happened, truly. Since usernames aren't real names, we may not know if this forum has lost some members to the outbreak in death. So, quite understandably, it is safe to assume that the mentioned users didn't intentionally chicken out but that something could have been amiss with them. Anyone who knows them outside this forum can check on them to ascertain what issues they're faced with now. Again, if there are merit sources who have been known to have abused merit and their positions as sources, such should be revoked and be sanctioned appropriately. 
it would certainly be good to have a comparison between merits circulation of pre and post activity.
For instance, inactive merit sources within last 20 days Vs merit circulation within last 20 days.
I keep weekly data in this topic. For the past weeks:For instance, inactive merit sources within last 20 days Vs merit circulation within last 20 days.
Total: 737258
Total: 743044
Total: 747592
Total: 752115
Total: 757074
Total: 761428
Total: 765913
Total: 770835
Total: 775831
And here's all-time sent Merit graphs for the users in the OP:
chimk
bones261
TMAN
Flying Hellfish
teramit
Alex_Sr
redsn0w
Each column width is 10 days (8 pixels). "Days" start the second the first Merit was transfered, and count exactly 10*3600*24 seconds after that. It has nothing to do with calendar days in any time zone.
The maximum is 150 Merit per column (1 pixel per Merit). If more than 150 Merit was transfered in a 10 day period, the top of the column gets darker.
The maximum is 150 Merit per column (1 pixel per Merit). If more than 150 Merit was transfered in a 10 day period, the top of the column gets darker.
Sad to see that TMAN is yet to be active.
Nevertheless, it would certainly be good to have a comparison between merits circulation of pre and post activity.
For instance, inactive merit sources within last 20 days Vs merit circulation within last 20 days. That would have a good result I guess.
Nevertheless, it would certainly be good to have a comparison between merits circulation of pre and post activity.
For instance, inactive merit sources within last 20 days Vs merit circulation within last 20 days. That would have a good result I guess.
Not active over 1000 mert senders which are sourses :
You can remove Flying Hellfish from the list since he already been active again on 4 days ago| Nr | Profile name | Status | Sent merit | Position | Last active |
| 4 | Flying Hellfish | DT2 | 6214 | Staff | 35 days |
I didn't removed him but crossed him out from the list. He was online 3 days ago, true but no posts for the past 4 months. Last time he sent merit was on 7/21/2020 so thats like more than 3 months ago.
Not active over 1000 mert senders which are sourses :
You can remove Flying Hellfish from the list since he already been active again on 4 days ago| Nr | Profile name | Status | Sent merit | Position | Last active |
| 4 | Flying Hellfish | DT2 | 6214 | Staff | 35 days |
Were I giving out merits (no thank you - just speaking hypothetically) I wouldn't gift Legendary at all, Brand New no more than one once only, no Newbies, probably Jr. Member through Hero member perhaps two (allowing them to pass it on down the ranks). If I did find a post of merit, I'd probably read back through their recent posts over the last fortnight to see if there were any other meritorious posts (not more than five posts X 2 merits each)
This would mean a lot of additional time and work, and I'm not so sure it would be a best way to share the merit. I guess that some merit sources have few basic rules how they share merit but I doubt they go to such lengths when it comes to meriting. IMHO, it's not a bad thing to give merit even to those who don't need it for rank up, as those will pass on the merit for someone else that needs etc. If I'm merit source I would keep it simple, just merit the good post when I see it, no matter the rank.
So each merit source has about seven or eight merits they can give out per day
No, you're talking about the average per Merit source. Some get only 10 per month, others gets hundreds to 1000+.I wasn't aware of that - it puts into perspective why some merit sources seem to get rid of their merits more liberally than others. (and yes, I did do a quick calculation of the numbers to give an average)
Were I giving out merits (no thank you - just speaking hypothetically) I wouldn't gift Legendary at all, Brand New no more than one once only, no Newbies, probably Jr. Member through Hero member perhaps two (allowing them to pass it on down the ranks). If I did find a post of merit, I'd probably read back through their recent posts over the last fortnight to see if there were any other meritorious posts (not more than five posts X 2 merits each)
It is possible that n merit sources were removed at the same time n were added, and the sum total of their source merit was equal to each other.
From what I've seen, new Merit sources usually start with a lower amount than existing Merit sources, so this is not very likely.So each merit source has about seven or eight merits they can give out per day
No, you're talking about the average per Merit source. Some get only 10 per month, others gets hundreds to 1000+.(In other words they're not really looking that hard).
I can only speak for myself: I have 26.67 source sMerit per day to get rid of. On some days I send more than other days, so the amount I get replenished varies per day too. I always find myself short on time, and the work-from-home-thing only made that worse. I don't want to "look harder" to find more posts, that would mean I have to read much more posts than I already do. Being a Merit source doesn't get paid, just like reporting posts. I do both to support the forum, but you can't ask Merit sources to look harder just to Merit more posts. As of last Friday, I've sent 7495 Merit transactions to 1901 users. Sending them more than one at a time makes the "merit economy" ~ less top-down. As long as it doesn't end up on spammers, it's fine with me I would not be surprised if some of those on the above list have been removed as merit sources.
Unlikely, Merit sources hasn't changed in a long time.Quote
Merit sources
There are 97 merit sources with a total merit generation of up to 21171 sMerit per 30 days
There are 97 merit sources with a total merit generation of up to 21171 sMerit per 30 days
So each merit source has about seven or eight merits they can give out per day yet some of them claim they can't find posts to merit while yet other merit sources drop seven or eight on just one post seemingly every day. (In other words they're not really looking that hard).
It is possible that n merit sources were removed at the same time n were added, and the sum total of their source merit was equal to each other.
The last big change (~14/11/2019, almost a year, is it a sign ?(I will not bet a sat on that
)) several dozens of source merits have lost their status because they were inactive. At the same time, there have been some nominations and for the most active MS there has been a good increase of their smerits. I would not be surprised if some of those on the above list have been removed as merit sources.
Unlikely, Merit sources hasn't changed in a long time.Then a simple graph of the top merit senders for the last 120 days will show if there is an increase of the sent merit of those "chosen" for new sources. It's not impossible but I personally believe that there was no change.
Theymos is quiet about it, even gmaxwell promised to push him a little back in May but looks like it didn't help.
I would not be surprised if some of those on the above list have been removed as merit sources.
Unlikely, Merit sources hasn't changed in a long time.I would not be surprised if some of those on the above list have been removed as merit sources.
Unlikely, Merit sources hasn't changed in a long time. Jump to: