I'm against deMeriting -- except for clear cases of merit abuse, which of course also leaves room for interpretation unfortunately.
In my opinion further tweaking the merit requirements may make more sense, as even the largest account farmers will run out of sMerits eventually. Maybe something like having hoarded sMerits decay over time could alleviate long term abuse of the airdropped sMerits as mentioned in OP. This would force account farmers out of the shadows, as they can't rely on a long-term supply of sMerits anymore.
Topic: LoyceV's deMerit source application - page 3. (Read 1641 times)
Not really required, IMO.
Jr. Members can't do much. People are focusing a little too much on a ranking system, and concentrating their time on something that's not very important. If I were you, I'd rather go play football or you know...go get yourself wasted.
Jr. Members can't do much. People are focusing a little too much on a ranking system, and concentrating their time on something that's not very important. If I were you, I'd rather go play football or you know...go get yourself wasted.
legendary
Activity: 1358
Merit: 1565
The first decentralized crypto betting platform
Not completely true - the 50 merits would have generted 25 sMerits, and if they were awarded in 2s, then they could be used to generate even more.
Yes but following this hypothetical example, having 25 smerits would be useless because you need 50 to rank up, and you also have almost 50 alts you want to rank up.
I think the point is clear, the higher the requirement, the less cheating the system is possible, because people run out of merits to sent to their alts.
That guy probably got out of merits already. If he had sent 50, he would have been able to make just one account to rank up, instead of 48.
Not completely true - the 50 merits would have generted 25 sMerits, and if they were awarded in 2s, then they could be used to generate even more.
legendary
Activity: 1358
Merit: 1565
The first decentralized crypto betting platform
It is already tough for the ones who have no support to push them ahead, and the excessive amount of posts regarding this and the efforts of getting a Merit by creating threads in Meta has already proved that.
It would be too much to ask the genuine users to wait too long to rank up just one step. So it is much better to just keep demoting the one's who don't deserve to rank up and let the ones who deserve it keep going ahead.
It would be too much to ask the genuine users to wait too long to rank up just one step. So it is much better to just keep demoting the one's who don't deserve to rank up and let the ones who deserve it keep going ahead.
Maybe you are right. The difference I see is that LoiceV’s proposal depends on people actively accounts to demerit, whereas raising the requirement is automatic and works for everyone. It can be raised to 5 first. A newbie really interested in the forum shouldn’t have problems to get those 5 merits, because people will qualify his posts taking into account that he is a newbie. Even theymos said that newbies should be merited for good posts, not exceptional ones.
Even though the amount of Merit required on each rank increased, there are still a lot of possible merit abuse out there and there will be more. Can you imagine giving 50 Merits to a garbge post? 50 Merits to a one liner posts? It's a total abuse. So deMerit is the best solution.
People who send 50 merits for one post get out of merits soon.
Hero - zanzibar - https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/zanzibar-218947
Raised the rank in Jr. Member 48 accounts
Raised the rank in Jr. Member 48 accounts
That guy probably got out of merits already. If he had sent 50, he would have been able to make just one account to rank up, instead of 48.
those merit abusers that will be caught can received Negative Trust so they can still received enough punishment.
The Merit sender has red trust already, so he doesn't care about more red trust. The Merit receivers can't be blamed, as they can never prove their innocence. That's why I think a demerit is the best solution.
Not bad, but abuse can also be avoided by raising the merit requirement. Theymos suggested up to 5, but it could be even up to 10, and then change member requirement to 20 or 50.
Even though the amount of Merit required on each rank increased, there are still a lot of possible merit abuse out there and there will be more. Can you imagine giving 50 Merits to a garbage post? 50 Merits to a one liner posts? It's a total abuse. So deMerit is the best solution. 
Anyway, good luck convincing theymos for this. 
That seems not to be an easy task in such cases.
Don't worry about it, I'm in no rush, and I have hundreds if not thousands of spammers helping me to convince theymos That seems not to be an easy task in such cases.
You should probably be in no rush because even after having thousands of spammers, it would still take some time to convince theymos to take a step ahead
Be patient, and let the spammers do their convincing work. I think it is better to make the 1 merit requirement a tougher one.
It is already tough for the ones who have no support to push them ahead, and the excessive amount of posts regarding this and the efforts of getting a Merit by creating threads in Meta has already proved that.
It would be too much to ask the genuine users to wait too long to rank up just one step. So it is much better to just keep demoting the one's who don't deserve to rank up and let the ones who deserve it keep going ahead.
Yes - I want to apply as a deMerit source too. I'm even happy to give some of my own merits back to become one.
legendary
Activity: 1358
Merit: 1565
The first decentralized crypto betting platform
Not bad, but abuse can also be avoided by raising the merit requirement. Theymos suggested up to 5, but it could be even up to 10, and then change member requirement to 20 or 50.
Massive spamming is created at lower ranks, so it’s sensible to make requirements tougher for them.
Since the introduction of merit system, good posters (not exceptional ones) are taking longer to rank up than before, but juniors can keep spamming and they are only required one merit. Until recently they weren’t even required that. I think it is better to make the 1 merit requirement a tougher one.
I'm not saying yours is a bad idea. Both steps can be taken.
Massive spamming is created at lower ranks, so it’s sensible to make requirements tougher for them.
Since the introduction of merit system, good posters (not exceptional ones) are taking longer to rank up than before, but juniors can keep spamming and they are only required one merit. Until recently they weren’t even required that. I think it is better to make the 1 merit requirement a tougher one.
I'm not saying yours is a bad idea. Both steps can be taken.
Anyway, good luck convincing theymos for this. That seems not to be an easy task in such cases.
Don't worry about it, I'm in no rush, and I have hundreds if not thousands of spammers helping me to convince theymos That seems not to be an easy task in such cases.
I like this idea as well.
And, maybe you could open a thread somewhere (Once your application is approved) where people can contribute their part in this by posting proofs about users who are abusing the system and deserve to be deMerited. I would probably report anyone receiving Merits without any efforts and then you may take back the Merits and send them back to where they should be.
Anyway, good luck convincing theymos for this. That seems not to be an easy task in such cases.
And, maybe you could open a thread somewhere (Once your application is approved) where people can contribute their part in this by posting proofs about users who are abusing the system and deserve to be deMerited. I would probably report anyone receiving Merits without any efforts and then you may take back the Merits and send them back to where they should be.
Anyway, good luck convincing theymos for this.
That seems not to be an easy task in such cases. those merit abusers that will be caught can received Negative Trust so they can still received enough punishment.
The Merit sender has red trust already, so he doesn't care about more red trust. The Merit receivers can't be blamed, as they can never prove their innocence. That's why I think a demerit is the best solution. 
I love this idear!
Normally i'd think about possible abuse (for example, somebody being able to demerit a competitor or somebody that doesn't agree with him/her), but since the new demoted jr. wave, i think the odds of demerit abuse is a lot smaller than the odds of merit abuse itself...
Normally i'd think about possible abuse (for example, somebody being able to demerit a competitor or somebody that doesn't agree with him/her), but since the new demoted jr. wave, i think the odds of demerit abuse is a lot smaller than the odds of merit abuse itself...
Interesting, I'm willing to support this idea. Like what I expected, this new requirement to rank up to Jr. Member will surely reduce spam but the possible merit abuse will increase. By looking at that Hero member's merit history, I have doubts that those accounts s/he merited were her/his alt accounts or maybe this Hero member was paid by those spammers. This would really be a serious problem and this deMerit is the possible way to stop these abusers. Well, merit abuse has just getting started, lets expect that there will be more abuse later or sooner.
In the other side, I'm not sure if theymos will approve such idea because having a deMerit source will make the rules too strict, those merit abusers that will be caught can received Negative Trust so they can still received enough punishment. Second, I don't know if this will be implemented immediately, we must wait for a couple of weeks or more before he made a decision about this and apply it, theymos is busy as we can see. But overall, I will provide my support to this idea or else things will get worse, we have now successfully achieved lesser spam forum all that left is those abusers to be gone.
In the other side, I'm not sure if theymos will approve such idea because having a deMerit source will make the rules too strict, those merit abusers that will be caught can received Negative Trust so they can still received enough punishment. Second, I don't know if this will be implemented immediately, we must wait for a couple of weeks or more before he made a decision about this and apply it, theymos is busy as we can see. But overall, I will provide my support to this idea or else things will get worse, we have now successfully achieved lesser spam forum all that left is those abusers to be gone.
I think there are 3 possible reasons to provide a de-meriting structure.
- Merits awarded by mistake. In ths case the de-merit should be excercised in conjunction with the awarder.
- Deleted posts should have associated merits removed autmatically
- Clear cases of merit abuse. Perhaps a team of 3 could evaluate the awarder, and if found guilty, remove all the merits awarded.
There is a secondary issue involved. What would happen to the generated sMerits that have been awarded. Perhaps those could be retained to avoid an over complicated system.
- Merits awarded by mistake. In ths case the de-merit should be excercised in conjunction with the awarder.
- Deleted posts should have associated merits removed autmatically
- Clear cases of merit abuse. Perhaps a team of 3 could evaluate the awarder, and if found guilty, remove all the merits awarded.
There is a secondary issue involved. What would happen to the generated sMerits that have been awarded. Perhaps those could be retained to avoid an over complicated system.
I started my Merit source application half a year ago. I want to try something new: I'd like to be a deMerit source (or should this be called a merit sink?).
User cabalism13 reminded me about this:
But worse, it lead to massive Merit abuse, like this:
To counter this, I'm applying to be a deMerit source. I don't think this should be used against heavy merit abuse (50 at a time), it could be limited to a maximum of 5 deMerit per user per month. This way it deranks many different users without destroying a large amount of Merit.
More examples
See Users abusing merit to level up their alts to Junior Member (by o_e_l_e_o)
User cabalism13 reminded me about this:
There is currently no such thing as a "demerit". I'm hoping that the positive merits alone will be fine. I could add demerits pretty easily later on if necessary, though.
Just 3 days ago, theymos implemented Enhanced newbie restrictions. Jr. Member status now requires at least 1 Merit point. This has already reduced the amount of spam, and lead to a Newbie invasion in Meta.But worse, it lead to massive Merit abuse, like this:
Hero - zanzibar - https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/zanzibar-218947
Raised the rank in Jr. Member 48 accounts
I can't read most of those (Russian) posts, but the fact remains this one guy ranked up a small army of a few dozen Jr. Members, who no doubt will continue spamming later on. There are many users with a large supply of sMerit (only a small fraction of the 600k airdropped sMerit has been used), which means the Jr. Member spam can be sustained for a very long time.Raised the rank in Jr. Member 48 accounts
To counter this, I'm applying to be a deMerit source. I don't think this should be used against heavy merit abuse (50 at a time), it could be limited to a maximum of 5 deMerit per user per month. This way it deranks many different users without destroying a large amount of Merit.
More examples
See Users abusing merit to level up their alts to Junior Member (by o_e_l_e_o)
Jump to: