Topic: Merit awarding as an alternative to posting. (Read 471 times)
In my opinion, a merit is better representative of your affirmation to a post than posting "yes I agree, *add a description of the post further*" definitely. If there's nothing substantial or contradictory to add, like, "I agree with your posts partially except for...", then sending a merit would be the best way. But, again, there are a lots of posts you might "just agree" with, if you are going to send to every of them, you will have to earn them at bullet speed (unless you are merit source). So, sometimes, I refrain from posting into those threads
@jetty, does this come with stock smf (the out-of-the-box kind)? I saw it on fittotalk and a couple of your forums and I'm wondering if that's an extension or comes with smf?
It's a standard plugin. I added it as a bit of fun, rather like the shop and the currency. Fit to Talk is a fairly friendly site fortunately, so there isn't the bitching and flaming that happens here. If Theymos ever decided to add the feature, I would suggest that he only allows the likes, and doesn't include the dislikes. I've seen that on several sites, and it does seem to work without too much trouble.
I've personally merited posts which I outright disagree with
I do that sometimes, but it confuses people:@LoyceV, meriting/agreeing to the OP from trusted device but disagreeing from non-trusted device 
Most people have been conditioned by large corporations to use "Like" and "Upvote", and they're used to it. Merit is different, but it doesn't show when you're meriting a post. Users won't know the difference if they don't read about it on Meta.
I'd say Bitcointalk needs a small explanation on how to use them ("merit good posts") on the "Merit a post"-page.
I've personally merited posts which I outright disagree with, and have even merited posts which are wrong. However, if there's a good argument or at least some effort was applied then it doesn't matter whether they get their facts a little skewed. Whoever you are you are not going to have all the answers, and especially when discussing technical aspects of Bitcoin. My merit rewarding system is all about effort, and quality rather than being factually correct.
Of course, if they're spewing total nonsense which makes little sense then that's not likely to get a merit, because its likely not constructive, and a quality post to begin with. An example would be discussion of the conspiracy theory that certain people on this earth are lizards. Even though I think that's batshit crazy if they bring some quality discussion, and reason to believe that then I'll likely reward them for that even though I'm totally against the suggestion as long as effort has been applied, and its of high quality regardless of the subject.
Of course, if they're spewing total nonsense which makes little sense then that's not likely to get a merit, because its likely not constructive, and a quality post to begin with. An example would be discussion of the conspiracy theory that certain people on this earth are lizards. Even though I think that's batshit crazy if they bring some quality discussion, and reason to believe that then I'll likely reward them for that even though I'm totally against the suggestion as long as effort has been applied, and its of high quality regardless of the subject.
I wouldn't do it for posts you "agree with", but for posts that are worth reading. I've done this to posts that stated what I wanted to add to the thread already, so posting it again would be spammy. So I try to highlight the post by Meriting it.
I guess it's caused by actually reading the thread, instead of just responding to the title or OP. I'd say that's a good thing.
I agreed with Loyce. Merit is for high quality posts. Generally, such posts deserve merits, and should be highlighted by merits.I guess it's caused by actually reading the thread, instead of just responding to the title or OP. I'd say that's a good thing.
Agree or disagree with posts, it should not be a determinant factor which decides readers send their smerits (if you have them) to posts or not. If posts are worth-reading, send smerits to them is good, and matched with what theymos envisioned how merits should be used.
Using smerit this way will give posters more motivation to keep making good posts. They will be inspired by merits they received, even from users whom do disagree with what they wrote.
I'm hoping that this system will increase post quality by:
- Forcing people to post high-quality stuff in order to rank up. If you just post garbage, you will never get even 1 merit point, and you will therefore never be able to put links in your signature, etc.
- Highlighting good posts with the "Merited by" line.
Let's take WO thread as an example. We all know that most of guys in that thread are bullish bitcoin investors, so it is normal to see how they have likely - Forcing people to post high-quality stuff in order to rank up. If you just post garbage, you will never get even 1 merit point, and you will therefore never be able to put links in your signature, etc.
- Highlighting good posts with the "Merited by" line.
'unfriendly' feelings with people whom post bitcoin will fall or fail to break that resistance. However, I think we need such guys to keep our minds as neutrally as possible. So their bearish posts if made with enough convincing proofs, deserve merits, IMO.
If you agree with a poster, but don't have much to add to the point he has made, do you think it is good practice to award merits without quoting and posting an agreement?
I wouldn't do it for posts you "agree with", but for posts that are worth reading. I've done this to posts that stated what I wanted to add to the thread already, so posting it again would be spammy. So I try to highlight the post by Meriting it.I guess it's caused by actually reading the thread, instead of just responding to the title or OP. I'd say that's a good thing.
The fact is that sMerits are very low amongst active members who are willing to recirculate it or would love to Merit good posts when they come across any. I often come across good posts and posts of those who have made a good effort to expose scammers but you find yourself not being able to merit them. You have to wait until you get a couple of merits and then you go back to their post.
So i think Meriting as a form of agreeing to a post won't really work to common members who usually have 1-2 sMerit per day unless you are a merit source
So i think Meriting as a form of agreeing to a post won't really work to common members who usually have 1-2 sMerit per day unless you are a merit source
Please don't use merits as a substitute for "agree" and don't make "+1" posts.
It's a discussion forum so discuss. If you don't have anything else to add other than "+1" then just don't.
It's a discussion forum so discuss. If you don't have anything else to add other than "+1" then just don't.
100% agree.
Merit can NEVER be alternative to posting
.
Please don't use merits as a substitute for "agree" and don't make "+1" posts.
It's a discussion forum so discuss. If you don't have anything else to add other than "+1" then just don't.
It's a discussion forum so discuss. If you don't have anything else to add other than "+1" then just don't.
Likes and dislikes can often start flame wars.
This is my issue with stack. If you post something that's correct but the community hates it, you just end up with a load of downvotes (it shouldn't happen but it does - A LOT)...
Sometimes I just want a “Like” or “Agree” for that.
@jetty, does this come with stock smf (the out-of-the-box kind)? I saw it on fittotalk and a couple of your forums and I'm wondering if that's an extension or comes with smf?
I like the idea of using likes or merits (like what we have now) maybe we could have a softer version of merits (we could call them commendations or kudos points).
I rmember this sort of thing used to be done by PM before the merit system so we at least have evolved by then.
I was discussing the awarding of merits with another member recently, and he made me aware that we have both started to award merits as an alternative to posting a reply in a thread. If you agree with a poster, but don't have much to add to the point he has made, do you think it is good practice to award merits without quoting and posting an agreement? It will certainly keep the thread cleaner and easier to read, but it may be difficult for those seeking to build a post count to restrain themselves.
Definitely, you don't even have to merit it, if a user doesn't have anything useful or new information to add on to the existing conversation, there's no actual use of the post except for the monetary gain the person receives in form of the signature campaign payment. I see so many people just using the concept of the verbose on an excessive scale here and that's usually nothing but spam that makes sense when you read it but is still spam and is unnecessary.
Merit is indeed for awarding usefulness, not that you agree or like what the poster wrote.
I also think that some sort of "free" alternative for merit could be useful. Yes, some sort of like, especially since posts like +1 are not what we want to see in this forum.
Edit: should I have been quoting TryNinja's post and add a +1?
I also think that some sort of "free" alternative for merit could be useful. Yes, some sort of like, especially since posts like +1 are not what we want to see in this forum.
Edit: should I have been quoting TryNinja's post and add a +1?
I don't agree that you must give merit and keep quiet.... to make topic or thread 'clean'.
If you want 'clean' topic then lock it and enjoy
If you want 'clean' topic then lock it and enjoy
Giving merits has always been optional anyway; you can simply not give merit if you don't want to as no one is forcing you. The merit just gives kudos points to the poster; pretty much giving a bit of legitimacy to the post/reply if no one makes negative responses or counter-arguments towards the reply.
As I said before ....many users do not have merits.
What about them?
That will only make them more quiet
What about them?
That will only make them more quiet
What do you suggest they'd do then? If they just simply agree on a certain user's reply but doesn't have anything to add to the conversation, then they wouldn't be able to do anything anyway. If they reply "this", "true!", I agree!" or something along those lines without giving more information or adding anything constructive then the reply would be reported and deleted anyway.
They should know better, and I think nobody will answers "true!", I agree! thanks, I like..."
I don't agree that you must give merit and keep quiet.... to make topic or thread 'clean'.
If you want 'clean' topic then lock it and enjoy
As I said before ....many users do not have merits.
What about them?
That will only make them more quiet
What about them?
That will only make them more quiet
What do you suggest they'd do then? If they just simply agree on a certain user's reply but doesn't have anything to add to the conversation, then they wouldn't be able to do anything anyway. If they reply "this", "true!", I agree!" or something along those lines without giving more information or adding anything constructive then the reply would be reported and deleted anyway.
As I said before ....many users do not have merits.
What about them?
That will only make them more quiet
Merit isn’t meant for that anyways. An “Agree” would be more about pointing out your opinion without you needing to create a redundant post (not necessarily reward a good post). However, I’m pretty sure that’s not going to happen. What about them?
That will only make them more quiet
While we will not be directly moderating this, I encourage people to give merit to posts that are objectively high-quality, not just posts that you agree with.
It is not too bad idea, but idea for merit awarding to show agreement with post owners should be applied only for high-quality posts, as theymos stated very long time ago.If we simply I agree with this post, then I award this post owner a merit as a proof of my agreement, it might result in over-arguements from merit abusers.
Furthermore, merits should be awarded not only to high-quality posts that we agree with, but also to high-quality posts that we disagree with.
Sometimes I just want a “Like” or “Agree” for that. Some posts aren’t exactly worth a merit, but you still want to vouch his idea without needing to create a post for that. If I recall correctly, this was probably the suggestion that resulted in the merit system.
Lots of users suggested about that Like button, or even moved further by suggesting automatic conversion of Like to Merit, ie. 10 likes ~ 1 merit. Unfortunately, the forum is not Facebook, or Twitter, and that Like-Merit conversion only cause more abusements. 
I was discussing the awarding of merits with another member recently, and he made me aware that we have both started to award merits as an alternative to posting a reply in a thread. If you agree with a poster, but don't have much to add to the point he has made, do you think it is good practice to award merits without quoting and posting an agreement? It will certainly keep the thread cleaner and easier to read, but it may be difficult for those seeking to build a post count to restrain themselves.
The idea seems to be great for merit sources but what about those (like me) who don't have enough merits (i have 7smerits atm) to give it to each and every post they agree upon and don't have anything to add? I think it's not practical for everyone. As mentioned earlier a "like" button would do the job. But merit, it has to be given to deserving posts.
Edit: Didn't see dkbit98's last post before posting :/ More like same thoughts.
Likes and dislikes can often start flame wars. Also, I find that begging for likes on YouTube is annoying.
As I said before ....many users do not have merits.
What about them?
That will only make them more quiet
Likes and dislikes can often start flame wars. Also, I find that begging for likes on YouTube is annoying. Steemit's demands for payment for likes (upvotes) are even worse in my opinion.
Jump to: