Topic: Merit & new rank requirements - page 116. (Read 167726 times)

Can I ask why it's that important to you (or to anybody for that matter) to get Merit? Indeed it's needed for ranking up, yet the rank is not really indicative of anything, or at least shouldn't be ... Is it just about getting more money on signature campaigns (no offense intended)?

i'm talking about something a little more sophisticated here http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3622331/Facebook-s-AI-reading-messages-teach-humans-communicate.html

And what are the criteria for a meritorious post? Post length? Number or character in a post? What more? I believe all of that can be cheated easily by all the smart abuser in this forum. With this system now, abuser/alt accounts/cheater/etc can be spotted easily, and those people wont go any further if they dont step up their game to be a good member for this forum, or cheating more. Their choice.
 

what is really needed is some AI algorithm that gives merit automatically based on the post you write, is not science fiction. No way at the current state anyone can keep up spotting good post, beside is often up to personal interpretation if a merited post really deserve merits, this is the work for a machine, we are in the 2018  

There are many of them right now, and i suggest you to search one from the QuestionAuthority. He has a wide knowledge and good decision on some matters, so if you have a good post you might have a chance to get from merits from him.

I think what they meant is "review threads". There are a handful of threads whose original posters offer to review posts that you think deserve to get their sMerit but didn't get merited (enough).

Can you clarify what "getting merit from review 3Ds" means?

I'm struggling to get Merit, so other sources than making posts sounds interesting. At the moment, I'm considering just following known merit sources around and commenting in the threads where they are active, but that can't be the actual idea behind it..

We really cannot really tell, since merit sources are unknown, and the proportion of sMerit given out by the sources out of their maximum is also unknown versus the proportion given out by regular meriters.

There are forum sections more favoured overall than others. That is due, in principal, to the interest those sections provide in general, with some more difficult to understand awarding taking place in bounty threads for example. Some sections, like my local board, are under a severe sMerit drought, but activity is quite low there in comparison.

Where you post obviously has it’s toll on odds, but also thread length and subject, tone, style, information, wit, novelty,  personal opinion, insights, usefulness, etc. Chances add up better the more ingredients you have to enable you to bring a decent dish to the table.

So does it mean merits will be mostly consentrated in a small number of topics where these merit sources are active, that's sad and for most of the users will mean no upgrade is possible.

Apparently so: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;stats merit sources. I check these quite often, but can’t recall when this one changed specifically.

I will post the exact number when the new file will be avaiable. Have they reduced sources to 79? I've missed this change!

Yeah, don't post shit like this:






Etc. and so on...

Number one tip that I can give to you is don't be too lazy to use the search tab or look around for any tips on how to get merits. If you don't do that and don't even try then you don't deserve to get a single merit. Here in Meta section, just check the first 3 pages and you'll see threads that can help you.

If I grab your data for April 2018 (nearly a full month), then 22.608 sMerits were awarded. Merit sources roughly in that period have a potential maximum of 17.750 awardable sMerit according to official stats (per 30 days).
If the current 79 Merit Sources managed to award all their sMerits during April 2018, it would mean that they alone would be behind 78,5% of sMerit awarding, and that the conventional forum users would only be behind 21,5%.

That would itself seem a problem, since merit sources would be behind most of the work. This could mean either that member are running out of sMerit, or not awarding enough having Merit Sources make up heavily to try to counterbalance this.

The truth is, we do not know if Merit Sources do manage to award all their sMerit or what percentage they manage to award, so the above scenario is only an extreme scenario.
For example, if Merit Sources managed to award 63,69%, then Merit Sources and Forum Users would each be responsible for 50% sMerit awarding each during April 2018.


In order to see who has ranked up since sMerit Kick-off, there are a couple of considerations to ponder:

-   New Ranking with no Airdrop can be measured for users created since the 24/01/2018. The Merit System has been going on for 14 weeks since then, but activity count would alone only allow new users to have reached the Member status, thus that is the maximum rank level achievable by new users.

I kind of did this exercise a couple of weeks ago, where I tracked the activity, Merit and Rank of users created during the first two weeks after sMerit Kickoff.
See  https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.34527667
If this data were to be update today using the same subset of user accounts, things I figure will have changed. We can do that at some point down the line if needed.

-   The rest of the users would be those that existed prior to sMerit kickoff. Unfortunately, we do not have a database snapshot of user ranks on that date to see the initial rank for all these users, so as to compare with current rank.
Trying to backtrack from current user Rank I believe is not feasible, especially due to the fact that many had a Merit Airdrop that was based both on rank and activity prior to the airdrop date (so it was variable per user and not a fixed value per rank). All in all, some users stared from scratch, whilst others has a Merit starting point. That too makes comparisons difficult.

It takes 4 months to for a Full Member to get the activity to get to Sr. and another 8.5 months to get to Hero so I don't find it surprising that only a few made it in the mere 3 months the system has been in place. The system was also designed to prevent the majority of spammers members ranking up. Give it a full year and see how many people that deserved to rank up haven't yet.

I do agree with your last post that if only 21k was spent then that does need to be addressed. I said a few pages back that I think there is too much work being done by too few sources.

Yes, obviously. Apart from people who abused the system, I think those who have increased their level in April can be counted in one hand, especially from the full member rank onwards.


I've also ranked up on April. But yeah increasing the number of Sources Is a valid alternative. I Think we need more merit in the system, on last check of stats we got 21k sMerit on Aprli (missing last 3 days) with 18k generated from sources, something is not working at the best. (without counting the unknowed quantity of sMerit airdropped)



For exemple we both ranked up, but we got merit from "review 3Ds", without those services we probably haven't enough merit for rank up, and this is a contradiction with what wrote above here because if we add merit sources but we have to ask to evaluate our messages, the increased number of the sources doesn't solve anything, right?

I ranked up last month, at 25th april if i remember it correctly. I must say no for your suggestion, it would be better if we have more merit sources rather than lowering the requirement.

Increasing the number of merit sources makes more sense than decreasing any requirements. I haven't seen the actual stats on ranking up, but I know I and few others did it in much less time than it takes to get the activity.

As it is only the 2nd of May did you mean last month?

What do you think about the need to decrease the merit requirement now that the airdop is almost done? Do we need it?
How many users has ranked up this month?

Ok, they have rights to do this, but the basic pricinples are "When in Rome, do as the Romans do". Late comers, especially who joined after the merit system's launching day, should accept this fact, this system, and all related-new rank requirements.
Part of them will complain as you stated, but I think the rest (might be most) of them will naturally accept the system.
It is just my feelings, but I don't just reasons to complain about merit system from newcomers.