Topic: Merit & new rank requirements - page 124. (Read 167726 times)

How can  the merit point be awarded.. ..is it the higher members that gives merit to  junior or just an automated robot.. ..i have been on this platform since last  year and I have not even be awarded with one  merit.. ...so  disappointing

Meh... 75% of my merit came from either helping people out or providing some entertainment value* while 25% has come from posting about merit in meta, which I can't help but find entirely apropos (that is, talking about merit in meta, which is itself meta, hence why the subforum is called meta). So I would say I am both an example of what you claim - that lots of merit can be obtained by talking about merit - as well as a counterexample, in that 3/4th of my merit has not come from talking about merit.

And FWIW, I was definitely conflicted about posting my perspective on merit the first few times for the exact reason you find so repugnant - I did not want to be involved in a circle jerk of meriting, either, just from talking about merit. However it appears I have since taken a different path from you in that I am not actively trying to annoy people to not get merit (nor am I actively courting high ranking members or merit sources to get merit). To quote from Vince Vaughn's character in that epic comedy, Dodgeball, "I've found that if you have a goal, that you might not reach it. But if you don't have one, then you are never disappointed. And I gotta tell ya... it feels phenomenal."




* - that said, I was honestly surprised I got a merit for my recent, "meat popsicle" comment, but hey, if someone found it funny and had merit to spare, why not?

I concur that sMerit decay and eventual loss many not resolve the issue of a numerous amount of users still withholding large amounts of sMerit and not joining in the game of awarding often enough to guarantee the overall system goal (cut down on spam and abusers, whilst not strangling the legit users that try to rank-up).
Taking a leap, many fidelity programs apply some sort of points decay system overtime, if the accumulated amount is not redeemed. Fidelity programs nevertheless have the incentive of points being usable for our personal gain, so spending them is in our favour and thus does not need too much of a shift.

Here though, the incentive to use sMerit is down to believe or morality, with nothing tangible directly being gained from awarding sMerit (yes, there are those that benefit in fraudulent ways, and yes there is an overall benefit if spam is reduced and reasoning is stepped-up three steps).

If sMerit did eventually decay, it would be like a constant token burn, thus making sMerit more valuable to those that believe in it or require it to rank-up.
Even though it is decentralized by nature of usage, there does have to be an overall aggregate look upon the amount of sMerit potentially awardable forum wide, to avoid the above.
Perhaps instead of decay it should be transferred to merit “sub-sources” (to be defined how to designate them, how much sMerit they get to award, etc.), so that total overall forum potential sMerit does not fall below a certain threshold.

I think it is important that both new users and what takes more time, strengthen their ranks and everything will now take more force in the credibility of the projects, I value very much what each person says in this forum, but before I value their rank and involvement in the long time. I've become a fan of this forum, the one that best evaluates its users to this day, Grandes!

everything is very well explained and understandable

Hahahahaha...

Lucky you.  You will be able to remain a full member forever, perhaps.   

This is a great idea - the merit thing. At the same time I am reading that it can be abused . Posting Proofs of Identity/Authentication besides other useless posts alone can make a member's rank go up in no time and such posts are certainly not quality posts. I was even banned for 7 days once for spam. Learnt my lesson. I am not an intelligent person so my posts won't be worthy of any merit but now I am not so eager to move up the ranks anymore (hope I don't get demerited for this ).

Wow its really good system and also after this system there are lots of change on spamming on this forum.if people don't do good quality of post those account are not upgrade to higher rank.

no kidding...that is precisely what I am talking about...in another merit-based thread, I made a mocking post about my rapid merit increase since I started posting about merit ....I have made it a special point to be as crass and repugnant as possible in my comments, to avoid unfairly picking up merit simply for posting about merit, and because I see it as a "kiss the ring and you can advance" system...which I find disgusting...it has probably cost me many ignores...o well, cant educate those who plug their ears...perhaps in all of my ranting what I am trying to say is that merit should not be given out on the merit threads...it is laughably  circular

And 80% of your merit came from posting about... merit. So all I have to say is:

Dear Pot,

You are black.

Signed,
Kettle

90% of your merit has come from posting about merit....congrats, you have figured out how to rape the system....if I were you I would open up a dozen new accounts...keep posting about merit...and sell them in a few months...I can see the day when we go from bitcointalk.org to bitcointalkerstalkingaboutthemeritsystem.org

I have merited your post DdmrDdmr because I agree with the general direction that you are going with it, and that you have explained your points fairly well.

My main point of agreement is the concept of incentivizing the spending of smerits; however, I have to quibble with any seemingly premature assessment of placing a timeline expiration or even suggesting that members have any obligation to go out and discover meritorious posts....

Maybe you are describing requirements that sources might have that would differ from regular members?  Sure, theymos has complete discretion regarding criteria to become a source or to maintain source status but it seems that sources do have more obligations to spend their merits because they will expire if not used in 30 days (at least according to theymos's description of the algorithm).  I would think that theymos is capable of getting some kind of handle regarding how much sources might be spending or spreading out their merits and whether he believes what they are doing is worthy of keeping their source status.. and even he may have some other criteria that he considers that are purely his subjective criteria rather than merit based for merit sources (if that makes any sense).

Regarding regular users, I really like the idea of something approaching complete discretion, and that may apply to a member's decision to never, ever, ever spend his/her smerits - but even within that context of nearly complete discretion about how or whether to use merits it seems likely that theymos has tools that he could use to incentivize the spending of individual smerits without ever really needing to employ decay... because in my thinking decay seems a step too far, and maybe even might be something that is considered after several other available tools are employed (including the tool of threatening smerit decay... hahahahhahaha, which he has already employed at least once).

And I agree that sMerit awarding is very low. Only around 10% of generated sMerit has been awarded and in my stats posted yerterday we can see the effect that it has on slowing down progression (merit and activity based) vs the old system (activity based) on the new forum users. That is an issue that should probably be addressed, perhaps by means of adding a timeframe to give sMerit away.

What I was in disagreement with was the fact that we should "gradually weed out those who do not use their sMerits". That suggests a purge focused on people who don't award their sMerits. People should not be purged because of this, but rather a method created to incentivate sMerit distribution (more that the so much used "make quality posts" frase).

Apart from that, me included, I think that time needs to be set aside to find meritable posts by those that do have sMerit, and not just focus on posting.

It's not a rule of thumb, it's a very specific suggestion for a very specific situation.  I suspect this has a lot to do with alt accounts and people's indifference to leaving merit for their fellow bitcointalker--but I could be completely wrong. In any case, I've given out all my merit a couple times over since the system started, and people should be giving out theirs and not hoarding it.  If people don't, then it's going to get even harder to rank up, and that's going to be bad news for the merit system itself.  That will mean it's not working at all.

By that rule of thumb, we should also "weed out" those who in their private lives decide to save money instead of rushing out to spend it.

It’s true that there is a large amount of sMerit that has been earned and not awarded to others yet. That may be addressed at some point, but in the meantime the way it goes is that you’re going to need to really try your best to draw attention to your post, and gardening topics are probably not the best idea..

It probably depends on the visibility and usefulness of your tutorial. Personally, if I stumble upon a tutorial that I deem useful for other people (even if it is not useful for me), I will certainly merit it.

Looks like the only way to get merit is create some really usefull topicks/threads with really good information for Member and up . Because if i create some tutorials for newbies , there will be nobody to give me merit , because newbies dont have it as know . Ok maybe some ranked up member will give me some ,

Right, unused sMerit is another topic that needs to be addressed. Maybe start with more a broader distribution of sMerit sources and gradually weed out those who do not use their sMerits

TheQuin has already answered you but I had to add a few things.

Not only is the Wall Observer thread a community of its own with members that have known each other for years but there most people don't care about ranks and usually award merits for being quick on painting the situation in the markets. The guy that you're so envious on receiving merit has been around since the dawn of bears and is the least interested in ranking up, you can see for yourself that he doesn't wear a signature nor do the ones that awarded him merit.

Try to understand that there are people not interested in getting legendary, nor are they interested in bounties or altcoin.
Merit sources and people that have smerit are not under contract to send merit only to newbies that are eager to wear a signature.

The merit system was designed to cut spam and account farming, not to make everybody around here write a full thesis in each posts.

ps.
I see your last posts it's the same ...that's...lame.



Which one? And you must apologize to my mouse, he's squealing in pain after going to your posts history full of quotes of quotes of quotes of Facebook links.

Show me 3 links to some of your posts that you think deserve merit and if so I'll reward you.

Wow look, a real prove of a member that can rank up in the merit era. I bet it feels great right?  There are more members that ranked up in merit era, you just dont know because you are not active enough to search or roam in the meta section.

lol, literally 90% of your posts are "bounty entries". How can someone make 500 fucking posts and not receive a single merit? You must be proud of yourself.

After the copypasters and one-line-broken-english-'sir' users, you are IMO the worst kind of user that this forum has. You should be perma-banned.