Topic: Merit & new rank requirements - page 154. (Read 167726 times)

What I am trying to say is that people that use the forum for its intended purpose "A meeting or medium where ideas and views on a particular issue can be exchanged." will get the required merit. There is no false equivalence because you're the one ranting on about quality, not me.


That's a very short term issue, most of the airdrop sMerit has already been abused and that problem has all but disappeared.


It's certainly working. Spammers going to spam. The spam megathreads still get poinless posts tacked on the end of them for signature payment but these guys will never rank up.


I'm not misleading anyone. I was giving myself as an example to prove the person I originally replied to wrong. They stated it was impossible to rank up and I am proof that is not the case. If someone uses the forum in the way I do, mainly to read and learn and then get involved in debates, merit will be less of an obstacle to ranking up than activity is.

Just to show I'm not by any means special here's another example. Full member with 118 earned merit. https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/samarkand-1010454

---

Edit. As you back to back posted here's the reply to your second post.


Where? You still don't get it. You can't do statistical analysis of the context of the conversation a post is in.


I'm not being defensive, you just unwittingly pointed out a great example of what I'm trying to explain.

You can look at the data yourself if you cross-sample users what they were given merits for.

You seem to be very defensive about your post. So be it.  I leave you with your illusion of superiority.

Everybody has there own reasons, and that's exactly my point. The reason MIGHT be because the post is of good quality. But it MIGHT also be because you simply strongly agree with the opinion. Or it MIGHT be because you just want to raise the importance of the post in a debate. Or it MIGHT be just because you feel like giving away some merits ... And exactly because of all these possibilities, it is a false equivalence to state that with good quality people will eventually earn the merits they deserve.

Furthermore, if merits are used also in merit trading and other matters, then that again demonstrates that the quality => merits is simply not accurate.

As I mentioned previously, as long as the system works to keep spammers in check, I don't really care about these side effects. But making people believe that the quality of their contribution will be reflected in the amount of merits they gain, is misleading.

What data? Can you point me to a statistical analysis of merits given in a person to person conversation versus those that are not?

It really depends what you define as 'quality'. "talking to people about issues related to Bitcoin" is quality to me. It has nothing to do with making big long fancy posts. The fact you judged my 30 merit post on the grounds that it was only a few lines long rather than reading the conversation it was part of shows me you just don't get it and I'm wasting my time trying to explain it to you.

These are the false equivalences that are of concern. You switch from a quality focus to focusing on "talking to people about issues related to Bitcoin", and make it appear as that would be the relevant measure for gaining merits. And once again, whereas the intention of this might be the right one, it is not what data shows how it really works.

You should have read that post and looked at the thread it is in. It's QuestioAuthorities merit thread. I specifically said I wasn't applying for merit but was agreeing with his point about how merit was initially distributed was unfair particularly to higher ranks that were just about to rank up. I wasn't even thinking about myself as I was a couple of months short of having enough activity to make Hero, I was thinking about people who were just a week or 3 away. He decided to look at my posting history anyway and he thought at least 20 of my old post deserved merit (that's his way of doing it). Them Mitchell and Wowcoin came along and gave me 5 more each.

That post is actually an example of what I'm talking about, having conversations and debates, as shortly after theymos came along and explained why he decided to distribute merit in that way.

Maybe the other 117 merit is more representative than those 30?

Again you focus on 'quality', forget that and start talking to people about issues related to Bitcoin, that's what the forum is for.

Then make a thread with those "great" posts without merits entitled "Me Applying to be A Merit Source". This is the greatest solution for your complain. Members may merit those posts that don't really makes sense to you but I think they have their own reason why they've done that, these reasons include merit trading and alt accounts.

In principle, you are right that the length of the post in itself is not a measure of quality. One of the most influential insights can be expressed in a few letters : E = mc2 ... But it still stakes the pages over pages to explain the meaning and context, before it really start making sense.

And a point well made, in a concise manner is definitely better than rambling on about a minor issue.

So let me then ask you, do YOU think some the post that earned you 30 merits is, in comparison to other posts, really worth 30 merits? What's then the yardstick to determine what it a quality post and should get merits and what isn't?

Honestly, I don't think your post makes sense. It looks like a spam thread, no useful contents inside, and the images is almost oversized. Both of them make your thread a little bit annoying with readers who want to read around to obtain knowledge, lessons, sharing experiences. Please stop quote oversised-images threads next time. If quote, please delele lines related to images attached.

I know that this is the intention, but it's not how it works. Equating working hard and smart with the possibility of gaining merits, is not reality. There are way too many great posts out there which recieve no merits while weak posts receive several merits. The causality that's being claimed here, does not hold on average

It really has nothing to do with the length of a post. I actually find long posts annoying and prefer people to be able to get their point across concisely.

(Src: OED)

There is no secret or technique to gain merit, just use the forum for what it is intended. If you are having conversations and exchanging ideas then at least one person is reading your posts. Quality isn't about writing a masterpiece it is about making an important point.

this is my picture from 162 page
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.31113413

And where do these negativity comes from? Is this the function of Merit? No! Merit is for the best of the forum and not for the worst of the members. If the members want to contribute in these forum, they are just asked to make a constructive and quality post, is that too much to ask?

Nothing is wrong with complaining since that means that you understand the new system you are making some queries and suggestions about it but if you will be spreading out this kind of words in the forum, just find another one without this kind system, it will be great.

the merit will lead to new memers never to get rank rise, and surely more and more people people will quit from this forum, i just want to know how to handle those hero and legend members with scam posts? i think most scams are posted by those high rank members who participate in bounty campaign

Although I agree with the sentiment of your comment, and indeed made the same observation just above you, I also took the liberty of looking at the post about privacy coins you referred to. The problem I see there is that it's not original and does not contribute something new. There are already several threads looking at the universe of privacy coins, some of them with much more details. Taken on it's own, the post is of high enough quality and thus deserving merits (which it got). But I would not give it a merit myself, again, because the topic is being discussed on many other threads, and personally, I would prefer to see the other discussions advance.

What magic are you using to get so many merits even for short posts? I have created a popular thread about privacy coins, but received only few merits so far. Maybe to get some merits one also has to be very lucky

With all do respect, this is a false equivalence. I have looked at some of the posts you made, in particular that gained you many merits at once. And whereas you made undeniably fair and proper statements, gainig 30 merits for a short two sentences post, is disproportional, and has IMHO nothing to do with "quality". And please, don't get me wrong, I am not blaming you. I have received myself 10 merits for posts which I found completely undeserved, while other posts that I truly believed make some important, new contributions received 0.

I've read many comments here equating the quality of posts to the success of earning merits. From what I have seen how merits are awarded, this is not what really happens. Merits seem to me more akin to "likes" on Twitter or Facebook, than to a "fair" peer-review of quality. People seem to be MUCH more likely to give merits to short posts that express their own opinions rather than the quality of the post itself.  Also, there are certain threads in which readers are more liberalrly spending merits than in others. A weak post in such a thread has a higher chance of gaining merits and a great post in a less visited thread with less "free flowing" merits.

I understand the rational for introducing the merit system, and if it manages to keep the scammers, serial fudders or brainless posters away, then great. But I do have an issue with comments that seem to imply that quality and merits go together and if somebody makes quality posts they will be rewarded with merits. Average posts and some large amount of luck that a like-minded generous reader stumbles upon the post, is more relevant for merits than quality.

Getting 90 merits is an impossible task. Relax and take the fact that you will stay in member position forever

Exactly I liked your post a lot but I'm not meriting it.

It is also the question why our posts need to be so exceptionally. Outside spammers are most discussions on this forum normal discussions by normal users. All that normal activity is laid to waste with the merit system. And don't think that the present Legendary members and heroes attained that level with many exceptional posts.

Notice to the public:
Merit makes us crazy, be careful not to be the subject but indeed subject.
Look member to member quarrel each other. I like and dislike this merit but the truth we are all subjects.
Watch your way. POST AT YOUR OWN RISK but don't beg for merit or other wise it will kick you out.