Topic: Merit & new rank requirements - page 237. (Read 167726 times)

I think it would be more convenient if one could check his/her sMerit balance at Profile page and under the name at his/her post, which, however, should be visible only for the account holder just like email address to avoid people rush to rich-sMerit holder.

I don't think they will be punished for that it's their smerits after all but it does feel like unethical.
Selling smerits will only lead to the bad reputation of the seller.

Thanks for all of you, now I'll be more cautious with refresh.
Edit:
Or, because merit is usually opened in a separate tab, it's easier to close the tab as soon as the merit is sent.

Hahahahahahaha



The keeping the stampeding masses down from the top of the pyramid theory.  Great.   

I did the same thing on one of my sending of merits, and accidentally sent two merits to the same person, when I had only meant to send one  (so I sent one merit twice to the same person).

What you have to do is NOT refresh from a page in which you send merits, but instead remove any of the text after the word "merit" in the refresh page.

So your refresh page address should look like the below address, without text after the word "merit" at the end:


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit

Did you see my last post (almost same but in other words)





And I thought it was just mi imagination (I had same problem). I gave 1 merit for one newbie and later I saw that I gave him another 1 for same post but like 1,5h later (I was sure that I did not do anything like that). Now you confirm this issue for me.

Yeah, I posted about that 10 pages ago but this thread is moving too fast.

To say the least, something of this nature was to come upon the community sooner or later. Increasing cryptocurrency awareness is bringing so many new users to this forum and everyone is heading up the hierarchy. Sadly enough the upper room isn't always enough for everyone on the pyramid and there has to be a way to slow down progressions. Merit is not just a sanitizer, but also a tranquilizer.

Well in my case, my browser does always give me a pop up notification to stop me from doing the same action accidentally.

Maybe you should try to use another browser, or just reinstall that one you're using.

Is it possible that I have found a bug? Or it's just my browser that tricks me... or this is the normal behaviour and I have to be cautious hitting refresh in the browser...

Have you also noticed if you see this page, after you have merited someone (Merit sent!)

and you hit the refresh button in the browser, the merit is sent again? (Without asking that I really want to send the data again like when I fill out a form on a normal webpage and hit send, after if I hit refresh, it asks me if I want to resend the same data)

(No, I don't want to trick you to send me a merit and after hit the refresh button to send a second one I'm just curious if it works for you too or it's just my browser....)

Edit:
before the post I've tried to google for this, if it was asked already but no luck

I'm not sure this solves the problem it's trying to address- it adds another layer, so it does make it harder to farm, but it's also a limited supply system than can just as easily be manipulated. Time will tell I suppose.

This, exactly...over time there will be less 'shitposts' and this most honorable forum will go back 'the way it used to be'...<200 members...

More I study the system, more it seems to me completely unsustainable: just try to make some different scenario on excel, and you will see how fast we'll run out of merits; so, the only concrete result will be to "freeze" the actual situation: high ranks will stay high rank by "divin right", low ranks will remain low rank forever.
After some time low ranks will give up, spam and shitpost will diminish, but also the vitality of the forum.

I think that who implemented the system is an intelligent guy and he knew perfectly what I'm saying (and what everyone sees).
So, I just wonder: did this merit system have really the aim of "to improve the posts quality" as officially stated or its true goal is to keep in power who is already in power (I suspect Legendaries don't like concurrence...)

There is a third option: Mr. Theymos is doing a kind of social experiment, proposing something that can't work, just to test how much time people need to figure it... :-)
We'll see.

Couple of weeks? Ok let me know when you will get these 150 merits in "couple of weeks" let's assume that you will make 20 posts weekly and 50% of them will be really good and will deserve for merits (how many ppl will read your "good" posts and how many of them will have spare merits and how many of them will give you in the end merits?) let's assume that it will be another 50% so in the end you will get 5 merits per week so 30 weeks before your rank up.

And this calculation (in my opinion are really an optimistic variant) - but well it's just my opinion and I whish for you 150 merits even in 1 day.

In my opinion, the merit system is a good way to reward people for making quality posts. My only regret is that the initial merit assignment was done based on rank, not taking into account progression to the next rank.

I was nearly a Sr. Member (which does make a significant difference with bounty campaigns) but I guess I'll be stuck on full member for another couple of weeks gathering an additional 150 merit.

I've no problem with the purpose of the new Merit system. Stopping spammers is surely necessary for the forum right now.

What I don't agree is the way the Merit system were introduced. In my opinion, before the new system is actually established, the MODs should've made some announcement to all members of the forum, made a poll or something like that, collected their opinions regarding the new system, and then established the system based on the poll result. That's what "decentralized" and "democratic" governance mean! I believe the merit system would has incurred much less criticism if it'd been done this way.

2nd, the system is kinda too difficult for members to rank up. The activities required for next rank is double of the current rank, while merits required to rank up is too much more. eg. activities required for "member" to rank up to "full member" is 60, which is double of "member" requirement of 30 activities. However, the merits required to rank up to "full member" is 100, which is 10 times of "member" requirement of 10 merits. It looks unfair to me and unnecessary. Why set such high merits requirement for ranking up? Did MODs conduct some solid research and have data to back up the rule?

I really hope the policy makers can hear the voices from all over the community and make adjustment to the rules accordingly!

Of course, we do not necessarily need to have an open mind on all points, especially if there is some lacking in facts or logic for the points that are being made, but if we can recognize that sometimes change comes that includes both negatives and positives, yet it might not be fruitful to let the perfect become the enemy of the good - and sometimes we can make progress even when we do not agree (and we might not come to complete agreement, sometimes  - or maybe frequently). 

I have discretion to determine what I would like to read and I have discretion regarding what I post too, just like you do. 

Furthermore, we disagree about the large majority of your ad hominem seemingly bitter (if not envious) and without substantiation other points, of course. 

By the way, I am not even going to ignore you (lucky you   ) because once in a while I have seen that you have made  a decent point, here or there - especially when you can get past your tendencies towards emotionalism.

unfortunately this system is destined to fail. the accounts that should distribute the Merit points have no incentive to do so, this makes the sMerit completely useless.
sure, you will now say "I will distribute them" but a large number of people will not "waste time" in doing so.

I agree that the risk of self-fulfilling prophecies is frequent, but probably not in our case since over 99% of the forum members won't read our discussion here, and surely not the worse shitposters who are quite likely to not even speak English and to use google-translate for posting. In fact, I guess that over 90% of the forum's members are probably still completely unaware of the change, unless they have been in the META section. They will start to suspect something when they'll realize they don't rise in rank.

I also agree that my post was unbalanced towards a negative view. I guess the reason is that experience made me quite pessimist (I would prefer the word "realist") about human behavior, and especially human mass behavior - which is even much much worse than individual human behavior, which at rare times even happens to be not bad at all. And even though I agree on the necessity of a merit system and I am afraid that this version won't work, at the moment I have no constructive idea of a better system.