In the joy of completing 10 years of Bitcointalk, make all newbie members a junior member
Nice try but you should have joined the art contest in the joy of the 10th year anniversary. There were many newbies who where given ample merits to rank up.
Topic: Merit & new rank requirements - page 24. (Read 167717 times)
Nice try but you should have joined the art contest in the joy of the 10th year anniversary. There were many newbies who where given ample merits to rank up.
🙇 This is my own opinion
😄 In the joy of completing 10 years of Bitcointalk, make all newbie members a junior member 👍
😄 In the joy of completing 10 years of Bitcointalk, make all newbie members a junior member 👍
Most of last distributed merits come from theymos. This figure is for the last 30 days.
Weekly rank is below. So, most of 14251 merits distributed last 7 days come from theymos.
Oops! I was wrong with above prediction.
The truth is here:
Update:
Merit Spree I: 3399
Merit Spree II: 3813
Merit Spree III: 1236
Total merits in the art contest: 9029
78 forum pages scanned.
Merit Spree II: 3813
Merit Spree III: 1236
Total merits in the art contest: 9029
78 forum pages scanned.
Weekly rank is below. So, most of 14251 merits distributed last 7 days come from theymos.
Code:
. list weeklyrank merit week, abb(30)
+------------------------------+
| weeklyrank merit week |
|------------------------------|
1. | 1 30960 2018w4 |
2. | 2 19979 2018w5 |
3. | 3 14251 2019w46 |
4. | 4 13313 2018w6 |
5. | 5 11745 2018w7 |
|------------------------------|
6. | 6 8833 2018w9 |
7. | 7 8767 2018w8 |
8. | 8 7837 2018w38 |
9. | 9 7317 2018w11 |
10. | 10 7261 2018w10 |
|------------------------------|
11. | 11 6952 2018w12 |
12. | 12 6744 2018w13 |
13. | 13 6632 2019w2 |
14. | 14 6423 2018w14 |
15. | 15 6130 2019w13 |
|------------------------------|
16. | 16 5644 2018w37 |
17. | 17 5542 2019w42 |
18. | 18 5494 2018w15 |
19. | 19 5454 2019w19 |
20. | 20 5354 2019w24 |
|------------------------------|
21. | 21 5317 2019w3 |
22. | 22 5271 2019w15 |
23. | 23 5214 2019w20 |
24. | 24 4975 2019w43 |
25. | 25 4965 2018w18 |
|------------------------------|
26. | 26 4929 2018w25 |
27. | 27 4913 2019w10 |
28. | 28 4829 2018w42 |
29. | 29 4803 2019w1 |
30. | 30 4766 2018w19 |
|------------------------------|
31. | 31 4764 2019w18 |
32. | 32 4742 2018w16 |
33. | 33 4735 2019w45 |
34. | 34 4730 2019w44 |
35. | 35 4726 2019w25 |
|------------------------------|
36. | 36 4688 2019w16 |
37. | 37 4687 2019w23 |
38. | 38 4667 2019w4 |
39. | 39 4638 2019w9 |
40. | 40 4612 2018w17 |
|------------------------------|
41. | 41 4609 2019w12 |
42. | 42 4580 2019w21 |
43. | 43 4575 2018w47 |
44. | 44 4565 2019w41 |
45. | 45 4538 2018w23 |
|------------------------------|
46. | 46 4526 2019w14 |
47. | 47 4525 2018w45 |
48. | 48 4521 2019w8 |
49. | 49 4520 2019w38 |
50. | 50 4491 2019w5 |
|------------------------------|
51. | 51 4465 2018w26 |
52. | 52 4448 2019w17 |
53. | 53 4445 2019w22 |
54. | 54 4395 2018w39 |
55. | 55 4367 2019w26 |
|------------------------------|
56. | 56 4357 2019w40 |
57. | 57 4353 2018w20 |
58. | 58 4332 2019w6 |
59. | 59 4326 2019w11 |
60. | 60 4318 2019w39 |
|------------------------------|
61. | 61 4310 2018w40 |
62. | 62 4278 2018w27 |
63. | 63 4277 2019w29 |
64. | 64 4247 2018w28 |
65. | 65 4236 2019w33 |
|------------------------------|
66. | 66 4225 2019w27 |
67. | 67 4221 2019w7 |
68. | 68 4194 2018w22 |
69. | 69 4176 2019w30 |
70. | 70 4167 2018w29 |
|------------------------------|
71. | 71 4119 2019w28 |
72. | 72 4043 2019w37 |
73. | 73 4011 2018w32 |
74. | 74 3953 2018w43 |
75. | 75 3864 2018w21 |
|------------------------------|
76. | 76 3863 2018w31 |
77. | 77 3839 2018w24 |
78. | 78 3816 2018w41 |
79. | 79 3809 2019w36 |
80. | 80 3805 2018w50 |
|------------------------------|
81. | 81 3805 2018w34 |
82. | 82 3769 2018w51 |
83. | 83 3765 2018w48 |
84. | 84 3747 2018w46 |
85. | 85 3661 2018w30 |
|------------------------------|
86. | 86 3631 2018w33 |
87. | 87 3622 2019w34 |
88. | 88 3590 2018w36 |
89. | 89 3571 2018w49 |
90. | 90 3549 2019w31 |
|------------------------------|
91. | 91 3540 2019w35 |
92. | 92 3347 2018w44 |
93. | 93 3338 2018w52 |
94. | 94 3207 2019w32 |
95. | 95 3072 2018w35 |
+------------------------------+
+------------------------------+
| weeklyrank merit week |
|------------------------------|
1. | 1 30960 2018w4 |
2. | 2 19979 2018w5 |
3. | 3 14251 2019w46 |
4. | 4 13313 2018w6 |
5. | 5 11745 2018w7 |
|------------------------------|
6. | 6 8833 2018w9 |
7. | 7 8767 2018w8 |
8. | 8 7837 2018w38 |
9. | 9 7317 2018w11 |
10. | 10 7261 2018w10 |
|------------------------------|
11. | 11 6952 2018w12 |
12. | 12 6744 2018w13 |
13. | 13 6632 2019w2 |
14. | 14 6423 2018w14 |
15. | 15 6130 2019w13 |
|------------------------------|
16. | 16 5644 2018w37 |
17. | 17 5542 2019w42 |
18. | 18 5494 2018w15 |
19. | 19 5454 2019w19 |
20. | 20 5354 2019w24 |
|------------------------------|
21. | 21 5317 2019w3 |
22. | 22 5271 2019w15 |
23. | 23 5214 2019w20 |
24. | 24 4975 2019w43 |
25. | 25 4965 2018w18 |
|------------------------------|
26. | 26 4929 2018w25 |
27. | 27 4913 2019w10 |
28. | 28 4829 2018w42 |
29. | 29 4803 2019w1 |
30. | 30 4766 2018w19 |
|------------------------------|
31. | 31 4764 2019w18 |
32. | 32 4742 2018w16 |
33. | 33 4735 2019w45 |
34. | 34 4730 2019w44 |
35. | 35 4726 2019w25 |
|------------------------------|
36. | 36 4688 2019w16 |
37. | 37 4687 2019w23 |
38. | 38 4667 2019w4 |
39. | 39 4638 2019w9 |
40. | 40 4612 2018w17 |
|------------------------------|
41. | 41 4609 2019w12 |
42. | 42 4580 2019w21 |
43. | 43 4575 2018w47 |
44. | 44 4565 2019w41 |
45. | 45 4538 2018w23 |
|------------------------------|
46. | 46 4526 2019w14 |
47. | 47 4525 2018w45 |
48. | 48 4521 2019w8 |
49. | 49 4520 2019w38 |
50. | 50 4491 2019w5 |
|------------------------------|
51. | 51 4465 2018w26 |
52. | 52 4448 2019w17 |
53. | 53 4445 2019w22 |
54. | 54 4395 2018w39 |
55. | 55 4367 2019w26 |
|------------------------------|
56. | 56 4357 2019w40 |
57. | 57 4353 2018w20 |
58. | 58 4332 2019w6 |
59. | 59 4326 2019w11 |
60. | 60 4318 2019w39 |
|------------------------------|
61. | 61 4310 2018w40 |
62. | 62 4278 2018w27 |
63. | 63 4277 2019w29 |
64. | 64 4247 2018w28 |
65. | 65 4236 2019w33 |
|------------------------------|
66. | 66 4225 2019w27 |
67. | 67 4221 2019w7 |
68. | 68 4194 2018w22 |
69. | 69 4176 2019w30 |
70. | 70 4167 2018w29 |
|------------------------------|
71. | 71 4119 2019w28 |
72. | 72 4043 2019w37 |
73. | 73 4011 2018w32 |
74. | 74 3953 2018w43 |
75. | 75 3864 2018w21 |
|------------------------------|
76. | 76 3863 2018w31 |
77. | 77 3839 2018w24 |
78. | 78 3816 2018w41 |
79. | 79 3809 2019w36 |
80. | 80 3805 2018w50 |
|------------------------------|
81. | 81 3805 2018w34 |
82. | 82 3769 2018w51 |
83. | 83 3765 2018w48 |
84. | 84 3747 2018w46 |
85. | 85 3661 2018w30 |
|------------------------------|
86. | 86 3631 2018w33 |
87. | 87 3622 2019w34 |
88. | 88 3590 2018w36 |
89. | 89 3571 2018w49 |
90. | 90 3549 2019w31 |
|------------------------------|
91. | 91 3540 2019w35 |
92. | 92 3347 2018w44 |
93. | 93 3338 2018w52 |
94. | 94 3207 2019w32 |
95. | 95 3072 2018w35 |
+------------------------------+
Oops! I was wrong with above prediction.
The truth is here:
To sum up:
In 2019w46
A raw caculation from merits (with all possible effects from Art contest - excludes theymos' sent-merits, new merit sources, newly increased sMerits allocation, and the others), we have:
In 2019w46
- Total distributed merits: 14251
- Total merits sent by theymos: 1071
- Median of weekly merits before the last week: 4521
A raw caculation from merits (with all possible effects from Art contest - excludes theymos' sent-merits, new merit sources, newly increased sMerits allocation, and the others), we have:
Code:
. di 14251-1071-4521
8659
Unbelievable!8659
Update:
- The forum users distributed 8659 merits more what they usually did in most of half previous weeks at 4521 (the median of weekly merits).
- There is nearly 292% increase in the total merits last week, compares to median of weekly merits (before 2019w46) at 4521.
Well actually there are three factors that weighed in the last couple of weeks.
I would say we can list them in decreasing order of importance:
So perhaps the increase may not be so temporary (although not at these levels, of course).
I would say we can list them in decreasing order of importance:
- The art thread. One-off event, with theymos creating merits out of the thin air (sort of QE in the merit economy) to reward participants.
- New merit sources, promoted and replacing inactive merit sources
- 175% increase in the monthly allowance of the old merit sources, compared to the average held in the past 6 months
So perhaps the increase may not be so temporary (although not at these levels, of course).
Lots of spikes in daily and weekly merits (due to the Art contest's effects), so I come back to this thread.
What an impressive last week!
The last week (2019w46) is the third highest week since the merit system released. It stays only behind the first two weeks when the forum saw the merit system.
Intra-day merits:
Full and truncated datasets, respectively:
Merits over days of week:
As you can see, most of the outliers (especially very extreme ones) over days come from the last week.
Outliers displayed (in red circles) and non-displayed, respectively.
Interquartile range of intra-day merits
Intra-week merits:
The Art contest's effects:
For details, please see: tranthidung's statistical threads on bitcointalk
What an impressive last week!
The last week (2019w46) is the third highest week since the merit system released. It stays only behind the first two weeks when the forum saw the merit system.
Code:
. list merit week if merit >= 6373 | merit <= 2645
+-----------------+
| merit week |
|-----------------|
1. | 30960 2018w4 |
2. | 19979 2018w5 |
3. | 14251 2019w46 |
4. | 13313 2018w6 |
5. | 11745 2018w7 |
|-----------------|
6. | 8833 2018w9 |
7. | 8767 2018w8 |
8. | 7837 2018w38 |
9. | 7317 2018w11 |
10. | 7261 2018w10 |
|-----------------|
11. | 6952 2018w12 |
12. | 6744 2018w13 |
13. | 6632 2019w2 |
14. | 6423 2018w14 |
+-----------------+
+-----------------+
| merit week |
|-----------------|
1. | 30960 2018w4 |
2. | 19979 2018w5 |
3. | 14251 2019w46 |
4. | 13313 2018w6 |
5. | 11745 2018w7 |
|-----------------|
6. | 8833 2018w9 |
7. | 8767 2018w8 |
8. | 7837 2018w38 |
9. | 7317 2018w11 |
10. | 7261 2018w10 |
|-----------------|
11. | 6952 2018w12 |
12. | 6744 2018w13 |
13. | 6632 2019w2 |
14. | 6423 2018w14 |
+-----------------+
Intra-day merits:
Full and truncated datasets, respectively:
Merits over days of week:
As you can see, most of the outliers (especially very extreme ones) over days come from the last week.
Outliers displayed (in red circles) and non-displayed, respectively.
Interquartile range of intra-day merits
Intra-week merits:
The Art contest's effects:
For details, please see: tranthidung's statistical threads on bitcointalk
A more in line Merit from Member to Full would be around 20 - 25 IMO
I don't offend our opinion but if the merit requirements for the Full member rank is 20 or 25, full members are not too different than Members.Non-difference in their post quality compared to closest lower rank (the Member rank) and there are more Full member users.
I assume with 100-required merits for Full member rank, there are 1000 self-made Full members.
Then, if the requirement reduces to 25 merits (as you wanted), there are likely 4000 self-made Full members.
Those figures above are only assumed, not real ones but from the assumption and results you can see your odds to be accepted in campaigns (4000 applicants rather than only 1000 applicants) will be decreased roughly four times with 25-required merits for the Full member rank. Do you want it?
A more in line Merit from Member to Full would be around 20 - 25 IMO
The Merit required for Full Member and higher is close the the required Activity. If anything is out of balance, is that Jr. Members and Members require less Merit.Hahahaaha...
You are correct Loyce, and the whole point about striving to achieve "in line" merit system is ludicrous at best, at least in terms of considering the trajectory in terms of percentages.
Currently, there seems to be a decently low threshold for members to get started in achieving some kind of rank by having low thresholds to get started. They get some skin in the game by achieving some rank relatively quickly, as long as someone finds enough value in their post(s) to send some smerit love in their direction, but yeah as a percentage those values are pretty great between member and full member, even while there should seem to be no real desire to line up the percentages because then, as you imply either the earlier ranking would have to become more difficult, even while phillymogul seems to be suggesting that upper ranking could be made easier.
In other words, even though percentage thinking might make sense in terms of how you allocate the value of your bitcoins versus shitcoins versus other investments, and in might make sense in terms of considering BTC price movements, it makes a lot less sense in terms of ranking up, so in that regard the current ranking up system does seem to strike a decently aligned balance to allow contributory members to rank up to regular member status fairly quickly but then necessitate the garnering of a lot more merits, in substantive terms (even though not really in percentages) in order to achieve the higher ranks.
A more in line Merit from Member to Full would be around 20 - 25 IMO
The Merit required for Full Member and higher is close to the required Activity. If anything is out of balance, is that Jr. Members and Members require less Merit.
This merit system seems out of balance with Member to Full Member.
Why 10 to be Member but 100 to be Full Member, a 10X increase?
If this is true, Full Member to Sr Member should be 2400 merit, and similarly 4800 to Hero etc.
A more in line Merit from Member to Full would be around 20 - 25 IMO
Why 10 to be Member but 100 to be Full Member, a 10X increase?
If this is true, Full Member to Sr Member should be 2400 merit, and similarly 4800 to Hero etc.
A more in line Merit from Member to Full would be around 20 - 25 IMO
I haven’t posted on recent weekly merits per board for two months now, so here’s an update:
What I’m showing is merit distribution over the last 10 weeks (weeks 36 to 45), with all previous data aggregated (2018 and 2019 "compress"), in order to reduce the number of columns. Week 45 is still partial (lacking the weekend’s data).
I’ve highlighted in yellow some (not all) of the most significant changes over between the last few complete weeks:
- Announcements (Altcoins) had an atypical peak on week 41.
- Bitcoin boards picked-up on weeks 41 and 42 quite a bit, but have fallen back to previous week’s numbers (and even lower on week 44).
- German Local board has dropped by around 60% over the last 4 weeks (compared to previous 4 weeks).
- Turkish Local board has improved, more than doubling over the past 4 weeks in comparison to prior weeks.
- By art of magic, Meta has improved nearly threefold over the past weeks (and may have drawn some attention away from Bitcoin boards).
What I’m showing is merit distribution over the last 10 weeks (weeks 36 to 45), with all previous data aggregated (2018 and 2019 "compress"), in order to reduce the number of columns. Week 45 is still partial (lacking the weekend’s data).
I’ve highlighted in yellow some (not all) of the most significant changes over between the last few complete weeks:
- Announcements (Altcoins) had an atypical peak on week 41.
- Bitcoin boards picked-up on weeks 41 and 42 quite a bit, but have fallen back to previous week’s numbers (and even lower on week 44).
- German Local board has dropped by around 60% over the last 4 weeks (compared to previous 4 weeks).
- Turkish Local board has improved, more than doubling over the past 4 weeks in comparison to prior weeks.
- By art of magic, Meta has improved nearly threefold over the past weeks (and may have drawn some attention away from Bitcoin boards).
I said there are no reason why such a list would need to made public.
Of course there are reasons why this list need to be kept private! (Theymos argument and your one are two correct examples, but there might be others too).
Those are two different statements.
Sorry for nitpicking the logic.
Of course there are reasons why this list need to be kept private! (Theymos argument and your one are two correct examples, but there might be others too).
Those are two different statements.
Sorry for nitpicking the logic.
There are no reason why merit source list should be made public.
This is the reasoning:
I will not be posting a definitive list of merit sources (so that people don't bug them too much), though you'll soon figure out who they are if you pay attention.
Another reason I can think of against making the list public is it would make it easier to buy merits by contacting every one on the list and hoping at least one of them is willing to profit from their position.
Is there any way yet to know the list of merit sources?
No. Why?
Some identify themselves, others are identified by others. You could work out who some of them are if you applied yourself.
There are no reason why merit source list should be made public.
There is *one* reason - waste.
e.g. When said merit sources go on sprees splashing large numbers of merits to high ranking members such as in threads specifically designed to trash others.
There is an obvious reason why board administrators are public.
Trust lists are inherently public.
There is a good reason why forum funds custodian are public.
There are no reason why merit source list should be made public.
Trust lists are inherently public.
There is a good reason why forum funds custodian are public.
There are no reason why merit source list should be made public.
Because, we have default trust list here - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust.
But, no such merit source list here - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;stats=sources
Hence, I thought, if I am missing something.
But, no such merit source list here - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;stats=sources
Hence, I thought, if I am missing something.
I mean - why do you need it? What would you use it for?
Have not thought of any specific usage. But, so far, I have seen if theymos chose a group of users for whatever purpose, it is public. Forum moderators, the erstwhile default trust, users holding forum fund... all are public. This is probably the first time, there is no official list of people chosen by him. Hence, I was a bit surprised and wanted to confirm.
Because, we have default trust list here - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust.
But, no such merit source list here - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;stats=sources
Hence, I thought, if I am missing something.
But, no such merit source list here - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;stats=sources
Hence, I thought, if I am missing something.
I mean - why do you need it? What would you use it for?
Is there any way yet to know the list of merit sources?
No. Why?
Because, we have default trust list here - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust.
But, no such merit source list here - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;stats=sources
Hence, I thought, if I am missing something.
Is there any way yet to know the list of merit sources?
Just have to assume you're asking a genuine question without any bad intentions. There isn't an officially list but unofficially you can identify them through this thread; [TOP-200] The most generous users giving merits. Merit sources are highlighted in bold letters. There could be few mistake as some merit source are yet to be identify while other smerit generous givers could be mistaken for merit sources nevertheless, the list is 99% accurate.
Thanks. Was aware of suchmoon, LoyceV, DarkStar_, OgNasty and a few others. But did not know that so many of them are unofficially identified.
legendary
Activity: 2408
Merit: 4282
eXch.cx - Automatic crypto Swap Exchange.
Is there any way yet to know the list of merit sources?
Just have to assume you're asking a genuine question without any bad intentions. There isn't an officially list but unofficially you can identify them through this thread; [TOP-200] The most generous users giving merits. Merit sources are highlighted in bold letters. There could be few mistake as some merit source are yet to be identify while other smerit generous givers could be mistaken for merit sources nevertheless, the list is 99% accurate.
Is there any way yet to know the list of merit sources?
No. Why?
Is there any way yet to know the list of merit sources?
Jump to: