Author

Topic: Merit & new rank requirements - page 277. (Read 167726 times)

full member
Activity: 910
Merit: 103
January 25, 2018, 07:57:08 PM

His suggestion isn't the solution, but mine would. The problem is that if the initial merit score is equal to the minimum required for the rank you have, at least half of the people of this forum (those whose activity is closer to the upper range of their rank than to the lower one) will feel they have been treated in a way which is not fair. That's 50% of the members of Bitcointalk. And those who were only one week away from the next rank will feel particularly bad, especially if you are going for a higher rank (like from Senior to Hero) and in one moment you are losing 6 months of activity, since activity without the corresponding merit has no value any more. On the other side, if the initial merit score is more progressively and proportionatelly distributed, nobody would feel the system has treated HIM in an unjust way. Someone has said that now it's too late for changes because the system has already been implemented. This would be true if you had to take away merits from people. But in fact, what I'm suggesting is that people would get some additional merits to fit or anyway somehow reflect their activity count more than just their rank. What I'm saying is that more precision here would mean much more justice. My view is that as much justice as technically possible is badly needed in any big community which doesn't want to fall apart.

May be not 50% but a lot of them for sure. Cannot believe that it is so technically hard to apply initial merit points equal to activity points.

By definition half of the people would be closer to the upper threshold of a ranking activity range and half would be close to the lower range. You could obviously imagine also some being exactly in the middle Smiley Of course, the closer the people would be to the upper range, and therefore to the next rank, the more they would now feel the injustice.

You don't know that without looking at the actual forum distributions. I don't think the distribution would be uniform.

But the larger point about making this fair, here are some suggestions -
  • Make the initial Merit equal to the Current Activity, so give more Merit to everyone. It seems like no one would complain in that case, since no Merit is taken away, just given to members.
  • If not, at least make the distribution more granular. For example, instead of treating all Hero Members the same, treat them in say 5 tiers, with Activities between 500-1000+, and redo the Merit calculation based on which tier they belong to. You can then again apply the same algorithm of lower bound for the tier that you belong to, but the tiers are more granular.

It would greatly help the adoption of this system by the community if the initial distribution is perceived to be fair.

Quote
people would get some additional merits to fit or anyway somehow reflect their activity count more than just their rank

yes, your solution is better than me , we need to wait for other member to send us smerit, I've try to send my smerit , but I don't think people will send back to me , actually as you said that distribution initial merit more fair way based on current activity and not member rank
legendary
Activity: 2590
Merit: 3015
Welt Am Draht
January 25, 2018, 07:56:37 PM
This made me laugh but I don't know if that makes it merit worthy?

Give your merit to someone in greater need than I.
member
Activity: 145
Merit: 16
January 25, 2018, 07:54:29 PM
I think this merit system is quite unsustainable and I'm 100% sure I'll NEVER get any Merit point with this post. This will prove my theory is totally legit.

True but time will tell.. Let see for some time how everything will work.
legendary
Activity: 3836
Merit: 4969
Doomed to see the future and unable to prevent it
January 25, 2018, 07:54:02 PM
This looks about as incomprehensible as the trust system, which is jolly incomprehensible, but my brain has gone these days and I've always had little merit anyway.

This made me laugh but I don't know if that makes it merit worthy?

I don't see a description of what should be considered a merit worthy post?

May be I don't fully understand the system, but it seems to me that if you have a limited number of merit (note: I don't have any) it will be very difficult to reward who deserve it.
And who have plenty of merits to give will have a lot of power, in many senses.
I can't grasp all the implications, we'll see in the next period.
All I can see is that Legendaries are very happy, and the other aren't.
And I don't think it's just about "quality post improvement"

Btw, I'm here from a very short time, so I can't judge anything. Just accept the situation, we'll see.

You summed it up pretty well there with the exception of losing merits.
You will not lose any merits by giving someone a merit.
For every merit you have you also have 1 to give..
The rest of your post is spot on!

This is not true, I started with 200 sMerit(sendable merit) to give so it is not a 1:1 ratio. Re-read the OP.
legendary
Activity: 3892
Merit: 11105
Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"
January 25, 2018, 07:50:57 PM
I guess it just got tougher to move up the ranks. Can't argue with the reasoning behind it though, although I tend to do a lot more reading than posting. Doubt I am alone in doing that.

Yep,,,


that is something each member would need to consider, especially the ones who spend a large amount of time reading, rather than posting. 

A question might be:  How important is it to you to rank up?  If you are merely reading, then there is no need for ranking up for that, right?  If you are posting and you want some credibility to be attributed to your posts, then ranking up comes in more handy, right?
legendary
Activity: 1386
Merit: 1045
January 25, 2018, 07:46:46 PM
I would be in favour of a system in which some merit is generated to give for all users. That is, a newby may get 1 merit every month to give away, a junior 2 merit, etc...

Leaving Junior Members without signature has been a bad idea, I am sure many of them were in the middle of a signature campaign and now they will loose all their effort. Even a "grace period" of 1 month on this regard would have been a life saver for many.

I think the idea is that the ability to give merit is a privilege, not a right. You earn the ability to give Merit based on the Merit that you've earned from your efforts in helping the community.
legendary
Activity: 2590
Merit: 3015
Welt Am Draht
January 25, 2018, 07:44:57 PM
Why is bitcointalk doing this?

To combat the avalanche of shite posted by google translate bots. Once upon a time this forum was filled with old school bitcoiners having high level discussions. Many of them have moved on because of the racket here.
member
Activity: 254
Merit: 18
January 25, 2018, 07:44:51 PM
I would be in favour of a system in which some merit is generated to give for all users. That is, a newby may get 1 merit every month to give away, a junior 2 merit, etc...

Leaving Junior Members without signature has been a bad idea, I am sure many of them were in the middle of a signature campaign and now they will loose all their effort. Even a "grace period" of 1 month on this regard would have been a life saver for many.
member
Activity: 140
Merit: 11
Heya Homies
January 25, 2018, 07:43:49 PM
May be I don't fully understand the system, but it seems to me that if you have a limited number of merit (note: I don't have any) it will be very difficult to reward who deserve it.
And who have plenty of merits to give will have a lot of power, in many senses.
I can't grasp all the implications, we'll see in the next period.
All I can see is that Legendaries are very happy, and the other aren't.
And I don't think it's just about "quality post improvement"

Btw, I'm here from a very short time, so I can't judge anything. Just accept the situation, we'll see.

You summed it up pretty well there with the exception of losing merits.
You will not lose any merits by giving someone a merit.
For every merit you have you also have 1 to give..
The rest of your post is spot on!
full member
Activity: 322
Merit: 103
January 25, 2018, 07:41:58 PM
Why is bitcointalk doing this? This is getting so complex and making our life more difficult. Where is the petition to change this?!
legendary
Activity: 2590
Merit: 3015
Welt Am Draht
January 25, 2018, 07:40:44 PM
This looks about as incomprehensible as the trust system, which is jolly incomprehensible, but my brain has gone these days and I've always had little merit anyway.
newbie
Activity: 154
Merit: 0
January 25, 2018, 07:36:05 PM
May be I don't fully understand the system, but it seems to me that if you have a limited number of merit (note: I don't have any) it will be very difficult to reward who deserve it.
And who have plenty of merits to give will have a lot of power, in many senses.
I can't grasp all the implications, we'll see in the next period.
All I can see is that Legendaries are very happy, and the other aren't.
And I don't think it's just about "quality post improvement"

Btw, I'm here from a very short time, so I can't judge anything. Just accept the situation, we'll see.
full member
Activity: 280
Merit: 102
January 25, 2018, 07:34:48 PM
Well... But I do not understand. If someone has 10 twinks. Why do not they just give merits to the main account?
If a person A gives 1 merit to a person B, does it mean that the person A lose 1 merit from the profile?
Reason A: because you only have a limited amount of sMerit available to send.
Reason B: Because that would be fucking obvious and althunters would be all over your ass.

Or why do people not send trust to/with all their alt accounts? Same situation, really.

There will be a shit load of "favoritism" from the collectibles section as a large % of us all socialize off forum..

the Alt master turned Alt Hunter QS will be chucking up REP threads left right and center.. LUTPIN=LAUDA=MINI=ZEPHER=ACTMYNAME=TMAN=MITCHELL=LAUDA etc etc...

he will just judge us by his own standards, even though we are more likely to read each others posts more carefully

Still trying to get caught up, but, you hit the nail right on the head and I had to stop and let you know.  Thanks.
newbie
Activity: 17
Merit: 0
January 25, 2018, 07:30:54 PM
I think this merits would make much sense on the forum since i've been seeing lots of unuseful posts these days. My question thoughts is unanswerable when reading posts about bitcoin, as a newbie i think this will be a challenge for us and we should adapt this.
legendary
Activity: 2492
Merit: 1232
January 25, 2018, 07:25:46 PM
okay so thats the purpose of merit system..
but what if your to unlucky no one ever distinguished and merit you..
but you are still helping the community.. will admin provide this manually?

My point exactly. With the influx of posts and high activity (with everyone busy snapping up merits, Someone might just miss out on it). I don't know If I'm the only one that thinks only activity should be required.

Hopefully this merit system will it works for those spammer and shit posting members, even though you've reached the activity but the merits will not you can't rank up by not getting merit required. Hopefully this merit system now did not abused again.
legendary
Activity: 3654
Merit: 8909
https://bpip.org
January 25, 2018, 07:16:30 PM
Ok, but members like me, that are not here for the signature bonuses, but don't make state of the art articles, will be discriminated. I'm not extraordinary, and i don't want to be stuck waiting for someone to merit my posts. I want to help the community and learn from it at the same time, but from now on, will the community spend time thanking me for doing it?

If you're not here for the signatures - why do you care about ranks? How exactly are you discriminated?
member
Activity: 350
Merit: 41
January 25, 2018, 07:12:00 PM
I guess it just got tougher to move up the ranks. Can't argue with the reasoning behind it though, although I tend to do a lot more reading than posting. Doubt I am alone in doing that.
hero member
Activity: 2212
Merit: 805
Top Crypto Casino
January 25, 2018, 07:09:51 PM
okay so thats the purpose of merit system..
but what if your to unlucky no one ever distinguished and merit you..
but you are still helping the community.. will admin provide this manually?

My point exactly. With the influx of posts and high activity (with everyone busy snapping up merits, Someone might just miss out on it). I don't know If I'm the only one that thinks only activity should be required.

But I found this though :
Quote
1. Be a somewhat established member.
 2. Collect TEN posts written in the last couple of months that have not received nearly enough merit for how good they are, and post quotes for them all in a new Meta thread.
 3. We will take a look at your history and maybe make you a source.
legendary
Activity: 1386
Merit: 1045
January 25, 2018, 07:06:10 PM
Did I miss something because that seems like the system of 600k merit points will dwindle and end pretty quickly (assuming 50% always leaves the system). Do the merit-sources keep getting new merit points or was it a one off type deal?
That's not how it works. There are also 'sources' of sMerit, who have their 'supply replenished' every month, so they can give out much more sMerit than the 50% of what they receive. This will increase the supply of sMerit in the system.
member
Activity: 77
Merit: 10
January 25, 2018, 07:04:26 PM
I've been trying to mine this Merit and the intensity must be too high, as I keep getting rejects.  Glad there's no demerits yet


Seriously though, I know its been stated a few times here that the merit system should assist in identifying the people who have quality posts, and are a contributor to the forum.  I agree with a few here that it may lend to people posting longer, trying to get merit based on their post, which still contains very little content/value.

Separately, We probably need a system or ability to report merit that does not seem earned genuinely, creating multiple accounts and handing out merit between those accounts, etc.  Just my 2c
Jump to: