Good idea, at least! I was so tired of bitcointalk bad quality posts that I had almost stopped enter here at all.
Good job theymos!
Topic: Merit & new rank requirements - page 280. (Read 167726 times)
Yes, read that carefully after clicking +merit on other members. I believe you get 1 smerit per post and can spend that then. Thanks.
You clearly have not read the OP, since you get 0.5 sMerit for every merit you receive.You get merit points when someone sends you some for one of your posts. Additionally, when someone sends you merit points, half of those points can be sent by you to other people.
The bigger point still remains open for me where I was just two points away from next level, however with this change I am by 150 merit points. Its all good though, will get there sooner or later.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;stats=topsend
In less than a day we already sent more sMerits (11k+) than sources will gain in a month (~8k). Anyone knows how many sMerits have been distributed to existing members?
In less than a day we already sent more sMerits (11k+) than sources will gain in a month (~8k). Anyone knows how many sMerits have been distributed to existing members?
About 600k.
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
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.Rich people became richer, poor people more poor...
We all agree that - as day 1 of the system - is too early to make any evaluation.
Btw some aspects are unclear: as a Member, I've just ONE merit to give. One. After that, zero. I've to wait someone to give me a merit - actually two - to appreciate another post. May be I read some masterworks, but I can't give anything because I don't have.
Of course, this is true else for other people: may be they like very much a post I wrote, but they can't give me a merit because they haven't.
So, to earn a merit, not only I need to write a wonderful post, but I have to hope that it will be read from the right person, that has merits to give.
I don't know how other people at my level think about this, but I feel frustrated and discouraged, because the chances to receive a merit are very low.
I've no idea how many fantastic post I should write to have the hope to receive the 90 merit I need to become Full Member.
Probably after some post without any positive feedback, I'll simply give up, and I'll stop posting.
And for sure, newbies and Jr.Member will do the same.
I'm pretty sure that for some Vip here, this would a good result, but in this case ICO will lose interest to promote them here.
Shortly: may be the intention was to get rid of spam, but the result will be the death of the forum.
Of course, may be I'm completely wrong (I'd like to be), and it will be very easy to receive merit and to rank up, in the meanwhile we can keep shitposters away.
May be.
Btw some aspects are unclear: as a Member, I've just ONE merit to give. One. After that, zero. I've to wait someone to give me a merit - actually two - to appreciate another post. May be I read some masterworks, but I can't give anything because I don't have.
Of course, this is true else for other people: may be they like very much a post I wrote, but they can't give me a merit because they haven't.
So, to earn a merit, not only I need to write a wonderful post, but I have to hope that it will be read from the right person, that has merits to give.
I don't know how other people at my level think about this, but I feel frustrated and discouraged, because the chances to receive a merit are very low.
I've no idea how many fantastic post I should write to have the hope to receive the 90 merit I need to become Full Member.
Probably after some post without any positive feedback, I'll simply give up, and I'll stop posting.
And for sure, newbies and Jr.Member will do the same.
I'm pretty sure that for some Vip here, this would a good result, but in this case ICO will lose interest to promote them here.
Shortly: may be the intention was to get rid of spam, but the result will be the death of the forum.
Of course, may be I'm completely wrong (I'd like to be), and it will be very easy to receive merit and to rank up, in the meanwhile we can keep shitposters away.
May be.
Wow, big change. This is a minefield, going to have to put this thread on watch & come back and read thoroughly when I have time.
honestly, this makes me very sad, even if i understand why this merit system is implemented for.
i am like 3-4 weeks away from my sr.member rank and this fucks me really up
i'm sad, angry and shocked together X_x". now i have to collect like 150 merits in a short time but how Oo", i dont think that people will freely start to like everything i post... since humans are not generous, infact, they can be very harsh to others, being anonymous on the internet...
i am like 3-4 weeks away from my sr.member rank and this fucks me really up
i'm sad, angry and shocked together X_x". now i have to collect like 150 merits in a short time but how Oo", i dont think that people will freely start to like everything i post... since humans are not generous, infact, they can be very harsh to others, being anonymous on the internet...
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
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.
This system means fewer posts ,fewer members ,fewer people able to wear an avatar or a big sig...that will make the board less attractive for ICO promotions because it will look less popular .
I'm not sure anybody here wants that .
I disagree. more people will post more to have more chances of getting merit points. i'm sure that has already happened. I'm not sure anybody here wants that .
is there some place where we can see the number of posts per day? i'm sure it increased during the last day
It's just people complaining ...or sucking dicks (there will be a looot of that) .
When they realize they're fucked ,that they can't move up in ranks ,they'll leave .
Do you really think a guy who doesn't speak english will expect to get enough merits one day ?
Gimmick accounts and shitty posts are part of this place .I'm not saying I like it but it definitely makes it look more active and popular than it really is .And that attracts project devs and their money.
"Do you really think a guy who doesn't speak english will expect to get enough merits one day ?"
hmm? I thought we're talking about people making more posts or fewer posts as you said in your previous post
what I said is I disagree, I think each user will make more posts
I do agree it will be more difficult for users to increase their rank, especially if they don't speak english
Does it mean that when someone doesn't get merit from people for a period of time, their ranks powers down or it doesn't matter whether one gets merit or not. Also will merits now be used as a new means of achieving new rank?
For now, merit will not decay- you cannot lose points over time or from being "negative" rated by other users. As the OP states, one must now reach both a certain merit and activity requirement before achieving a new rank.
This system means fewer posts ,fewer members ,fewer people able to wear an avatar or a big sig...that will make the board less attractive for ICO promotions because it will look less popular .
I'm not sure anybody here wants that .
I'm not sure anybody here wants that .
I'm sure I want that. Fewer ICO promotions? Fewer flashy avatars and sigs? Great.
Except it's not really going to decrease, is it? Existing ranks will remain. New ranks will be harder to attain so it may mean slower growth, not a decrease.
But if shitposters are going to post less because of the new rules - I can live with that. It's Bitcointalk, not ICOtalk.
Does it mean that when someone doesn't get merit from people for a period of time, their ranks powers down or it doesn't matter whether one gets merit or not. Also will merits now be used as a new means of achieving new rank? Also does it mean if no one gives you merit, you will remain in the same rank?
Yes, from Jr. Member on you will need to have a certain # of Merit points to advance in rank 
This system means fewer posts ,fewer members ,fewer people able to wear an avatar or a big sig...that will make the board less attractive for ICO promotions because it will look less popular .
I'm not sure anybody here wants that .
I disagree. more people will post more to have more chances of getting merit points. i'm sure that has already happened. I'm not sure anybody here wants that .
is there some place where we can see the number of posts per day? i'm sure it increased during the last day
It's just people complaining ...or sucking dicks (there will be a looot of that) .
When they realize they're fucked ,that they can't move up in ranks ,they'll leave .
Do you really think a guy who doesn't speak english will expect to get enough merits one day ?
Gimmick accounts and shitty posts are part of this place .I'm not saying I like it but it definitely makes it look more active and popular than it really is .And that attracts project devs and their money.
I personally think that a third parallel system was not required at the moment, this will confuse majority of the people, if it really implemented already, lets see how it goes in coming days...
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
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. 
Could you please stick the thread? It was kinda hard for me to find info about this new system as I had to search in different threads to get linked to it.
Does it mean that when someone doesn't get merit from people for a period of time, their ranks powers down or it doesn't matter whether one gets merit or not. Also will merits now be used as a new means of achieving new rank?
For now, merit will not decay- you cannot lose points over time or from being "negative" rated by other users. As the OP states, one must now reach both a certain merit and activity requirement before achieving a new rank.
So....I was ready to move up to member on Tuesday, now due to this i have to wait until i receive merit points..Garsh
Added 1. PM me in a week and if your posts are quality I will give you more
What happened to the merits that given to me? They do not appear on my merits.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.28857729
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.28857729
Jump to: