Topic: Merit & new rank requirements - page 56. (Read 167726 times)

With your big name, posts you've made, and time you have spent on this forum, I guess 65 merit points isn't that far.

Stuffs that I would like to pinpoint are:
(1) Medians should be used to present almost true means of statistics, such as merits, activities, postcounts, trust points, etc, rather than means.
Because Means significantly affected by outliers.

(2) Percentage change for each week should be compared between total distributed merits during each week with median of weekly distributed merit.
By now, @coinlocket$ compared two weeks in-a-row. This approach has limitations.
For instance, let's take a look at the following image.
For the week started at 24/9/2018, the percentage change compared with previous week that has 9684 merit distributed in total, is -53,4% (as @coinlocket$’s table shows).
Nevertheless, if we use the median for comparison, which sort of result we can have.
Let’s see:
The median till the end of the week started at 24/9/2018 is  4440 (the first row in my table).
The difference between the week and the median is: 4510 – 4440 = 70 merits
Percentage change is: 70*100/4440 = 1.6%.
Once again, what does it mean?
It clearly presents that the effect of new rank requirements (aims at Junior Member rank) almost tailed off only after two week since the launch day(1.6% higher than median is very low effect).
Based on the given figure by @coinlocket$, readers can easily get wrong overview that the week had significant changes due to something unknown at that moment; but in reality everything probably come back to normal (with my analytic approach).

(3) For trend analysis, I will do it with time series analysis.
Let's wait and see when we will witness a first statistical significant trend break which might occur due to dramatic changes in the forum.

By now, there is no trend-break, as we all can see that the change of rules for Junior Member rank has had only temporary effects, which has not lasted too long. Consequently, these sort of temporary effects has not long enough to make a trend break.

I get where you’re going, but going into boxplots (which in practice I haven’t seen for a long time) is not going to be picked-up easily, as the terms are not of common knowledge and complicate somewhat the interpretation.

Besides, on an weekly evolution analysis, just seeing the graphical/numerical weekly values and trend seem good enough to get a good sense of what is going on. The outliers have a strong semantical meaning, since they are tied to events such as initial airdrop being spent heavily over the first weeks, and the change of rules for Jr. Member achievement.

What is most important to monitor in my opinion are the flat based absolute weekly values, and their (descending) trend over the last few weeks. The rest is history really.

Simply one single sentence^[1] can express what you are looking for.
[1]- Please give me merit.

While there is no option to lose unused smerits yet (it could be implemented if necessary) there is absolutely no reason to keep smerits as it is useless to the holder.
This doesn't mean you should be under pressure to give it out, until you find highly meriting posts.



Higher ranked members (or any member at all with smerits) does not merit irrelevant posts. Majority of these comes from newbies as such it looks like they are the target, buy lots of high ranked members who don't give out quality interaction also don't get merited.
No one likes spam, regardless who is posting it.

You have rightly said that since the introduction of the merit system, this forum has improved greatly. Because there are many spamer, those who have increased their ranking without any good post, and since the system has become more aware of those spamer and for which all are going to give good post on this forum.



I'm very glad to learn that if we get sMerit points, then we can keep it without any problems. My some friends said that if I receive any sMerit by  making high quality post or article, then I need to use it. Otherwise I will lost my all sMerits for ever. But after I see your reply regarding this, I understand properly.





Brothers, you know that sMerit is used for those who showcase many nice and helpful things before us. Those members of high rank who give sMerit if they do not see the quality of the newbie, then the next newbie will create spam for this forum by creating a small, unusual and helpless post, to earn sMerit. For this reason, higher rank members didn't like to give sMerits to newbie or lower rank members.



Yes, I totally agree with you. If we submit our personal data on public then there have lot of risk with our personal security. So many negative persons have in crypto world and they will blackmail us for money or for others way. So, we need to focus on only quality post and spamless helpful post to make this forum more clean and good.



Absolutely right that so many peoples didn't get any merits because of their lazyness. There are many people who want to get more than just a little effort and they give wrong answers without seeing what others post because of laziness. In my opinion, this forum will not bring any good for them and they will not get any merits. So we have to avoid laziness and have to respond carefully to another post, so that others are beneficial.



You are right, this forum has been very much improved since the changes in merit requirements .Those who always post low quality, they are now forced to post better quality and for which this forum has been spamless and clean and newbie become very careful about good quality post to get merits to rank up.



I think it is better to post quality post to get merits and rank up again. As I know so many projects don't like to accept "copper member" for their signature campaign. So there have not so much bengits if they purchase "Copper membership".



Don't worry mate and don't lost your hopeless. Cause if you deserve any merit points then you will get it. But for this you need to make good and high quality helpful post. You know so many spammer trying to post smaller post to get activities to rank up their accounts. But after merit system they are not able to rank up their accounts by helpless low quality post. So work hard and don't lose your hope.



I can see your most post was on bounty thread and your others post was not so much good quality. That's why still you didn't receive any merits. If you really wanna get merits then you need to make good helpful post not only on bounty thread. Hopefully you will work hard in future.



Yes you are right that the number of newbie in this forum is much more. Because they would post to participate in bounty without having a good post. So they could not earn any merits. You can try to create good and better posts, which will benefit everyone and that will obey all the rules of this forum. And you may know that there is nothing in this world that can not do people. So you have to work hard to make good quality post.

Good luck 

Update for the last week, based on the given data from @coinlocket$
As the attached image shown, the means and medians of weekly distributed merits are nearly 4.8k and 4.4k, respectively.
As always, I strongly suggest to take a look at medians, which are almost true means of distributed merits, rather than means,
Using medians will help us to have more exact, neutral overview on merit distribution without significant effects of outliers (robust to outliers).
More interestingly, the interquartile range (from 25th quartile to 75th quartile) has been from 3978 to 4820.
What does it means?
It presents that 25% of observed weeks have less than 3978 merits distributed over week (below the 25th quartile), and 25% of them have more than 4820 merits distributed over week (above the 75th quartile).
In other words, 50% of those observed weeks have weekly distributed merits ranges from 3978 to 4820; and the median of weekly distributed merit has been somewhere around 4.4k per week.
Data interpretation used statistics in the last row of the attached table.

In addition, weeks which have total distributed merits above 6k should be consider as potential outliers [as red circles shown in the boxplot]

*Notes:
1. Interquartile range: The range from 25th quartile to 75th quartile.
2. Mean +/- sd: Mean +/- Standard deviation
3. Potential outliers: weeks which have total distributed merits outside the two whiskers (above and below).
Above whisker = Q3 + 1.5 IQR = 4820 + 1.5*842 = 6083 (Q3: the 75th quartile)
Below whisker = Q1 - 1.5 IQR = 3978 - 1.5*842 = 2715 (Q1: the 25th quartile).

Hihi give me some merit sir    just kidding

Sounds like a great attitude. 

Think about it, the newbie signature campaign were causing a lot of spam because of the famed accounts and the 1 merit rule was a game changer for them. In addition, theymos was against such(any) restriction but at the end he surprised everyone and the impact was quite big.

the current system is very useful for avoiding account farmers and spammers, even though I'm still a newbie but I'm not shy. because my goal came in this forum to study not to pursue merit

What are the "quite serious" forum problems that were resolved that you are referring to? You mean things like account farming or something else?   Are they solved or just the incentives changed?

Well, I can say you are doing faaar better than many others here >
Thanks to BPIP and Vod for the stats.
I think when most of the forum problems are solved /the spam, bumping bots, account farmers, bounty/signature abusers, etc./ people will turn back to discussion stuff, and look away from Meta, but as long as there are problems /and we had quite serous ones solved lately/, the attention will be here.

Sadly, worked other way around for me...I was curious about mining, started reading about it, learned about modding bioses,
became part of altcoin mining community (dare to say, recognized one), made bioses that were downloaded thousands times, got 0 merit

then switched to your supposedly fail order of things, and got some

I said it before, you need to build a repatriation, then the merit does not matter anymore..
I hate when I have to quote myself but here it is..

I agree, I was just reacting about specific "look how easy it is" example 

When I look at my own account, I got many merit where I expected none, and zero
where I'm certain I helped a lot of people

You can't evaluate the whole system with a single or some user.
If we want to evaluate with one user's merit data, nullius can be a great example who didn't receive merit for analyzing merit data. S/he got almost all of his/her merits from bitcoin discussion.
So, if we want to evaluate the system, we need to compare all of the members. With the span of time, the system will work more greatly.

Check Lakai01 posts in german section
Not saying its right or wrong, just stating it as fact
I don't speek german, just see word "merit" there a lot

Lol. True indeed.

Anyway, totally agree with your statement. Never judged how people spend smerit and never said that merit shouldn’t go to merit data analysis, I’ve read whit interest all of them (coinlocket$’s, Piggy’s, your’s...) and also merited some of those stuff “meta-forum related”; just happens I’m more interested in other stuff and read and interact more on other 3ds, more crypto related.

As the comment you linked said, don’t like complains (all focused on “not fair I can’t earn money anymore” rather than the actual system)  and I’m just proud of being on the list of the few users who ranked up whit this system, nothing more:)

Actually, you have 1 received sMerit on a Meta board on September 18th, on this same thread: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.45888390

Regardless, merit is to be used to award any decent post by subjective standards, not specifically crypto related. Analysis on merits happens to be an area that shows insights as to how things are going on the merit front. The alternative is to be completely in the dark about these facts, have no measure of how things are going, and therefore no idea of the repercussions it has on the whole. I normally prefer to have information available that an information blackout on a core forum feature …