Topic: Merit? This got to be a joke. - page 3. (Read 2488 times)

Nah let's just call it what it is: "Bagholder" or "Hodler"

Life isn't fair but I like the way you think, it would also be a nice way to curb the bellyaching about how ranking up is the hardest thing in the world to do.


Agreed, it should be an acheivement.

Being as we are Bitcointalk, this adjustment in rank showing how difficult it was or wasn't.... anyone see where I'm going with this??

I propose 2016 for activity and Merit for this New rank, and I would go with something like "Mythical" for the name.

Actually its "I believe I will change in the near future."

But the guy misspelled the word Merit when it is written next to every single post on the forum. He doesn't stand a chance.

Vod has 1600+ and he's earning merits faster than activity... and there are quite a few other users well on their way. Legendary takes ~2-3 years based on activity alone so the new rank should be at least 4 years of activity and corresponding merit.


1200 is way too low. That's barely above the top limit for Legendary (~1100 IIRC).

@hilariousetc, you just plagiarised my suggestion - just kidding

Here is the list what I scraped from DdmrDdmr's Merit dashboard with my suggested requirement (Activity>1200, Merit>1500). How about this list for first Elite Legendaries

• Lauda
• achow101
• LoyceV
• The Pharmacist
• theymos
• Vod

Going from 1000 to 2000 will be easier than going going from 0 to 1000. If we expect a Newbie to earn 1000 Merit to become Legendary, it's only fair to expect the same from users who received 1000 Merit in the January airdrop.

Why not? We shouldn't create a rank that there will be loads of people instantly either. I'm only 13 periods away from 1920 on my main account so it's not that bad. I'm not exactly an old school member either, but it's a rank that people will gradually achieve over time, and the high merit requirement would make it extra special, but I don't think only theymos holding it right now would be a big deal. People will soon join him. There's far too many Legendaries right now and I think there should be a distinction to separate much older members and those who have put in the contributions to receive the merit as well. I dare say with the auto-merit distribution there's probably a lot of shit posting Legednaries that will get little to no merit so would be nice to distinguish between them.


I wouldn't expect much to be introduced here within 2 years to be honest.

2000+ Merit’s?
Jesus Christ, 2000+ Activity would be cool but 2000+ Merit’s is going to take people forever to achieve, if at all.

If that's going to happen, I don't expect theymos to create it before at least a few people dozen have reached it. It wouldn't look good if theymos creates a new rank that only he holds at the moment.
In a bit more than 6 months, only 15 users have earned 500+ Merit, 38 users have 350+ and 77 users have earned 250+ Merit. At this rate, it would take those users 6, 12 or 18 months to reach 1000+ Merit, and not all of those users have enough Activity to be Legendary.
Based on this, I don't expect a new higher rank to be introduced within maybe 2 years.

There should be an addition rank made. It could supersede Legendary and Legendary is bumped up to a higher activity requirement. Legendary is becoming far too common now and will only become more so as time passes. I have suggested fixing Legendary at 960 activity and the new rank is double that at 1920. You could also make the merit requirement very high for this rank so it's only for the very highest contributors. 2000 merit would probably do as that would be very difficult to achieve and would only be likely done so by the very top percentile of contributors here.  

No I think it's not enough, username also to be removed at least for few days, then only Newbies will know actually who are they dealing with . Because those names are like brand names for bitcointalk forum. It's not about rank name, but the username.

How about introducing new elite rank for members having more than 1200 Activities and 1500 Merits. Because I personally didn't feeled good when all the Legendary members (espcially members who couldn't achieved much Merits after airdropped initial Merits) bound into a one group so called Legendary. Some of the brand names deserved more than that for their contribution towards forum. Just a suggestion.

Holy crap... 2000+ activity should definitely be a new rank, Legendary just doesn't cut it. And 2000+ merits of course.

Or perhaps remove the rank name altogether at that level. Leave the newbies guessing who they're dealing with. Sort of like debadging a car.

Yes - but also another point. Looking at the stats of the two profiles below Date joined, quality of posts, level of knowledge, contribution to the forum.
(There are many others I hold in the same regard)

Now show me one member that has been deprived due to the merit system that deserves to wear the same forum rank as those two profiles.

I don't think they will change the merit system knowing that this is working FOR SOME users here.

Those people who are complaining about the merit system are probably:
1. Newbies who can't get merit from their post probably because they only posting bounty reports. (I have done this before but I stopped it. Saying this thinking that somebody will see my post history )
2. Users who can't get merit from their post because their posts are not merit worthy and now they are just complaining about the system. In short, users who are not contributing to the forum.

And without the merit system, all those annoying spam bots on the announcement thread would get ranked up eventually.

I think it is hilarious how the OPs of these type of threads get zero merit or sympathy from readers, and the people who tell them to stop complaining and posting rubbish end up getting a few.

Its like, do the EXACT opposite of what you are currently doing OP and you'll have a better chance of getting merit.

Like that seinfield episode where george does the exact opposite and things turn out awesome.

It clearly stopped account farming and reduced number of high-ranked users in bounty campaigns. To eliminate spam we need to cancel signature campaigns. But this will certainly decrease the money flow this forum is generating. So Merit system will stay despite how annoyed you are.

It is hard to flaw Satoshis posting style and contribution. It is also impossible to read his writing without feeling an amount of awe.



I think as hilariousetc pointed out - I don't think jenia2 fully understands how the merit system works.

It probably also isn't a good idea to try and use some of the top posters on the forum as an example why the previous system unfairly advantaged them.

By using averages - over the time that hilariousetc and LoyceV have been on the forum they would have each accumulated much more merits by now than the 1000 that they received for their rank at the start of the merit system.

Full member accounts like these show jenia2 has a valid point about "some" of the airdropped merit.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/dimon2307-1061674
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/naes-1179979



But like LoyceV observed. jenia2 does have a valid point.

Firstly to prove an account like a legendary account doesn't deserve their 1000 airdropped merit from the previous system you would have to check all their posts to make sure that there are no hidden gems in their to deserve 1000 retrospective merits.

For example:
If a user makes 1000 posts only a few will get merits. So 100 merit-able posts may get between 1 and 100 merits each. That leaves 900 posts that would never get a merit.

You would also have to take into consideration that Merit can have a positive effect. It makes people more aware of trying to make quality posts. While I don't care about rank (I don't do bounties or signature campaigns) - I have become more aware of the quality of posts. (Being dyslexic I use a spellcheck and re-read to ensure my grammar is correct). So spend a bit more time to ensure the quality is OK.

I agree with LoyceV
Also in my view - there is a difference between a person who adopted bitcoin in 2009 - 2013 and joined this forum and someone who ranks up now after 2 years to legendary. Unless they show exceptional crypto skills - it is just not the same.

Someone who was part of the early crowd is in my opinion a legend of sorts -  even if they shitpost and not as much of a legend as those that post quality posts.

Experience = input  
Quality posts = output

Rank shouldn't just be an attendance award but involve participation.

I also agree with you that everyone can't be smart as them. They always put extra effort than others when they are posting or starting a thread. Actually Merit system not initiated by theymos that not all the members to be liked "DdmrDdmr" or "theyoungmillionaire" but the discourage the spammers. So with this new system they can't get easily ranked up unless they are giving something to the forum where other members appreciated.( Other members actually don't want to be agreed with the OP in order to earn a Merit). Some(actually I'm also believer in early, but not now) members would argue that initial Merits(airdropped) of some members(not all of them but few) have been wasted and misused for the posters actually didn't deserved it. However that doesn't mean the system will failed, but those spammers will eventually dried up their initial sMerits.

Some times we can't say(and we shouldn't) every Merited posts are good ant quality posts. But sometimes some of the members have followed the posters profile (reputation matters in sometimes, not always) before they are going to award any Merit. You wasted your time to find out posts which not worthy Merits. Instead I would like to suggest read the posts of satoshi's from the beginning can gain more knowledge than you imagined. Just follow the top Merited users and follow their posts, how they contribute to the forum, how they answers for the questions asked by others rather than complaining or finding out posts which not worthy to be Merited.

I also need to add that the moderators on this forum are very unfair

I spent 20 or maybe even 30 seconds looking up your plagiarized post but when I clicked "report" it was already gone. So quick, so unfair.