Topic: My contribution to a near-perfect Merit-based ranking system for Bitcointalk - page 2. (Read 356 times)

@OP although it's better if we don't know which user send his own sMerit and people also doesn't know which one send him merit, but it will increase of abusing merit.

Example: you have 5 accounts and then you share sMerit with your each alts, does anyone know if you're abusing the merit system? No. Only theymos and Cyrus might know since they're an administrators.

It will increase the administrators work, so I don't think they will keep watching and moderating the merit flows between each account.


It doesn't make sense to have thumb up and merit in the same time, someone need to click thumb up and giving merit which is double work for merit sources.

If you mean thumb up is merit and thumb down is demerit, there's few people have made proposal about it, but it seems really hard to implemented, abused etc.

If you see a good post and don't have any sMerit just create report in this thread https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/self-moderated-report-unmerited-good-posts-to-merit-source-5093271

Having just a thumb up 👍 and thumb down 👎 on every post box could be very productive. When more people give you a thumb up, it would automatically motivate you to do better. On the other hand, seeing that one of your posts receives more thumbs downs than ups would make you rethink and revise your future posts.

This system would motivate members and should not be dependent on work. With my humble suggestion, we would see more quality and constructive content in the long term.

Even if only 10% of active members are merit sources, there are still 90% of us who would like to contribute to the community. I currently only have 2 merits and read at least 50 posts every day, with about 10 of them being merit worthy. However, when I don't have any merits to give, I simply move on. There are certainly thousands of other members like me. Imagine if thousands of members actively rewarded good posters every day!

If this system were implemented, it would reach a point where you could simply go past a post that has no thumbs ups or only a few and just read the more interesting posts by looking at their ups and downs. This system would really benefit the forum.




Revised by AI.

Today I was going through a topic on Merit created by Theymos (on Jan 24 2018) called  "Merit & new rank requirements". I spent some reasonable amount of time reading through the post and digesting it in order to understand why the merit system was really created. Atlast I realized the intention was genuine... I didn't pay too much attention to the reward system in the past because I concluded it was going to be abused as long as human being is concerned. For example, human biases or emotions as it relates to such reward systems is a very important factor that has to be considered if you want a near perfect reward system. If some people are disliked by much of a society due to their impartiality and strict adherence to good morals they will likely not benefit much from certain reward system and the society will definitely suffer for not being guided by their best. It's more like hating humans in zombielands who are trying to persuade full-blown zombies to stop killing people and sucking their blood, plus other hate going to half-turned zombies for liking the posts of the humans. How do we solve this problem? The problem should be solved by using a reward system that incentivizes everyone to search for solutions (generally called useful contributions) and faults/issues in the works or posts submitted by people for review, preferably in an anonymous/privacy-friendly environments to grade/reward them accordingly. The anonymity will help in the case of those who aren't liked that much or those who fear rewarding those that are hated for their good/revolutionary views.
Every single work or post should have a chance to be reviewed by other people. We could have a little "submit for review" button below or above each post which will enable other members go through a work to review it, earn reward for the review as well as  reward those they are reviewing, in privacy-friendly manner. No need to know your reviewers so you don't create a situation where everyone will be trying to please certain people for reward, whether they are right or wrong... or situation where people will be afraid to give certain kind of reward in order not to be hated.  There is a reason why the eyes of images of judges with sword and scale are covered.


The Merit-based ranking system should really be based on Merit otherwise it should not be used to prevent people from ranking up or qualifying them for Signature campaigns.
Only post with little to no fault/issue should earn high merit. We can aswell grade all the posts and give them the merit they deserve(whether high or low merit), meaning most/all will be going through merit system in order to be graded rather than being outrightly ignored/neglected.

---

* Really give good rewards to only good works/posts otherwise you will share in the punishment reserved for evil posts/works that you reward.

* Good Work/Post is solution with useful contributions that solve problems properly and increase the quality of life/existence, without creating more problems.

* Be sure not to call evil Good or Good evil... as it's written "Woe to those who called evil Good and Good evil