Topic: New DT algo - why 100 earned merits?? and not objective metric Activity or Rank? - page 2. (Read 514 times)

1500 activity is not an easy feat and going by the 14 activity every 2 weeks, it would take close to a year to acquire that activity level.

A user who has made so such contribution on the forum is expected to have achieved a number or merits if they were posting quality content. Otherwise they were probably spamming, and that should not be an indication of their judgement and knowledge of forum matters.

It would also be useful to include that members who explore the forum more and visit various boards have a better understanding than those who stick to a section and maybe ignore some others.

Being an "elder statesman" in here doesn't guarantee trust,yeah,i get where you're coming from as you're trying to say that like longevity should come ahead of merits in determining trust

Merits to me sounds more reasonable as its a reward for valid contribution to the forum and on its own also may not be a valid tool to determine trust,its not possible for a system to be totally agreeable to all and sundry,as definitely negatives could be forked out from every decision.

So in such cases as this the administrator is left with making a decision,between various options,valid ones, it's best to respect it,if it doesn't work/fails,then a better proposition could be put forward with reasons as to why it may better the standing one

Thanks for post, Yes  I thought it did work as you say.

I do not think 1500 activity would be easy for account farmers that would take YEARS of farming and is unlikely to go unnoticed. If you want put it to 1750 or 2000. You will lose an account like that then you will not be rebuilding it again for another 5 years. I don't think people will ever farm that again. Make it Hero + 1500 activity.

I am simply saying by this logic.

It is about trust -  so

Who do I trust to be having influence over DT1

New member who got a score via a totally subjective and easily gamed system that can be abused.

Old member with lots of history who obtained the score through objectively observable and fair means that can not be gamed or cheated.

When you are talking TRUST you want ZERO subjectivity or as little as possible.

I am opening a debate only to get greater understanding of the reason behind it. Everything else about the new system looks like a big improvement so I am not being critical of the changes over all.

You don't need 100 merits to be a DT member,just someone with 100 earned merit need to add you to their trust list to become eligible for a DT1 member.The merit requirement for the DT member is to show how much they are contributes to the forum.
1500 activity is also easy requirement for the account farmers so I believe adding X number of positive trusted or untrusted feedback on their profile with valid reference towards the requirement maybe a good option.

Straight forward simple question.

Perhaps I have not fully understood the new DT algo.


What does merit have to do with trust?

You must have  member with 100 "earned" merits directly decide to include you in their trust list?

Would that not be better to replace with activity 1500 or above?

How can a subjective score that can be obtained quickly and has nothing to do with trust be a more useful and sensible basis for trust than Rank or Activity - these are objective scores and take a long time to gain and can not be gamed or cycled.

If someone has been here years (to gain 1500 activity) and I can explore their post history to gauge if they are to be trusted or not that is far more useful than some subjective score that can be gained quickly.

merits can be earned quickly, simply for some creating some merit stats and are subjective and can be abused/gamed.

rank and activity - these are objective meaningful metrics - can not be gamed - takes years to attain and more history to explore for trustworthy behaviour. If you have not scammed or engaged in anything untrustworthy in YEARS of being here then you are more trustworthy that someone that came a few months ago and made some good stats metrics, or got given huge merits from their alts.

Other considerations that may or may not be correct

Elder legends and heros may  be more likely to be very wealthy already and need not scam?

By saying earned merits you are NULLING the effort of elder legends who may be due much more than 1000 merits and actually in some cases could be due 100000's of merits by earned merit standards. Also nulling the post quality of legends that never come to meta.

I mean there are many Legends in the alt board that have held millions and millions of dollars in community funds for years that will not be classed as important TRUST WISE as someone who could come here and make some nice merit stats or bought merits.

I suggest removing 100 earned merits and replace with 1500 activity.

Let's have a sensible debate.