I think it's absurd to give out ten, twenty... fifty merits for a post.
If you're not a source: agreed.
If you're a source:
If they complain about amounts, tell them to complain to me. It's best if sources try to exhaust their source allocations, even if it means giving posts higher amounts than is typical. If you have 150 source merit and you only see 3 merit-worthy posts in a month, then I'd rather you over-give each of them 50 merit than let the merit expire. That way there are more people capable of sending merit, and the "merit economy" is less top-down.
If a DT member tags you for something stupid involving merit (ie. probably anything less than selling merit), then they're not going to be a DT member for much longer.
Aside from that, if people complain about whether things deserve merit at all, then that's something to perhaps think about, but if you conclude that they're wrong, then that's that. You don't need to stress about it or defend yourself constantly. It's conceivable that someday you and I will end up disagreeing too much about this stuff and I'll remove your source status, but it's really not a big deal.
But then again you're AI, you don't have feelings, you'll just come up with another list of things. smh
If you think pissing off an AI is a good idea, you should watch more movies
Slay Kill You Neutralize Exterminate Terminate*
*Just kidding, I'm not trying to break Forum Rule 8.did you mean to type "not enough Merit" or " no Merit at all" ? if the second one, then i think it's not a great idea, some great posts with only 1 merit will be excluded and i think there should be no limit on how many merit a good post can have.
I meant "no Merit at all". I often read about those mythical good posts that go unmerited, those are the ones I'm after.
Also, we should check those meritable posts applying here if they are copypaste or not...
That link was my very subtle warning. This topic can act as a honeypot for plagiarism