Topic: Seriously bitcointalk, why this merit point system ??? (Read 656 times)

This is totally unfair for those account who are below hero member ranks, and I totally agree with you that this new ranking system will surely slows the promotion for a higher rank. Hero and Legendary members are the one who will benefit as they can now join bounties hassle free.especially to those account that has the power to rule the entire FORUM.
It's unfair to those accounts who honestly giving their best to post with quality and with content, just to support their family.
I am also after with those signature campaigns but that is only my 3rd reason why I joined BCT.
I hope there will be some changes regarding this.

I thinks giving negative trust is much more than merit system.

The merit system was implemented to encourage quality posting and to stop shitposting which I agree is a very good idea to stop spams, multi-account farming etc but even the honest members can face a huge problem in ranking up because of the requirement of the merits. And in the previous 2 days, I just saw people giving merits to members who have already crossed legendary or the hero mark and these members are the famous and well-known members of this forum [ Like Yahoo, Lauda, The Pharmacist and etc ]. I didn't see any lower ranked member even with good posts getting as many merits as they are getting. So I guess this can be a problem for us lower ranked members.
 And correct if me If I am wrong about something above.

For example take a look at this user: https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/vella85-560058 i know him/her for the good posts he/she makes over some threads i follow too, if you take a look on his last posts since the implementation of the Merit system, he/she made 250+ good posts (in my opinion) and got only 15 merit. So at this rate, for him/her to reach 1000 from 515 will need to make another 8000 good posts, which is huge. Please note that I'm not related in any kind of this account or user, was just an example.

Instead of half-assed justifications of why this wouldn't work, I'd rather see some data that proves it won't work. My hunch is that it greatly helps reduce useless posts. As Bitcoin taught us, it is all about incentives. I am happy to be proven wrong, but with a strong argument or something backed by real data, not musings.

I think the issue is that there are a number of threads (mainly alt-coins/token threads) where if you do not blindly love the project then you wont pick up merit. I've seen numerous articles where there has been a very well crafted and thought out post which does not blow smoke up a projects ass and it doesn't get the recognition it deserves. While i can get behind the increasing of the height of the bar, merit should be given where merit is deserved (i understand that there are people who will be demanding merit because they put in a post of more than 10 words but hopefully they are in the minority).

The merit system will not provide the expected return of good quality post just because the newbies won't help anyone as they are newbies and not very knowledgeable, and the old-school guys with higher ranks doesn't need the merit points to rank up anymore (Legendary ranks) or they don't need too (Full Members, Sr.Members or Hero Members), because they don't participate in the signatures campaigns as they have made some money from crypto since they are higher ranks. I'm speaking here about the majority as there are exceptions, of course. In my opinion the merit system is kind of useless for the forum quality posts, but it is what it is. My 2 cents!

Good evening everyone,

I have created a special thread for more visibility about this discussion.

Why did you add this new merit point system??

I find this new system totally unfair, useless and even harmful for the future of our beautiful forum.

I understand your fight against fraud, multi-accounts, farming, spams etc... It's a real priority for you and the community.
Unfortunately, this system penalizes a very large number of perfectly honest users.

Like many, I participate in signature campaigns, which are sometimes a very good way to invest in projects that we like without taking any risks, if we don't have a lot of money. So my rank is very important for me because the reward depends on it. Unfortunately, with this new merit system, I'm sure that I will never reach the next rank. The number of merit points required is too high...

The number of points divided by 2 for each allocation will quickly show these limits and I doubt that the new points distributed monthly can counterbalance this.

Moreover, this distribution of points each month to a small number of users isn't an insult to our beloved decentralization? To this system set up by Satoshi who wants to free ourselves from the institutions?
When we see those who received the most merit points today (theymos, lutpin, satoshi...) Everything is said.

And what about locals sections? I imagine that only anglophones users will receive these new merit points each month and that they will benefit only part of the forum?

I'm also afraid that a real arranged traffic will develop around these points. "I'll give you 10 points, so you owe me 10." That people dont give points to quality posts, but to people who are likely to give them back.

I am also afraid, as we have already noticed, that a system of begging is being set up : "I'm willing to answer your question, if you give me merit points."...

The function of the red trusts was absolutely perfect and made it possible to know who we were dealing with, so why did you add this?

You're only going to explode account traffic...

In short, I think this system is a very bad idea and could seriously harm the good health of bitcointalk. And if it is maintained, I invite all users to spend their merit points honestly and intelligently (the legendaries don't need it for example)...

Signed: a full member who will probably never pass senior...

I think the issue is that there are a number of threads (mainly alt-coins/token threads) where if you do not blindly love the project then you wont pick up merit. I've seen numerous articles where there has been a very well crafted and thought out post which does not blow smoke up a projects ass and it doesn't get the recognition it deserves. While i can get behind the increasing of the height of the bar, merit should be given where merit is deserved (i understand that there are people who will be demanding merit because they put in a post of more than 10 words but hopefully they are in the minority).

Red trust is not enough to prevent spamming and other negative deeds on this forum,

Let's contribute good, or high quality threads or topics, then merits will automatically come to your account.

Firstly, if you are only here on BitcoinTalk because of the existence of signature campaigns then you're here for the wrong reason. A forum is meant to be a corner for meaningful discussion, the sharing of ideas and innovations, and a friendly environment to grow and learn, not somewhere that a horde of users force out quotas of meaningless drivel. I understand the fact that monetary rewards for discussing is appealing, but the fact that there is this much complaint about a system that is designed to limit this reward against people who spam solely for signature campaigns says something about the condition of the forum.

Firstly, if you are only here on BitcoinTalk because of the existence of signature campaigns then you're here for the wrong reason. A forum is meant to be a corner for meaningful discussion, the sharing of ideas and innovations, and a friendly environment to grow and learn, not somewhere that a horde of users force out quotas of meaningless drivel. I understand the fact that monetary rewards for discussing is appealing, but the fact that there is this much complaint about a system that is designed to limit this reward against people who spam solely for signature campaigns says something about the condition of the forum.


It is a new idea, and as many newly implemented ideas are, I'm sure that if the current number of users who are able to merit without limit isn't enough to bring enough merit around the forum to reward the average user, it will be drastically changed to fit the need.


There will always be a natural gradient and those who provide the quality content that the forum needs will be rewarded in the forum. I see no problem with that, considering that merit points are not "all going towards the small number of users" - there's still plenty to go around for those who deserve it. And wouldn't you rather see the users who are positively contributing to the forum ranking up rather than having the rank system be a measure of consistency? Although it may not seem like it now, rank will gradually become much more meaningful.


This has been brought up several times, but I doubt that this will be a real issue with the system of deteriorating merit as it is distributed. If it is, then, as mentioned before, it will be adapted and improved according to how the community uses it.


I don't particularly see this being an issue as people should expect others to utilize the merit system where need be. And if one refuses to help someone in need just for a few digits on a computer screen, they don't deserve to be here; the community should be on the lookout for those users and discourage that kind of behavior by acting out against them.


The merit system is purely to reward posts that deserve it. Continue contributing quality and you won't have to worry about who receives merit.


Newbies will be able to spend 8 weeks here until they are first limited by merit (@ 60 activity to become a member). That is plenty of time if they are serious about learning bitcoin.

But you do understand that bounty campaigns are NOT the reason this forums exists? It could have been great if there were no spammers around and people just posted constructive and meaningful posts and also join bounties to get some extra cash. But unfortunately things didn't quite went in this direction and instead the forum suffered from a huge amount of spammers. Yes it makes life harder for newcomers if they want to participate in bounties, but if you keep posting good quality posts you'll get your merits.

Did you notice the quality of those threads made by well-known members who got merits ? Can you say that majority of them did not deserve the merits they got ? Lower ranked members need to learn from them and post such threads.

"semi-spammer" ahah

With your 22K msg and your "GUNBOT Licenses -15% with ref. code 'GrumpyKitty'", please, just shut up.
You're exactly the kind of cancer I hate on this forum, so don't come here to decay my thread with your message

Firstly, if you are only here on BitcoinTalk because of the existence of signature campaigns then you're here for the wrong reason. A forum is meant to be a corner for meaningful discussion, the sharing of ideas and innovations, and a friendly environment to grow and learn, not somewhere that a horde of users force out quotas of meaningless drivel. I understand the fact that monetary rewards for discussing is appealing, but the fact that there is this much complaint about a system that is designed to limit this reward against people who spam solely for signature campaigns says something about the condition of the forum.


It is a new idea, and as many newly implemented ideas are, I'm sure that if the current number of users who are able to merit without limit isn't enough to bring enough merit around the forum to reward the average user, it will be drastically changed to fit the need.


There will always be a natural gradient and those who provide the quality content that the forum needs will be rewarded in the forum. I see no problem with that, considering that merit points are not "all going towards the small number of users" - there's still plenty to go around for those who deserve it. And wouldn't you rather see the users who are positively contributing to the forum ranking up rather than having the rank system be a measure of consistency? Although it may not seem like it now, rank will gradually become much more meaningful.


This has been brought up several times, but I doubt that this will be a real issue with the system of deteriorating merit as it is distributed. If it is, then, as mentioned before, it will be adapted and improved according to how the community uses it.


I don't particularly see this being an issue as people should expect others to utilize the merit system where need be. And if one refuses to help someone in need just for a few digits on a computer screen, they don't deserve to be here; the community should be on the lookout for those users and discourage that kind of behavior by acting out against them.


The merit system is purely to reward posts that deserve it. Continue contributing quality and you won't have to worry about who receives merit.


Newbies will be able to spend 8 weeks here until they are first limited by merit (@ 60 activity to become a member). That is plenty of time if they are serious about learning bitcoin.

Signed: a one line, useless, semi-spammer who doesn't deserve to pass anything*. Fixed that for you.

---

Another useless complaint thread from another useless poster. Contribute and get rewarded or just leave. Enough of this whining.

They should learn a lot before they even make their first post. Unfortunately, that is almost never the case.