So far I've reported over 40 people for merit abusing and none is red tagged. (edit-tagged someone) (https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/list-suspected-users-that-are-abusing-merit-30-2896910)
Also I can report more people who ranked up from jr. to member in 1 day but I don't know if I need to do, cause is a "small" upgrade. (Not so small for someone causes a lot of people have problem to rank up from jr to member)
A lot of them are really easy abuses to check, also when one person is tagged I've noticed only 1 account is tagged but if the merit is an action from 2 people why don't tag both?
I think a red trust is necessary cause here a lot of people are "working" hard and trying to do their best to get some merit to rank up and in that 3D you can find people who ranked up from jr->member or member->full member in one day or 2, only to get more money from the bounties.
Topic: Soliciting opinions on how to deal with suspected merit abusers - page 2. (Read 650 times)
theymos makes the point perfectly. We don't want to be dishing out negative trusts right, left and center as this doesn't achieve anything and more often than not results in a false positive. Think of it as a person rather than account, and how you wouldn't be so trigger happy at someone for committing a petty crime.
If it's Blatantly obvious and it's becoming a problem then we can have a look at the situation together over in the reputation section on a case by case basis.
If it's Blatantly obvious and it's becoming a problem then we can have a look at the situation together over in the reputation section on a case by case basis.
The real problem is not the merit system, but the bounty spammers. If you think that a particular abuser of merit is going to go on to spam the board with bounty sigs, then anything you can do to reduce that will be a great help to the forum in my opinion.
Unless it is particularly blatant, I feel negative trust is only appropriate when there is other evidence that links the two accounts together. There should be zero tolerance with proven alts.
I think that tagging may be appropriate in particularly obvious cases, or particularly egregious cases involving hundreds of merit points and several posts. But generally you should start out by assuming good faith, and only change that opinion as the evidence really piles up. Tagging someone immediately after an instance of apparently-inexplicable meriting is too trigger-happy IMO. Even if it is a case of illegitimate merit, even hundreds of illegitimate merit points are not much of a problem IMO, so you have to ask whether it's worthwhile to possibly make a mistake by tagging someone who is merely suspicious.
I do remember actmyname tagging suspected merit abusers early on, and then Theymos saying he was going to exclude him from his trust list.
- May be the reason was not only tagging the suspected merit users.Do you guys think I, or any other DT member, should be tagging merit abusers?
- Yes of-course you and other DT member do. Also everyone of us no matter if someone is newbie or high up member, everyone should tag the possible merit abusers with enough evidence.
Again, if the rule book says to leave negative feedback then so be it. No need for neutral feedback.
In my opinion - the punishment of abusing merit should be more than negative feedback/s from the community. It should be first 14 days temporary ban, if again proven guilty then a permanent ban.
First, I apologize if people have given their opinions on this matter in other threads. Here's an excuse: I had the flu for 2 weeks (!) right about the time the merit system was rolled out, and if this was discussed in that period I missed it. And if there was a formal discussion about this after that, I also missed it without excuse. I do remember actmyname tagging suspected merit abusers early on, and then Theymos saying he was going to exclude him from his trust list. If there was a thread about this, please link me to it and I'll lock this shortly.
Before I do any more tagging on people I think are abusing the merit system, I'd like the opinions about doing so from these people specifically:
Blazed
Hilariousandco
Vod
Lauda
I'd also like everyone else's opinion, because I do value them. I don't want to start having to delete feedbacks right after I left them.
I had expressed hesitation about tagging merit abusers early on, because there's so much subjectivity about the system, but at the same time there are some users who are obviously sending merit to people who don't deserve it. Obvious to my eyes, anyway. And that's the problem. I realize my feedback now carries more weight than someone who's not on DT, and I know I ought to hand out negatives to people who really deserve them. Do you guys think I, or any other DT member, should be tagging merit abusers? EthanB suggested in another thread that a neutral might be appropriate, and I don't think that's a horrible idea when there's doubt. But I don't think neutrals do much good.
Awaiting your opinions.
Before I do any more tagging on people I think are abusing the merit system, I'd like the opinions about doing so from these people specifically:
Blazed
Hilariousandco
Vod
Lauda
I'd also like everyone else's opinion, because I do value them. I don't want to start having to delete feedbacks right after I left them.
I had expressed hesitation about tagging merit abusers early on, because there's so much subjectivity about the system, but at the same time there are some users who are obviously sending merit to people who don't deserve it. Obvious to my eyes, anyway. And that's the problem. I realize my feedback now carries more weight than someone who's not on DT, and I know I ought to hand out negatives to people who really deserve them. Do you guys think I, or any other DT member, should be tagging merit abusers? EthanB suggested in another thread that a neutral might be appropriate, and I don't think that's a horrible idea when there's doubt. But I don't think neutrals do much good.
Awaiting your opinions.
Jump to: