Topic: Theymos I need a larger sMerit quota (Read 558 times)
If a merit source demands for more allocation of his monthly smerits, it shows that such user has been fully engaged with the use of the task ahead and needs more to be able to perform better, which i also support the addition of his merits allocation, if not for anything, but the fact that he has been engaging members to learn how to do what will be beneficial to them with the use of bitcoin by running a node, its not about the reward for merits but the profits running a full node challenge will give on every user, i hope Theymos finds this as important and increase base on request.
While I am not in danger of running out of sMerits any time soon, I am burning merits at a very fast rate and my current allocation is not replenishing fast enough to cover for it.
Perhaps, instead of increasing sMerit limits, you should distribute it more selectively and economically among users? I would like to believe that speed doesn't affect the quality of your distribution.The solution is obvious: if something is being spent too quickly, then slow down the pace (using it). Otherwise you will have to become a x2 (double) merit source?
You should have called the topic [CHALLENGE] Run A Bitcoin Node: 14 Days To 14 Merits differently, otherwise sending 14 merits will exhaust your limits.
Overall, I think that it will be good if theymos programs Merit system in a way that if someone doesn't spend sMerits on users, they'll get the equivalent merits removed from their profile. This approach should motivate people to be more active in giving away merits. The more active people will be (to genuinely merit those who deserve it), the more sMerit quota will everyone have.
i cant speak for other sources but personally i couldnt care less and im guessing some others feel the same.
merit and rank only matters for people who want to earn money in sig campaigns and such. the rest of us? not so much.
While I am not in danger of running out of sMerits any time soon, I am burning merits at a very fast rate and my current allocation is not replenishing fast enough to cover for it.
I think that this part of Merit system works really well. 2 merits = 1 sMerit. Yes, it's hard to give merits regularly but at the same time, I think that it motivates people to earn more merits to send more. If we easily give sMerits to people, then they put less work to fill their sMerit quota.Overall, I think that it will be good if theymos programs Merit system in a way that if someone doesn't spend sMerits on users, they'll get the equivalent merits removed from their profile. This approach should motivate people to be more active in giving away merits. The more active people will be (to genuinely merit those who deserve it), the more sMerit quota will everyone have.
I always try to refrain from sending merit to people who don't need it, even if their post is good.
I think this could be a reason to ask for a larger sMerit quota. If you're already sending less to posts that deserve it, those high ranking users can't trickle it down either.Good point.
I always try to refrain from sending merit to people who don't need it, even if their post is good.
I think this could be a reason to ask for a larger sMerit quota. If you're already sending less to posts that deserve it, those high ranking users can't trickle it down either. 
It's kinda hard to enforce a rule to make people receive and send a transaction inside Bitcoin Core.
Yeh you can - don't give them merits on what appears to be a whim or need to be seen to be *cough* generously handing out merits.
You complain about how the merit distribution is unfair and that Legendary members are giving merits to each other. Why are you bothered by me sending merits to lots of newbies? Actually you should be glad the merit distribution is tilting a little towards the other end.
Quote
And on top of that there is no way to prove which transaction belongs to who
You're currently asking for screenshots, which can just as easily be faked or bought.This made me realize another "problem": I bet many of the users who took your 14 day node challenge have never even used Bitcoin from their own wallet. That could be another challenge for Newbies, instead of using centralized exchanges to store Bitcoin. But withdrawal fees are ridiculous for many exchanges.
Yeah that's true. But I actually accept either screenshots or bitcoin-cli output, since most of these people don't know how to use a terminal.
Although at the end of the day, newbies should not be using exchanges. However, even if I wanted to run a campaign to get those people with large balances - who should have no issues with fees - I don't have enough sMerit to keep both running on a sustainable basis. (Not to mention committing the inadvertent sin of revealing other people's bitcoin holdings. I don't want to imagine what might happen if some crooks used that data for extortion.)
Perhaps if you stopped gifting the same users [BPIP] HUNDREDS of merits, then you might just have enough merits to gift those who deserve them.
... and your appear to be using blackmail in your trust feedbacks of others:
I don't know about that blackmail accusation, but as far as the first statement of yours goes I see a lot of merits being given to Legendary members who obviously don't need them to rank up--and I'm going by BPIP data. While it's true that anyone is free to give merits to anybody else, isn't one of the main points of having merit sources to have them help lower-ranking members to rank up? I'm not saying NotATether isn't doing that at all, nor do I have a problem with him, and I'm certainly guilty of meriting Legendary members, but circulating a big portion of your sMerits amongst Legendaries doesn't really keep the merit machine in motion the way it was intended (IMO).... and your appear to be using blackmail in your trust feedbacks of others:
OP, take that constructive criticism in the respectful manner in which it was given.
According to https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/ddmrddmr/viz/BitcointalkMeritDashboard/PersonalSummary, I have only sent 35% of my sMerit to (now) Legendaries. It will most likely be a little less once last week's data is processed. (Also I always try to refrain from sending merit to people who don't need it, even if their post is good.)
here are 39 merits
Thank you very much!
While I am not in danger of running out of sMerits any time soon, I am burning merits at a very fast rate and my current allocation is not replenishing fast enough to cover for it.
here are 39 merits
Perhaps an option to keep away some malicious users would be to have a minimum requirement to participate in the challenge... a minimum of activity or a minimum of merits...
One of the reasons I followed that topic, was because I hoped I could dump some Merit there. But it didn't feel right. I'd say lower the Merit amounts there, most of the posts aren't worth reading.
I can't say for others, but I participated in this challenge a few weeks ago and I keep my full node working to this day...
If you check well, you will notice that NotATether is running a challenge of 14 days node running for 14 merits and that is why you see the 14 merits he gave recently.
I count 57 of those transactions since half way January. I followed that topic for a while, and got the impression most users only join to earn Merit. It would have been much better if they actually care about running Bitcoin Core, but I highly doubt it. I didn't read all recent posts, but I haven't seen a single user who actually used Bitcoin Core as a wallet instead of only completing the block download.One of the reasons I followed that topic, was because I hoped I could dump some Merit there. But it didn't feel right. I'd say lower the Merit amounts there, most of the posts aren't worth reading.
I can't say for others, but I participated in this challenge a few weeks ago and I keep my full node working to this day...
Perhaps if you stopped gifting the same users [BPIP] HUNDREDS of merits, then you might just have enough merits to gift those who deserve them.
... and your appear to be using blackmail in your trust feedbacks of others:
I don't know about that blackmail accusation, but as far as the first statement of yours goes I see a lot of merits being given to Legendary members who obviously don't need them to rank up--and I'm going by BPIP data. While it's true that anyone is free to give merits to anybody else, isn't one of the main points of having merit sources to have them help lower-ranking members to rank up? I'm not saying NotATether isn't doing that at all, nor do I have a problem with him, and I'm certainly guilty of meriting Legendary members, but circulating a big portion of your sMerits amongst Legendaries doesn't really keep the merit machine in motion the way it was intended (IMO).... and your appear to be using blackmail in your trust feedbacks of others:
OP, take that constructive criticism in the respectful manner in which it was given.
Theymos, while you're at it increasing merit allocations, it will be nice if you get along to adding new merit sources. My application is already a couple of years old, along with the applications of some other members.
Hey Theymos! Care to drop in and perhaps give us pissants some guidance, thoughts, or anything else regarding the future of the merit system? Curious minds want to know! It's kinda hard to enforce a rule to make people receive and send a transaction inside Bitcoin Core. Let's say everyone sent some bitcoins to their own wallets. But then those transactions will be in the newest block so their nodes would have to sync anyway before they could spend it.
It would be a nice addition to do after syncing the node.One of the reasons I followed that topic, was because I hoped I could dump some Merit there. But it didn't feel right. I'd say lower the Merit amounts there, most of the posts aren't worth reading.
I will say we shouldn't be over critical of a contest, or try to suggest what others do with their smerits.
It still feels like a burden to get rid of them. 
It's kinda hard to enforce a rule to make people receive and send a transaction inside Bitcoin Core.
Yeh you can - don't give them merits on what appears to be a whim or need to be seen to be *cough* generously handing out merits.
I followed that topic for a while, and got the impression most users only join to earn Merit. It would have been much better if they actually care about running Bitcoin Core, but I highly doubt it.
I guess that's the concept of it all, using merit as an incentive to get users to do something that contributes to them and the community. Many of those users would have gained knowledge about running a node which they never would have bothered to get before. I also saw some inquiry post on some other board from a user asking for more clarity, that's what the concept ains to do.There's no way to actually quantify "care."
I didn't read all recent posts, but I haven't seen a single user who actually used Bitcoin Core as a wallet instead of only completing the block download.
If they already have wallets they are using that works fine and have no need for a extra wallet at this time how possible would it be to start using a different wallet? That is also not the criteria for caring about bitcoin core. There are other good wallets out there that one can use.One of the reasons I followed that topic, was because I hoped I could dump some Merit there. But it didn't feel right. I'd say lower the Merit amounts there, most of the posts aren't worth reading.
I will say we shouldn't be over critical of a contest, or try to suggest what others do with their smerits. I count 57 of those transactions since half way January. I followed that topic for a while, and got the impression most users only join to earn Merit. It would have been much better if they actually care about running Bitcoin Core, but I highly doubt it. I didn't read all recent posts, but I haven't seen a single user who actually used Bitcoin Core as a wallet instead of only completing the block download.
One of the reasons I followed that topic, was because I hoped I could dump some Merit there. But it didn't feel right. I'd say lower the Merit amounts there, most of the posts aren't worth reading.
One of the reasons I followed that topic, was because I hoped I could dump some Merit there. But it didn't feel right. I'd say lower the Merit amounts there, most of the posts aren't worth reading.
It's kinda hard to enforce a rule to make people receive and send a transaction inside Bitcoin Core. Let's say everyone sent some bitcoins to their own wallets. But then those transactions will be in the newest block so their nodes would have to sync anyway before they could spend it.
And on top of that there is no way to prove which transaction belongs to who, without using signed messages. But I am not sure if the signmessage RPC supports the default bech32 addresses. And I really don't want to encourage people to use legacy addresses for this.
But it's doable - Royse777 enforced it during the Mixin Safe review campaign so I definitely know that it's possible, and the transactions might even lead to busting of account farms, but the workload would be too much for me to process at the moment.
Although I do agree with the above guy that reducing the award would be wrong, for now at least.
If you check well, you will notice that NotATether is running a challenge of 14 days node running for 14 merits and that is why you see the 14 merits he gave recently. NotATether is not a random user who doesn't know how to issue merits. If he drops larger number of merits in a particular posts, check well, the post is worth it.
He can reduce it from 14 to 10 or lesser.If you check well, you will notice that NotATether is running a challenge of 14 days node running for 14 merits and that is why you see the 14 merits he gave recently.
I count 57 of those transactions since half way January. I followed that topic for a while, and got the impression most users only join to earn Merit. It would have been much better if they actually care about running Bitcoin Core, but I highly doubt it. I didn't read all recent posts, but I haven't seen a single user who actually used Bitcoin Core as a wallet instead of only completing the block download.One of the reasons I followed that topic, was because I hoped I could dump some Merit there. But it didn't feel right. I'd say lower the Merit amounts there, most of the posts aren't worth reading.
While I am not in danger of running out of sMerits any time soon, I am burning merits at a very fast rate and my current allocation is not replenishing fast enough to cover for it.
I also support for this, for the existing merits sources, there need to be additional allocation for their monthly budgets, especially for those that already have requested for more top up on this, there is no doubt we have been having shortage in the circulation of merits due to the decreasing nature of the source and the ones being active really needs to be added more on their monthly allocation in other for them to be able to discharge the required quantity on posts deserving for such.
I didn't read all recent posts, but I haven't seen a single user who actually used Bitcoin Core as a wallet instead of only completing the block download.
That is a good point Maybe OP should add that in his updated future rules, but even than you can't force anyone to care about something he doesn't want to care about.
I still think that his initiative is a step in a right direction, learning something new is never a bad thing.
If you check well, you will notice that NotATether is running a challenge of 14 days node running for 14 merits and that is why you see the 14 merits he gave recently.
I count 57 of those transactions since half way January. I followed that topic for a while, and got the impression most users only join to earn Merit. It would have been much better if they actually care about running Bitcoin Core, but I highly doubt it. I didn't read all recent posts, but I haven't seen a single user who actually used Bitcoin Core as a wallet instead of only completing the block download.One of the reasons I followed that topic, was because I hoped I could dump some Merit there. But it didn't feel right. I'd say lower the Merit amounts there, most of the posts aren't worth reading.
You are not getting me correctly. I saw NotATether's merit history and I know when he started that thread. I also know that he is sending 14 merits to the posts if people that posted what he wanted on the thread. But what I am saying is that instead of sending 14 merits, if he has little merit to send, he can reduce it so that he can send merit to more posts. Also I did not say NotATether is sending merits to poor posts but saying he can reduce the merits. He can reduce it from 14 to 10 or lesser.
Every good idea ends up being misused. It's a good initiative to reward everyone who starts a node, but I wouldn't be surprised if it starts to be used for farming accounts. Maybe it's time to pause this contest, so that it continues at some point, when new members arrive.
If you check well, you will notice that NotATether is running a challenge of 14 days node running for 14 merits and that is why you see the 14 merits he gave recently. NotATether is not a random user who doesn't know how to issue merits. If he drops larger number of merits in a particular posts, check well, the post is worth it.
You are not getting me correctly. I saw NotATether's merit history and I know when he started that thread. I also know that he is sending 14 merits to the posts if people that posted what he wanted on the thread. But what I am saying is that instead of sending 14 merits, if he has little merit to send, he can reduce it so that he can send merit to more posts. Also I did not say NotATether is sending merits to poor posts but saying he can reduce the merits. He can reduce it from 14 to 10 or lesser. Jump to: