Topic: Top 20 members with Post to Merit Ratio. (Read 591 times)

I agree with you, to an extent. As you say, perfect English is not a requirement to gain merits or a good metric by which to judge the content of a post. There are plenty of users with "average" English who make interesting posts, and plenty of users with "perfect" English who spam nonsense.

However, there is a significant difference between users like yourself, who although may not have perfect English are obviously making a good effort to be comprehensible, and users like "Gabteb", who managed to misspell the word "merit" 3 different ways in a single sentence. His other posts (the ones that aren't bounty spam) reveal an all too familiar mindset - churn out a reply as quickly as possible without worrying about whether or not it makes sense.

The point is very important but merit has nothing to do with giving credit to those that make the most optimal or correct point. It is simply a subjective award given for varying and completely different personal reasons.

Take our last thread for instance (important thread of the year). The  OP  makes provably correct and important observations gets 1 merit vs over 20+ merits for a post that is in contrast to that but provides negative value to that thread in that is seeks to null or reduce the importance of the OP based on a misleading interpretation of anecdotal experiences.

As that threads stands all of that merit should be removed or the OP should be awarded magnitudes more merit. It will not happen and there is nothing to prevent this kind of thing and far worse happening at anytime with no reversal process.

None of that is really important at this point because the entire merit system is good for holding back noobs and account farmers it is not really meant to have any real weight put in those scores. So long as no other systems are built upon merit that try to ascribe some objective value to it then it does not really matter. It should be decoupled from rank after full member or every legend and hero should become a merit source to prevent collusion and control in such a central way.

No point complaining you're not getting enough merit better to focus on posts that bring nothing except groundless opinions that are gaining merit. If you start to question people on why they are giving merit to false or misleading or just nothing burger posts then perhaps merit will only start going to posts that are correct, valid in that they push the debate/conversation toward a new and more optimal solution or opinion.

Merit as it is = data with very low reliability

Of course bots and people incapable of writing 1 line posts that are barely on topic will not get any (unless from their alts) will be deprived of it that is about all you can say.

The obsession with who is getting it in any other context than to illustrate the entire system needs a reset and some criteria or measure put in place to attempt to make is useful is a waste of energy.

Better to spend time on discussing how to implement changes to bring the board back to a place where collisions between real enthusiasts and people who are positive to the progression and development of an  arena that is end to end decentralised and trustless rather than allowing anyone to start blabbering on with stuff that dilutes those collisions and even damages pushing foward to that end goal.

There are 3 main posts that can be truly positive here, the tech discussions that will bring forth the mechanisms upon which an end to end trustless decentralised environment will run upon. Posts that are non tech based but can help devise the concepts upon which those may be thrashed out and coded ..and those posts that help keep this environment fair and free and truly merit based along the way. One can argue humour and various other posts could have some kind of value to some people but are not essential.

Just FYI, as far as the population of this forum is considered, I would place your English competency at "above average" to "good." I read some of your other posts and you're much more competent at it than most.

I agree with what you're saying -- its not fair if your native language isn't English, but in the case being referenced the poor post quality is compounded by the bad spelling, grammar, punctuation. Even if they fix all the mistakes they are still mediocre posts at best.

Also, I believe that the merit system isn't really intended to punish mediocrity but reward inventiveness. You can't demerit people for bad posts, after all.

---

I remember smaragda... That guy was annngery! Gonna read what posts he left for us right now, lol.

I have to disagree to your point, it's a valid reason for someone not to get merit for the quality or the actual content of their posts, English on the other hand is not a scale for post quality by any means. nobody is obligated to speak perfect English unless they are getting paid to do exactly that. Many of us here "including myself" speak a poor to average English, as long as one can deliver their point, that alone should be enough.

Clearly you need to stop wondering why you aren't receiving as much merits as other members do as you don't even know how to properly use the English grammar and its punctuation marks. The 5 out of the 6 merits you received shows that you received it from trading merits with vhns222, the 2 posts you received 5 merits from him undoubtedly aren't worth 5 merits from anyone with a right mind.


Merited Post # 1 (2 Merits)

Merited Post # 2 (3 Merits)

So far I have seen your other post and you have been consistent with your grammar mistakes so you really need to stop complaining that your activity is bigger than your merits as it's is awarded to quality not the duration of your membership here.

thanks


exactly what i needed , with these 2 tables you can't go wrong. btw it is amazing how Piggy manages to retrieve this amount of data on the weekly.

 -----------------------------------------

i am wondering what should i rename this topic to ?

Apart from the broken grammar and other mistakes, the parts of your post I've marked in bold makes it clear why you have received no metis, oops sorry, merits.  
First of all, you need to be constructive in order to get merits, after that, if you are posting in English sections, you need to be good in it. Otherwise if you think you are constructive but weak in English, you can stick to your local board which I'm sure has one or more Merit Sources to reward you for your efforts and other members would also do that if they feel so. Complaining about the issue doesn't solve the issue. You need to find a solution to it.


P.S: Sorry for being off-topic.  

That is really a self-deranked profile: the profile was a full member at the time of the merit airdrop, and at some point since then deleted all his posts except for 12 (11 participations in games and rounds, and … surprise surprise …  a post offering to sell the account).

Initial overall airdrop was really rather simple, and equivalent to the rank of each profile at the time of the actual airdrop.  

 I guess you downloaded @Piggy’s DB from Open scraped data of all the users - SQL Lite DB - 2.481.270 users. If I remember correctly, his first extraction (2 months ago) had a merit table on top of the user profile table. The current extraction (second extraction) may not have that data. I used his raw files at some point, which are user profile related (but I did not check the SQLLite data dump to see if the merit table was included this time, since I download the merit data myself and accumulate it in my DB).

Even so, if you want to just focus on merited profiles, then you should really be using @Piggy’s other public DB, updated weekly, and located on this thread: Tool to run online SQL queries over Full Merit Data. That dataset has both a user table (merited and meriters) and a merit table will all the historical merit TXs. There you can join the profile and merit tables to perform merit analysis.

The airdrop was based on the user's rank at that moment. To receive 100 Merit, that user must have had a Full Member rank. He deranked by deleting his posts.

That happens when you sort all accounts based on extremes.

I've created this list, which shows how many Merit points each user has received after the airdrop.

That's not enough: someone with 260 Merit has most likely received 250 from the airdrop too.

Good luck!

everyone who registered before the merit system got the airdropped merit, so i thought comparing those who got the airdropped merit to one another is not wrong since they all had the same base record based on their activities/post by then. so eventually that should takes out the airdropped merit out of calculation, at least mathematically speaking.but this will be unfair to those who did not witness the airdrop, so you are right, the data we have now is far from accurate to be treated the way i treated it, seems like the vast majority of the best merit ratio members are only at their rank simply because they got the airdrop merit and never really posted after or before that, which brings their post count close to nothing allowing them to be on the top list. maybe the airdropped merits should have been given in a better form. take a look at this guy for insanse > https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/lucky009-957841 . got 100 merit airdropped with only 12 posts.

but you have a valid point in this, for this to be a more accurate representation of post quality , we need to count only the earned merits. in which case a few unknown members have some very good ratio.

I will be looking at your analysis along side with LoyceV's , thanks for the input.




ya i have no clue why i ended up posting the abnormal and weird accounts, but honestly that's the db has, most of the top 100 members i got after taking the merit to post ratio into count were some crazy shit and merit abused, but mathematically speaking, there is nothing wrong with the list  , most other top merited people had their airdropped merits too, so that alone is not the main cause for this terrible report, the main reason is that most of those people stopped posting after they got the the pre merit,which made their ratio far too good to be true.

the query was nothing fancy really, just a simple straight forward
 
 

i would like to see you run the data on those, as for now i have no clue how to get the earned merits only as it's not on piggy's db, are you using some script to pull the data or someone has another db for it?

anyway I will try to give you a list of userIds that have earned the merit with good ratio but for now all i have in hand is the merit count, i will be ignoring fixed numbers such 100,250,500,1000 which i believe those represent the airdroped merit. but that still will require some manual work.

cheers.


it is not impossible, it is not even hard, you get merits you post on boards you are good at, and you can help others. by doing so , you will get merits without even trying. it's true that the merit system is not perfect, but to a very good extent it does represent one's posts's quality. so just focus on what you good at.


 

I believe an Activity/Merit ratio would be a much more useful statistics

In this case, even the airdropped merit could be considered, as users with airdropped merit have high activity.

If you really want it - it's quite real! I registered on the forum on January 27, 2018 and started with 0 merits.

Ah it feels like this Merit system stoped me on sr.Member forever as noone want give metis so i dont understand how to get metits for Hero member as already have more than 600 Activity but only 256 meits for this moment so dont imagine how to get more 250 merits its realy impossible for me at this moment.

We really have to be careful using data to retrieve useful close to truthful information. What you have done is divide personal total merit by number of posts, and that is conceptually wrong on two accounts:

-   The merit column represents the profiles total merit, including airdropped merit (not just earned merit).
-   Posts accounts for all the posting history (not narrowed down to Merit era or more recent).

@LoyceV has a topic on the matter, as stated by @Alex_Sr, with a focus that separated meaningfull concepts. Back in October, I created a post called Analysis – Personal merit per day, merit per post and ranking-up projections where I focused on the last four months to only take into account recent data.

Information, if not treated properly, is not only misleading, but points back false conclusions.

Only Newbies can be nuked. They probably deleted their posts on their own.

Allow me to check his data:

---

User VeilDango (full history)

• Received a total of 134 Merit up to last Friday.
• Received 0 Merit for 0 of 0 posts created before the introduction of Merit.
• Received 134 Merit (100.00%) for 4 (10.81%) of 37 posts created after the introduction of Merit (3.6216 Merit per new post).
• Received 0 Merit for posts that are now deleted.

---

He received many Merits for this ANN post, including 50 from one Legendary who hasn't earned a single Merit on his own.

This thread lists the anomalies who did something weird, not the ones who actually earned that much Merit for real posts. Even worse: it includes the airdropped Merit, which wasn't earned at all.
If you get me a list of userIDs, I can list them in the format as below.

This is an interesting account, who received 50 Merit from theymos:

---

User johank (full history)

• Received a total of 79 Merit up to last Friday.
• Received 0 Merit for 0 of 0 posts created before the introduction of Merit.
• Received 78 Merit (98.73%) for 6 (42.85%) of 14 posts created after the introduction of Merit (5.5714 Merit per new post).
• Received 1 Merit (1.26%) for posts that are now deleted.

---

It may actually be difficult to get an accurate data,as many users have either cleared up their post history for one reason or the other or have stopped posting on the forum
You'll need more in depth materials and probably a history of such users posts,deleted or not(if thats possible)

Yes, there are users with earned Merit with a high ratio Merit / Post:

	Name:	Merit received	Posts total	Merit per post
	cheddur_announce	67	1	67,0
	saginaw32	65	1	65,0
	TeleX AI	50	2	25,0
	nessie.io	148	8	18,5
	unknownids	55	5	11,0
	peterparker9191	74	7	10,57
	DECENT Marketing	60	6	10,0
	Battlestar_Coin	78	10	7,8
	YumukluSucurta	100	14	7,14
	coffeandtango	100	16	6,25
	kerem89	100	17	5,88

Merits they have received mostly deleted posts

the link you posted ,  Loycev only took a few examples and compared old to new post's merit.

also if you take this user for example > https://bpip.org/smerit.aspx?to=VeilDango

he has better ratio than satoshi and theymos ( 3.64 merit per new post)

i know the majority of these members are long gone. but a few of them are there around and active, and you will be amazed of the ratio they have compared to other well known members.

I will make a better flirtation " probably after the holiday" that will be more in depth of users who have the most merits compared to their post count.

Some of these account may have been hacked and the new user deleted majority of the old posts and that led to the high ratio of merits per post.
I am not entirely sure, but some could also be users who received airdropped merits and then deleted all their old posts.
Although some is pretty obvious merit abuse.

Such calculations are not quite correct:

1. Users simply deleted their posts, and not received merit for 1 post
2. It makes sense to consider the ratio of the earned merit, not the merit, obtained by airdrop

But this is already done in this LoyceV topic:

Percentage of Merit received on old posts, deleted posts, and average per post