Definitely for a post to receive upto 50+ merit from an individual, the person that merited the post must be very impressed with the post.
I agree with you, but there are many posts out there that are not qualified but get a lot of awards 
Topic: [TOP-200] The most generous users giving merits - page 31. (Read 39069 times)
Edited: Nice thread out there, you can also give us the top 200 users who received a large number of merits as I think ( or is it already done by somebody? 
)
)No, I didn't see such table on the forum yet. Probably you are saying about the table just ordered by the amount of received merits.
| User name | Received merits | ||
| 1) | Test | X (in Y txns from Z users) |
I will analyze all the merit transfer transactions and will show such TOP-200 in the future.
Few people gave 50+ merit on a single post. Is it too must useful post? Or is it really appropriate to receive 50+ merit on such a post?
Definitely for a post to receive upto 50+ merit from an individual, the person that merited the post must be very impressed with the post.
Few people gave 50+ merit on a single post. Is it too must useful post? Or is it really appropriate to receive 50+ merit on such a post?
They're just giving it away as a gift though, nothing to do with their post actually. Only the legendary people with the outmost knowledge of bitcoin can only receive such high merits. And yes, as long as the merit source find it very useful and unique I guess, that will also be considered to receive a high number of merits.To make it short, it all depends on the Merit Giver.
Edited: Nice thread out there, you can also give us the top 200 users who received a large number of merits as I think ( or is it already done by somebody?
) Maybe the OP could include the number of unique accounts merit was sent to?
I wished to calculate the indicator "Generosity" of the users and create this table. I will include the number of unique accounts later.
My first post on the first page was updated. The number of unique accounts whom merit was sent to is included. There are some user shifts in the table. The new merit sources are detected.
Hello! Can I suggest to remove the sources part?
We know them, by we i mean established members. No need for random spammers to know them...
I agree with it. Spammers will eventually troll the sources just to have merits in their part. Better disclose it like what have theymos notedWe know them, by we i mean established members. No need for random spammers to know them...
Quote
Certain users are designated as "merit sources". They can create new merit out of nothing, up to a limited number per month (which differs per source). I will not be posting a definitive list of merit sources (so that people don't bug them too much), though you'll soon figure out who they are if you pay attention.
Just let them find it by themselves just to give them a challenge in the forum. 
Few people gave 50+ merit on a single post. Is it too must useful post? Or is it really appropriate to receive 50+ merit on such a post?
If you spot that very often it’s likely to be Merit abuse & you should report it unless it’s been given to a Legendary/very old iconic post which is deserving of such a big Merit give away.
Few people gave 50+ merit on a single post. Is it too must useful post? Or is it really appropriate to receive 50+ merit on such a post?
Maybe the OP could include the number of unique accounts merit was sent to?
I wished to calculate the indicator "Generosity" of the users and create this table. I will include the number of unique accounts later.
I am really impressed with this statistic. They are really very liberated people. Besides, I appreciate their development and support for this community.
| User name | Sent merits | Received merits | Generosity | |
| 1) | QuestionAuthority | 2255 (in 179 txns) | 307 (in 96 txns) | 2101 (max 2105) |
Yes, I know about that.
The most generous users giving merits (24 Jan 2018 - 20 Jun 2018)
I will update my first post later.
I think LoyceV and Ognasty should have more source merits to distribute. I guess LoyceV is in the test phase and doesn't have that much sMerits yet. if he/she keeps at meriting more random members it would be great.
I've recently decided to merit more posts, not to lower my standards of "quality", but just because "good posts" deserve merit too. Any "good post" is far above the average spam for which the Merit system was introduced, and I don't think people with "good posts" should be restricted in leveling up.Most of the time, I leave just 1 Merit though. I haven't really decided on when to increase it.
In my opinion, you deserve to be a merit source. Your merit distribution policy is fair.
I think I resent the fact that I'm rated 82nd for generosity. Am I being penalised because i try to help more people with my awards?
No any penalizing. Don't change your merit distribution policy.
I'm not sure what we have gained by publishing that list. Also, if it failed to detect me ( an admitted source ) then surely the analysis is flawed.
Probably this analysis will detect you as a merit source later.
So the maximum per person depends on both rank and activity, meaning that the 205 barrier to detect a merit source is incorrect since not all merit sources are Legendries, and even so the maximum would have been 400 sMerit, and no lower limit was officially provided.
Agree with you. But it is more difficult to detect such non-Legendary user as a merit source. I guess it is almost impossible.
I can see that those listed person give merit in a legitimate way. But what can others say about this?
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/coincidence-standard-or-by-chance-or-totally-abuse-4522340
Is it legal?
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/coincidence-standard-or-by-chance-or-totally-abuse-4522340
Is it legal?
I think this totally dependant on person sending the merit.
What is Merit?
Merit is a new system created in order to reward quality contributions to the forum. Now to rise through ranks you will also need to acquire Merit in addition to Activity.
How do I receive merit?
You are awarded merit by people of the community if they find your post helpful or informative.
For more information read this post: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/faq-everything-you-need-to-know-about-forum-activity-account-ranks-and-merit-2766177
Here is a statistics of a merit distribution by the merit sources below. This table shows how many merits has been given by each merit source to other users, namely to Jr. Members, Members, Full Members, Senior Members, Hero Members, Legendaries respectively. The analysis takes into consideration the ranks of the users at the moment of a merit transferring.
Obviously, the policy of a merit distribution by the merit sources is evenly and fair.
This post was updated on Aug 12, 2018.
Merit distribution by the merit sources (Jan 24, 2018 - Aug 12, 2018)
| User name | Merits to Juniors | To Members | To Fulls | To Seniors | To Heroes | To Legendaries | |
| 1) | suchmoon | 491 (to 163 users) | 614 (to 105 users) | 467 (to 90 users) | 464 (to 63 users) | 632 (to 75 users) | 1391 (to 168 users) |
| 2) | QuestionAuthority | 63 (to 15 users) | 152 (to 15 users) | 776 (to 49 users) | 534 (to 30 users) | 921 (to 52 users) | 218 (to 21 users) |
| 3) | Foxpup | 42 (to 23 users) | 85 (to 26 users) | 115 (to 24 users) | 163 (to 21 users) | 266 (to 23 users) | 1065 (to 71 users) |
| 4) | TMAN | 164 (to 67 users) | 242 (to 63 users) | 173 (to 50 users) | 189 (to 31 users) | 462 (to 44 users) | 602 (to 67 users) |
| 5) | dbshck | 231 (to 80 users) | 397 (to 58 users) | 440 (to 55 users) | 274 (to 27 users) | 36 (to 16 users) | 116 (to 33 users) |
| 6) | EFS | 226 (to 96 users) | 212 (to 55 users) | 253 (to 53 users) | 228 (to 42 users) | 119 (to 23 users) | 415 (to 45 users) |
| 7) | Vod | 201 (to 89 users) | 179 (to 55 users) | 207 (to 50 users) | 94 (to 27 users) | 278 (to 52 users) | 679 (to 101 users) |
| 8) | qwk | 135 (to 61 users) | 217 (to 48 users) | 240 (to 47 users) | 159 (to 28 users) | 130 (to 29 users) | 330 (to 62 users) |
| 9) | xandry | 249 (to 68 users) | 405 (to 47 users) | 242 (to 41 users) | 30 (to 18 users) | 44 (to 18 users) | 62 (to 26 users) |
| 10) | paxmao | 286 (to 181 users) | 211 (to 94 users) | 125 (to 81 users) | 130 (to 53 users) | 116 (to 47 users) | 247 (to 100 users) |
| 11) | DarkStar_ | 128 (to 64 users) | 187 (to 70 users) | 122 (to 34 users) | 86 (to 19 users) | 155 (to 39 users) | 197 (to 64 users) |
| 12) | bones261 | 75 (to 44 users) | 91 (to 30 users) | 108 (to 40 users) | 103 (to 26 users) | 75 (to 28 users) | 180 (to 65 users) |
| 13) | JayJuanGee | 58 (to 50 users) | 62 (to 46 users) | 83 (to 51 users) | 75 (to 36 users) | 85 (to 49 users) | 317 (to 120 users) |
| 14) | malevolent | 78 (to 34 users) | 59 (to 19 users) | 76 (to 18 users) | 66 (to 16 users) | 97 (to 23 users) | 148 (to 43 users) |
| 15) | mindrust | 61 (to 33 users) | 79 (to 31 users) | 107 (to 25 users) | 32 (to 15 users) | 106 (to 22 users) | 195 (to 49 users) |
| 16) | mprep | 37 (to 25 users) | 87 (to 36 users) | 52 (to 33 users) | 64 (to 20 users) | 66 (to 26 users) | 291 (to 57 users) |
| 17) | frodocooper | 138 (to 50 users) | 95 (to 18 users) | 52 (to 7 users) | 12 (to 4 users) | 45 (to 9 users) | 169 (to 28 users) |
| 18) | BobLawblaw | 7 (to 7 users) | 17 (to 9 users) | 76 (to 15 users) | 112 (to 13 users) | 50 (to 10 users) | 447 (to 51 users) |
| 19) | OgNasty | 109 (to 101 users) | 66 (to 56 users) | 58 (to 41 users) | 64 (to 36 users) | 106 (to 47 users) | 225 (to 104 users) |
| 20) | achow101 | 64 (to 43 users) | 134 (to 26 users) | 136 (to 23 users) | 128 (to 21 users) | 169 (to 20 users) | 67 (to 16 users) |
| 21) | Vlad2Vlad | 113 (to 20 users) | 88 (to 5 users) | 31 (to 7 users) | 53 (to 8 users) | 52 (to 4 users) | 140 (to 5 users) |
| 22) | Micio | 68 (to 20 users) | 90 (to 18 users) | 54 (to 12 users) | 88 (to 10 users) | 40 (to 4 users) | 112 (to 13 users) |
| 23) | vapourminer | 115 (to 98 users) | 72 (to 58 users) | 66 (to 44 users) | 45 (to 30 users) | 44 (to 32 users) | 84 (to 54 users) |
| 24) | sapta | 76 (to 16 users) | 122 (to 17 users) | 103 (to 17 users) | 70 (to 9 users) | 19 (to 5 users) | 60 (to 9 users) |
| 25) | chimk | 94 (to 42 users) | 123 (to 41 users) | 116 (to 44 users) | 28 (to 14 users) | 27 (to 13 users) | 22 (to 11 users) |
| 26) | LFC_Bitcoin | 17 (to 14 users) | 10 (to 9 users) | 35 (to 24 users) | 38 (to 16 users) | 97 (to 26 users) | 219 (to 77 users) |
| 27) | Welsh | 41 (to 32 users) | 90 (to 40 users) | 68 (to 23 users) | 70 (to 21 users) | 106 (to 25 users) | 139 (to 45 users) |
| 28) | teramit | 59 (to 24 users) | 68 (to 21 users) | 76 (to 21 users) | 70 (to 15 users) | 8 (to 4 users) | 94 (to 9 users) |
| 29) | rickbig41 | 47 (to 25 users) | 38 (to 15 users) | 69 (to 22 users) | 18 (to 8 users) | 52 (to 11 users) | 129 (to 25 users) |
| 30) | LoyceV | 115 (to 96 users) | 71 (to 49 users) | 70 (to 38 users) | 67 (to 37 users) | 127 (to 46 users) | 181 (to 80 users) |
| 31) | iCEBREAKER | 66 (to 17 users) | 25 (to 9 users) | 34 (to 15 users) | 35 (to 16 users) | 82 (to 18 users) | 80 (to 18 users) |
| 32) | Jet Cash | 177 (to 118 users) | 52 (to 35 users) | 84 (to 43 users) | 52 (to 24 users) | 77 (to 35 users) | 155 (to 52 users) |
| 33) | redsn0w | 5 (to 1 user) | 75 (to 11 users) | 20 (to 4 users) | 54 (to 8 users) | 28 (to 6 users) | 109 (to 24 users) |
| 34) | ebliever | 34 (to 13 users) | 35 (to 8 users) | 32 (to 10 users) | 15 (to 6 users) | 62 (to 17 users) | 104 (to 22 users) |
| 35) | Mitchell | 33 (to 5 users) | 27 (to 6 users) | 19 (to 7 users) | 25 (to 4 users) | 24 (to 6 users) | 230 (to 22 users) |
| 36) | theymos_away | 21 (to 7 users) | 38 (to 12 users) | 82 (to 10 users) | 16 (to 4 users) | 30 (to 6 users) | 93 (to 17 users) |
| 37) | Globb0 | 18 (to 7 users) | 40 (to 12 users) | 13 (to 6 users) | 29 (to 6 users) | 25 (to 7 users) | 181 (to 33 users) |
| 38) | CjMapope | 54 (to 26 users) | 36 (to 15 users) | 38 (to 16 users) | 86 (to 15 users) | 28 (to 11 users) | 10 (to 1 user) |
| 39) | Dabs | 33 (to 15 users) | 15 (to 9 users) | 63 (to 14 users) | 66 (to 20 users) | 21 (to 9 users) | 102 (to 33 users) |
| 40) | cAPSLOCK | 21 (to 9 users) | 12 (to 6 users) | 90 (to 10 users) | 54 (to 4 users) | 12 (to 6 users) | 142 (to 24 users) |
| 41) | phantastisch | 52 (to 4 users) | 67 (to 5 users) | 115 (to 6 users) | 0 | 6 (to 2 users) | 69 (to 8 users) |
| 42) | jbreher | 12 (to 8 users) | 22 (to 8 users) | 26 (to 14 users) | 40 (to 9 users) | 47 (to 15 users) | 134 (to 36 users) |
| 43) | 38 (to 10 users) | 59 (to 19 users) | 54 (to 17 users) | 18 (to 5 users) | 33 (to 16 users) | 77 (to 35 users) | |
| 44) | 18 (to 9 users) | 22 (to 12 users) | 29 (to 11 users) | 11 (to 5 users) | 80 (to 5 users) | 70 (to 13 users) | |
| 45) | Vadi2323 | 58 (to 39 users) | 37 (to 22 users) | 54 (to 23 users) | 11 (to 9 users) | 60 (to 7 users) | 11 (to 9 users) |
| 46) | klarki | 39 (to 23 users) | 54 (to 27 users) | 60 (to 29 users) | 26 (to 10 users) | 59 (to 9 users) | 1 |
| 47) | RegulusHr | 58 (to 22 users) | 81 (to 22 users) | 93 (to 15 users) | 21 (to 3 users) | 3 (to 2 users) | 7 (to 3 users) |
| 48) | OmegaStarScream | 38 (to 16 users) | 40 (to 12 users) | 58 (to 8 users) | 17 (to 5 users) | 34 (to 8 users) | 69 (to 20 users) |
| 49) | Anon11073 | 57 (to 17 users) | 63 (to 10 users) | 41 (to 7 users) | 17 (to 3 users) | 2 (to 1 user) | 21 (to 4 users) |
| 50) | Halab | 38 (to 17 users) | 30 (to 10 users) | 21 (to 8 users) | 9 (to 4 users) | 4 (to 1 user) | 2 (to 1 user) |
| 51) | nanna | 27 (to 15 users) | 32 (to 7 users) | 30 (to 7 users) | 2 (to 2 users) | 1 | 1 |
| 52) | esmanthra | 30 (to 19 users) | 54 (to 19 users) | 48 (to 12 users) | 2 (to 1 user) | 4 (to 2 users) | 1 |
Obviously, the policy of a merit distribution by the merit sources is evenly and fair.
This post was updated on Aug 12, 2018.
The detecting algorithm was upgraded. Now the analysis takes into consideration the ranks of the users at the day of a deploying the merit system.
The maximal initial amounts of sMerit that were credited on Jan 24, 2018:
Such a way the merit sources of all ranks were detected. Here is the table ordered by the indicator "Maximal generosity" below.
Probably the rest of such users will be detected later. Also, see on the current page the statistics of a merit distribution by the merit sources.
This post was updated on Aug 12, 2018.
The maximal initial amounts of sMerit that were credited on Jan 24, 2018:
- Legendary - 200 sMerit
- Hero Member - 88 sMerit
- Senior Member - 32 sMerit
- Full Member - 7 sMerit
- Member - 1 sMerit
- Jr. Member - 0 sMerit
Such a way the merit sources of all ranks were detected. Here is the table ordered by the indicator "Maximal generosity" below.
Detected merit sources (Jan 24, 2018 - Aug 12, 2018)
| User name | Rank at Jan 24, 2018 | Generosity | Comment | |
| 1) | suchmoon | was Legendary | 3824 | |
| 2) | QuestionAuthority | was Legendary | 2506 | |
| 3) | Foxpup | was Legendary | 1692 | |
| 4) | TMAN | was Hero Member | 1525 | |
| 5) | dbshck | was Legendary | 1435 | moderator of the indonesian local forum |
| 6) | EFS | was Legendary | 1362 | moderator of the turkish local forum |
| 7) | Vod | was Legendary | 1328 | |
| 8) | qwk | was Legendary | 1046 | active in the german local forum |
| 9) | xandry | was Legendary | 1019 | moderator of the russian local forum |
| 10) | paxmao | was Full Member | 1008 | active in the spanish local forum |
| 11) | DarkStar_ | was Legendary | 717 | |
| 12) | bones261 | was Legendary | 583 | |
| 13) | JayJuanGee | was Legendary | 524 | |
| 14) | malevolent | was Legendary | 514 | moderator of the polish local forum |
| 15) | mindrust | was Legendary | 510 | |
| 16) | mprep | was Legendary | 501 | moderator of the section "Altcoins" |
| 17) | frodocooper | was Senior Member | 497 | moderator of the section "Mining" |
| 18) | BobLawblaw | was Legendary | 496 | |
| 19) | OgNasty | was Legendary | 475 | |
| 20) | achow101 | was Legendary | 449 | moderator of the section "Technical Discussion" |
| 21) | Vlad2Vlad | was Legendary | 438 | |
| 22) | Micio | was Legendary | 415 | active in the italian local forum |
| 23) | vapourminer | was Legendary | 398 | |
| 24) | sapta | was Legendary | 391 | moderator of the indonesian local forum |
| 25) | chimk | was Full Member | 371 | active in the russian local forum |
| 26) | LFC_Bitcoin | was Legendary | 356 | |
| 27) | Welsh | was Legendary | 356 | |
| 28) | teramit | was Legendary | 342 | active in the turkish local forum |
| 29) | rickbig41 | was Legendary | 324 | moderator of the philippine local forum |
| 30) | LoyceV | was Legendary | 298 | |
| 31) | iCEBREAKER | was Legendary | 298 | |
| 32) | Jet Cash | was Hero Member | 296 | |
| 33) | redsn0w | was Legendary | 281 | active in the italian local forum |
| 34) | ebliever | was Legendary | 277 | |
| 35) | Mitchell | was Legendary | 276 | |
| 36) | theymos_away | was Jr. Member | 272 | |
| 37) | Globb0 | was Legendary | 266 | |
| 38) | CjMapope | was Legendary | 250 | |
| 39) | Dabs | was Legendary | 248 | moderator of the philippine local forum |
| 40) | cAPSLOCK | was Legendary | 246 | |
| 41) | phantastisch | was Legendary | 243 | moderator of the german local forum |
| 42) | jbreher | was Legendary | 243 | |
| 43) | was Hero Member | 229 | not a merit source anymore | |
| 44) | was Legendary | 226 | not a merit source anymore | |
| 45) | Vadi2323 | was Legendary | 219 | active in the russian local forum |
| 46) | klarki | was Legendary | 217 | active in the russian local forum |
| 47) | RegulusHr | was Full Member | 214 | active in the croatian local forum |
| 48) | OmegaStarScream | was Legendary | 211 | moderator of the arabic local forum |
| 49) | Anon11073 | was Senior Member | 192 | moderator of the japanese local forum |
| 50) | Halab | was Member | 94 | moderator of the french local forum |
| 51) | nanna | was Full Member | 76 | active in the japanese local forum |
| 52) | esmanthra | was Jr. Member | 31 | active in the russian local forum |
Probably the rest of such users will be detected later. Also, see on the current page the statistics of a merit distribution by the merit sources.
This post was updated on Aug 12, 2018.
Hello! Can I suggest to remove the sources part?
We know them, by we i mean established members. No need for random spammers to know them...
Agreed. If theymos wanted to publish a list, he could easily do that by himself.We know them, by we i mean established members. No need for random spammers to know them...
PM-begging a merit source is a good way to get red trust though for the spammers
Maybe the OP could include the number of unique accounts merit was sent to?
I've included this in my weekly updates (link in my previous post). 
I think I resent the fact that I'm rated 82nd for generosity. Am I being penalised because i try to help more people with my awards?
Maybe the OP could include the number of unique accounts merit was sent to?
Hello! Can I suggest to remove the sources part?
We know them, by we i mean established members. No need for random spammers to know them...
We know them, by we i mean established members. No need for random spammers to know them...
| User name | Sent merits | Received merits | Generousity | |
| 1) | QuestionAuthority | 2255 (in 179 txns) | 307 (in 96 txns) | 2101 (max 2105) |
For instance sent:
Code:
2. 2364 Merit sent by QuestionAuthority (#72795) to 165 unique users in 185 transactions
And received:Code:
33. 307 Merit received by QuestionAuthority (#72795) from 84 unique users in 96 transactions
I think LoyceV and Ognasty should have more source merits to distribute. I guess LoyceV is in the test phase and doesn't have that much sMerits yet. if he/she keeps at meriting more random members it would be great.
I've recently decided to merit more posts, not to lower my standards of "quality", but just because "good posts" deserve merit too. Any "good post" is far above the average spam for which the Merit system was introduced, and I don't think people with "good posts" should be restricted in leveling up.Most of the time, I leave just 1 Merit though. I haven't really decided on when to increase it.
Is there anyone who would like to let me know, how to mine this kind of data.
~
I can help in generating valuable insights using the data.
Check this thread, you'll find my collection of raw data. I don't think it's desirable if many people start scraping the same data from the forum. ~
I can help in generating valuable insights using the data.
I can see that those listed person give merit in a legitimate way. But what can others say about this?
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/coincidence-standard-or-by-chance-or-totally-abuse-4522340
Is it legal?
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/coincidence-standard-or-by-chance-or-totally-abuse-4522340
Is it legal?
Jump to: