Seems I triggered too many points here. I cannot reply to everyone but I would love to clarify what I said.
How is it the worst requirement when we have users that are producing quality contributions but aren't getting merits. We have people that takes earning of merits as a duty but we also have those that don't put too much attention on receiving merits yet they're not spammers.
Yes. I still stand by what I said. If someone is active enough in the forum shares his knowledge, and reads before they write, they should earn at least 10 merits in the last 120 days if not 20. How many members could you show me who are active in several sections of the forum but didn't earn at least 20 or 10 merits? Either they are not active, or they are stuck in a circle where merits are not circulating enough. I do not focus on earning merits either.
Don't use merit to judge the quality of an account as those with less merits can be a more quality posters than those with merit especially in the recent 120days.
How else should we judge the quality of posts? After all, merit was introduced to judge the quality of posts. If you believe some members generate quality content and they do not earn merits for their content, it's the failure of merit sources as the administration. Feel free to share who are those members who are generating quality content, I will report their good posts to get merited in some specific threads where merit sources award good posts.
You can’t put the blame on campaign managers. I have worked on many campaigns with different campaign managers and I can tell you that no CM wants a spammer on his team.
I am not blaming campaign managers for the spam. But, if campaign managers pay for the spam, they have to take the blame.