Topic: why hoarding Smerits? (Read 551 times)

The bottomline is that, we cannot force other users to give us merit if they do not want to, they might have their own reasons of not doing so. But do not be worried, there are DTs and other users who does give you merit IF they find your post or topic created, informative or making any sense. There are also merit giveaway threads to which we can find hope. Just be active in this forum and try to construct posts which would be beneficial to the eyes of other users. It would be hard but, hard work pays, remember that. I myself is having a hard time to earn but is still trying to, so you better do the same thing if you are seeking progress.
Indeed. As I have said, they are not giving merits to eberyone because of their reasons. They mighy be saving it for posts or topics which would finally make them to do so and we should respect that.

I agree, merit should be freely given to any user who makes quality contributions regardless of their forum rank. But I also think that quality should be dependent on the users rank.
With the exception of alt accounts, users rank should also reflect their knowledge and technical know-how. If we agree with this, then a newbie can get merit for a post, which is deemed quality cause of their rank.
If a Hero member makes same post, I may not be inclined to give out any merits for it, as their higher rank means higher quality expectations, and this should reflect in their discussions.

Hmm, it's not like that I'm just limiting my smerit and no longer open for high members. Actually, I also give merits to Sr. Members and up if there's a chance but I realized that my smerits would be more meaningful if I give it to those low ranked quality posters. Besides, they needed it most compare to those Legendary members who already got overflowing recognition from the others . For me it is just my simple token of appreciation which can somehow uplift their self esteem as a member of this forum. I want them to feel that they really belong here .

How did you come to this conclusion?


Trust system and ranking system can't be compared  as they are both different things. Merit system has done more good than harm imo, previous ranking system was merely based on your activity, make some posts daily and done. Even for spammers it was easy to rank up.

Anyone who can post high quality, I think they have the right to get merit as a form of appreciation. Even though higher ranking members do not need merit as a condition for rising rank, their experience and knowledge are things that should get attention for merit.

If you are interested in distributing your sMerit to members with lower rankings on quality posts, I think that is no problem. But for me, I can distribute it to anyone on quality posts even though they are higher members. Post quality is the basic standard for distributing sMerit, so we dont need to limit it to rankings because only members who post quality goods have the right to get it.

Aside from that, some also are too picky to choose the right one like me. I mean, I want to give my smerits to someone with exceptional post but sometimes I'm more attracted giving merits to members which is polite and with the right intention of helping others . I love appreciating small contributions from people with kind heart.

I don't know how you came to the judgement like that. Is this based on any source of data, statistics?

AFAIK, most of sMerits on the forum have been delivered by established and high ranked members. My thread has not yet been updated with recent data but basically such a big stuff does not change too much after several weeks.
Where receivers received merits from, and meriters sents merits to
If you are not interested in statistics, you can simply look at bar charts which help you fastly see most of sMerits were distributed by Hero and Legendary members.

For example: with receivers are Brandnew and newbie members, Hero and Legendary members are the most merit senders to them. For more details, please take a look at the given thread.

In number of transactions:

In value of transactions:

Maybe just maybe if you tried to stray away from the marketplace section and altcoin discussion you'll find it easier to earn merits in your part. These sections are typically avoided by merit sources since there is no real conversation going on. Based on your post history you aren't that bad of a poster so really you have better chances of earning merits in other sections where members value what you post. Do not be one of those newbie and low ranking members thinking that merits are a hindrance of ranking up since they are the obvious ones who aren't really contributing anything to the forum.

Oh, we didn't had thread with complaints about merit system for a quite long time. OP, I think you're wrong.
It's OK, and it actually was one of points of merit system. Users who are making quality posts aren't leaving this forum because they aren't struggling to get merits and rank-up. While users who can't make good posts and don't get merits, it's not a problem that they are leaving, because in most cases they don't contribute anything to forum.
But can you tell where they are going to, because there isn't many alternative forums, especially these which have things like signature campaigns. Porobably only Cryptotalk comes as closest alternative.

I don't think it's good idea. I think it may increase abuse of merit system. Also, in first place, why do we need to rush rank-up proccess?

This rules is only for reducing some spam applications actually. Again if anybody have much merits there is no guaranty that the user will be accepted or not. It also depends on from where the merits came. Sometime lower merited user also do quality posts. But basically who do quality posts earn merits.

If anybody follow this suggestion and make a decision to go ahead by this way hope the user will success. But if any user get the merits system as very hard, rank up is not for him IMO. 

For me, hoarding sMerit maybe is not something that can be blamed on forums, but this kind of behavior will only be considered as a form of lack of hoarding contributions for forums and users. The bitcointalk.org forum has become a library for the bitcoin community around the world to learn it and now we have 117,144 active profiles based bpip.org. If this forum has been considered as our place to gain knowledge such as a library, then we must have a good contribution to the forum and users in a good and recommended way.

Merit system is an effort that requires each user to post quality things. Apart from aiming to help the forum reduce junk posts, the merit system will also function as a requirement for user rankup after the number of posts and activities. Someone with a lower rank is forced to post quality things if they want to move up to a higher rank and this does not mean that users who have been ranked higher can post junk because there are no rules that say users can post junk on forums and if found it will be deleted.

And one form of contribution to forums and users is distributing sMerit on other users posts that are considered quality and useful. Even though the merit system is not moderated, it must run as expected and we have statistics to control it. Good if you receive merit, you also have to distribute them to other users quality posts. Dont be stingy and dont be afraid, because only users who are afraid and stingy can be categorized as sMerit hoarders.

I did not expect the list of users on this thread to be considered a member of sMerit hoarding. [CLUBS] Top Merited-Users Classified into 4 Clubs

If indeed you find it, make one thread on the reputation board that is equipped with solid evidence. If they are proven to be misusing merit, they will also get prizes such as negative trust.

Not a good solution in my opinion and theymos will not consider it. Try to be a user who can post quality things, and you will have the opportunity to get more than what you expect and without having to change the minimum send sMerit to 5.

Look at Ddmrddmr, iasenko, nullious, RapTarX   and a lot of other members who have been ranked up so far after the merit system is introduced. They have received 1 merit most of the times and that's how they have reached their current amount of merits.
LoyceV has stated already, think from the anti point. I have received 522 merits which mean a total of 261 smerirs from which I have around 16 smerits now. I, and other members (not everyone), have been meriting posts which seems deserving, all the times. So, I guess the system is not a resistant towards rank up, the resistant is our goal; we want things to achieve with less effort.

This, you have mentioned already.

I thought this was an old thread but no, fresh from today´s oven (albeit using and old recipe). Regardless, do go ahead and show those established members, in order to get a sense of the dimension of the issue being discussed here (if not nominally, numerically).

Likely existed from the very first day, and pretty much unavoidable, although in big picture, the number of cases and amounts are expected to be small in proportion, to the point that it should be deemed pretty much meaningless (although, at this stage, unused airdropped sMerits are perhaps more of a risk than a potential benefit in my opinion).
 
You don’t really need rank that much unless it’s to benefit from campaigns. If people find alternatives they prefer, it’s their prerogative, but to discuss there is no need to escalate to any rank at all (although Jr. Member is desirable to be able to include images, which sometimes help to explain or refer to specific information).

It’s been discussed tons of times. The Merit System pivots around various key factors which I assume are monitored, and are moving in the currently intended ranges:

- Currently there is a more or less constant flow of merits of around 4,7K-6,7K per week. That could be increased by means of additional merit sources or allowance, but I figure it targets and intended weekly/monthly amount. I presume that the figure is more or less thought out.

- Each week there are something like 550 – 650 different sMerit awarders (with obvious different weights), which ensures some diversity of criteria.

- There are also between 800 and 1.000 different sMerit receivers per week. Out of those, around 100 are first time receivers. This latter may be an indicator to watch.

- The number of people that rank-up can (and is) be monitored.

Now could it if be moving at a faster pace?
Sure, but I’m not sure that the current parameters fall short of what is currently intended. I mean more sMerits could be pumped into the system through the Merits Sources (ideally through more sources in any case), or the 2:1 ratio (2 earned Merits: 1 generated sMerit) ratio could be altered (i.e. 3:2 ratio).
Those accounts that really put some time and effort scale the ranks (whether it’s their intent or not) without too much of an issue. Time is an important factor though.

There’s no need for that. Changing the rank’s requirements could be done without the above (i.e. lower the merit requirement for some mid-high ranks). If it has not been done, I assume it’s because it’s thought to be acceptable as is.

@OP
I believe hoarding is not the correct term to explain why some of the members who have lots of merits seem stingy or slow to spend their sMerits. Well, you know they can't stay online 24/7 and giving merit is a wearying activity (or should I say it sucks, lol). So many cheaters, copy pasters, plagiarists, etc., made them have to be careful with giving sMerits.

I have to accept few users do not care about merits who have got their merits by airdrop. But we can't say them established users of this forum. Although they aren't spending their smerits but there is merit sources to solve this issue. Hoarding their smerit doesn't effect on whole merits system since there is large number of smerits generating every months.

Look at my profile, I have joined on this forum after implemented merit system. Means all of my merits have been earned. Just no only me, there is lots of users have been ranked up by earning merits and they made inspirational thread as well. So when you will concentrate about your post quality then it's not very hard to earn. Besides that merit and trust system is totally different and their uses is different as well.

I will suggest, instead of complain merit system just contribute yourself and share your best knowledge & experience with community.

From what I've seen of the Signature Campaigns you only have to qualify with five initial merits in the last 120 days, not a rolling 5-in-120, so if there were any merits changing hands for payment, then a user only needs those initial five.  The most obvious purchase would be a loan of five, then pay back ten (two for one) once accepted to the SigCamp.  Look for any clusters where users over time back-scratch 5-for-10 with the sender of ten being lower ranked and in a Campaign.

I am agreed with LoyceV and The Pharmacist. Obviously we need merit system in this forum. And merit is the solution to reducing spam posters. I don't sure actually what did OP said about other forums. AFaik Bitcointalk is the old and best crypto forum in the world. So bitcointalk will not follow the others, maybe other forums should follow bitcointalk to improve their forum.

If any user does not prove him as a good poster by ranking up through 1-10 merits earn, Then can you guess what will happen when that user can easily rank up and able to wear the signature ??   Just only signature spam we can guess actually. And the main vision of the merit system would be destroyed.

There doesn't appear to be any links presented as evidence of users selling their merits.  Perhaps you could give examples of users who are "hoarding" their merits, then give examples of what you would like done - public shaming, branding via tar and feathers, covered in honey and tied to an ants nest - or more likely nothing as the recipients haven't seen anything worthy of being merited.

No, no, no.  I was personally using the trust system to fight shitposters right before the start of the merit system and it wasn't popular with anyone, including Theymos.  The merit system was absolutely needed, and it was a pretty elegant solution to the problem it addressed.

If newbies are frustrated that they can't rank up on a discussion forum, that's 99.9% likely because they're here to use the forum as a place of employment instead of having a genuine interest in reading and writing about crypto.  I have zero sympathy for those folks.  And where are they going to go where they can rank up quicker?  Cryptotalk?  Good luck with that; that forum is a shitfest and it's nothing compared to bitcointalk--and there aren't a hell of a lot of other forums dealing with bitcoin that I know of.

The whole issue as I see it is the existence of signature campaigns, which is fairly unique to bitcointalk.  It is because of their existence that account farming exists, account sales thrive, and rank is of the utmost important to newbies.  I could pretty much guarantee you that if campaigns went away, nobody would be bitching about merits or ranking up.

They won't throw merit out because they are established member,  any merit you get has to be gotten by good work. Let's be guided if they are established member but not merit source, there going out looking for post to merit is for the extent they cherish the forum.

If they left for quick rank up then the forum is at no loss, ranking up is a process. And just to let you know the forum has no competition else where.

I think would fail, ATM a member can give you five merit if they think that's what the post deserve, but making a number greater than one as the minimum is strange.
The only solution to rank up is following the process.