Bitcoin Forum

Are there no enforceable rules regarding merit abuse?? No neg trust even in serious cases??

I would suggest powering up each others merit or even your own alts merit is quite a dangerous practice.

It is actually like cheating really because you are allowing accounts to rank up and gain trust in an unfair way.  These are obviously less deserving in trust than those that do not do this.

 Trust score you say is for trust but for me a lot of faith is put in rank too perhaps just as much. I mean would you trust a legend with 0 trust or a jnr with 20 trust.

You can see that a person doing this kind of thing should demonstrate their entire account has far less real merit than those that gain their merits in a fair way and far less merit even than person that have zero or less merit.

I think Negative DT is a minimum needed to alert person of blatant trust abuse.

I have seem some account just give 50 x merit 2x  to highly probable alts and that legend has seemingly no consequences at all? the posts were laughable and to get 50 merits for almost the same exact 2 posts??

Merit is always going to be gamed a bit but to see it go down like that and no DT is commenting then I am sure there must be a good reason that I am not seeing?

Can anyone shed some light.

This is a serious question. Since I see we are now tightening up ship here to expel scammers and scam enablers and rightly so... what am I missing with these types of cases?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5050263.msg47119519#msg47119519

Read the whole thread too. It will give you an idea as to where the community stands on merit abuse.

No.
There are no enforceable rules regarding either the merit system or the trust system.
It seems to be common practice to give negative trust to blatant merit abusers, but I recall theymos frowning upon it.

Thanks, yes that certainly explained why there are no DT trust of some of these obvious merit abusers. This legend gave 50 merits out twice to more or less the same post and those accounts were analysed and look highly probable to be his own.

I guess most things can be gamed.

Mere speculations,the more reason why there's no enforceable rule regarding such cases...
Take a plagiarism case,we the community can simply run a quick plagiarism test on such users posts,and if he/she is found guilty,the penalty(permaban)will be handed out..

But with the merit abuse cases,its always difficult to call,and we could be making a mistake tagging a user at least 5/10 times for various reasons such as.
Every user is entitled to do whatsoever he/she wishes with his/her Smerits really(so there is no proof to show a user is meriting his/her alt)
And users on the forum merit posts they agree with,which according to theymos shouldn't be so.."merit quality/good post"
So such user probably agreed with the recipient of the merit,and decided to hand out quite a chunk of it to them..

Not sure what your post means. Like most noob accounts spouting nonsense in meta looking for some merit crumbs.
 

 I am talking about 50 merits for very similar post 2 x to 2 accounts linked to his same holding addresses.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5072316.0

Just this one instance makes a mockery of merit, and brings into question any use of it except as weapon to stop noobs filling the board with junk. Sadly even some slip through the net like for instance you.

I am talking blatant abuse not a difference of opinion on what makes a good post.

Plagiarism is not as simple as running some script for hits and job done. Of course it may seem like that if you are some bot deployed to KA for merit.

Same way I feel reading all the "hogwash swill" you drop all day on the meta board...
Talking about being a noob,you basically haven't earned much,you are simply legendary based on your longevity on the forum...

You're a "member"based on earned merits
I wouldn't hurt you then,hoping to demerit you

Longevity, We are here just because of the longevity of some members. If they don't deserve to be Legendary, theymos definitely put some restrictions. Back in the day, the scenario was totally different. Most of the persons used to join the forum with the interest of learning about bitcoin, having some updates about bitcoins or learning about cryptocurrency. Their posts were objectively high quality because they didn't post for fulfilling signature requirements. Why most of the boards are full of shits now? Mostly because of the signature campaign, otherwise, merit system was not implemented, IMO.

What if demerit existed and it was free to give-

I posted a lot of cases here: Suspected users that are abusing merit 3.0 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2896910.320), The fact is that nobody cares about cheaters so I stopped, I will stop also to report alts soon since in over 500 accounts reported only around 2-3% are tagged from DTs.

LOL  why are you on meta all day...merit crumbs?  I never heard of just joining a board to comment on the running of it.

What projects do you support ispup?

Let's stick to your post that I have already demonstrated  was worthless. Neither points are valid here.

Stop cluttering my thread buzz off.

Actually there is need to reply the answer was clear in the thread that I was directed to.

However as I see more NOOB's hovering around merit I will wonder probably suspect they are hovering for merit crumbs.

Point me to hogwash swill that you are going to demonstrate is incorrect.

Bring a full case I am not interested in wasting time on you if you want to throw nonsense around without substantiating it.



@coinlocket$

I am sorry your efforts are not rewarded. You look like you are doing very good work

re topic: No

Here is a quote from theymos in regards to Merit abuses and punishments - I believe this is what qwk was referring to.


It's understandable to want/expect action when we see things transpiring that are so foreign to our own values or the "right" way of doing things. I feel I'm beginning to get a better handle on the ideals behind this forums punitive actions, and they are not meant to be harsh or rigid. So much like other issues with the forum until it becomes more than a blackeye on the system, and actually affects the overall integrity I don't expect there to be a change in attitude.

Edit: theymos quote is pruned - Didn't realize suchmoon's link was to this thread at the time.

Guess I missed Theymos's take on this, and I'm glad you linked to this post, suchmoon.  I haven't been tagging merit abusers anyway--certainly not consistently.  There have only been a couple of cases of blatant abuse where I've given out negs.  

Anyway, that's why merit abusers haven't been suffering any consequences, cryptohunter.  I had a question about this myself a while back and started a thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3202458.msg33236953#msg33236953) wondering if DT members should be punishing merit abusers, because I could tell it was being done inconsistently and wanted to help out.  

There's too much subjectivity involved when trying to judge who's abusing the merit system and who just doesn't value something like 50 merits the same way another person does and would have no problem handing out that amount of merits for a post that most people would find mediocre.  I don't know if I agree with Theymos completely about not tagging anything short of blatant merit sales, but if he doesn't want to make a big deal out of merit abuse I'm not in a position to argue.

Edit:
It always brings a smile to my face when you drop some red on merit abusers, and yeah I suspect you're not in danger of being booted off DT for tagging these fools.

I have been trying to enforce the merit abuse rules.  I hope I have earned enough respect from Theymos to continue doing so.

I only tag those users who are blatant and obvious.

   Obviously, the best way to deal with suspected merit abuse coming from a merit source is to bring it to theymos' attention rather than add a comment to the person's trust page. The post Theymos made was in a reputation thread with someone disagreeing with the way QuestionAuthority (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=72795) was handing out merits. I responded with some insecure paranoia that I would start getting red trust simply because people don't agree with how I hand out merits. In the end, QuestionAuthority ended up having his merit source status stripped from him.  
  Also, theymos did make a comment somewhere that he has the power to reverse merit transactions, if need be.

I will continue to red-tag users who send merits to their own alts. Beyond that I don't consider merely sending or receiving merits (without proof that the users are connected) as evidence of wrongdoing, even if it's large amounts / shitty posts / etc.

Not sure if theymos will kick me out of DT for that but I have a feeling that his statement was more applicable to someone red-tagging a merit source rather than merit abuse in general.

Here:
I've only seen theymos undo it once, when a hacked account had send out 3 times 50 merit.

Not really.

Yes there is few DT tagging if really happen merit abuse or sale, but must be need strong proof before tag. My thought also same to you but admin change my mind. I have opened a thread on reputation regarding merit abuse those has mentioned by suchmoon  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5073831.msg48129108#msg48129108)and admin himself give clear explanation why he really not like to tag peoples for merit transfer. If there is obvious abuse like merit sale then its different case. Basically I don't think need to tag for 5/10 merit transfer if they are not proven alt each other.  


Absolutely for same reason I left reporting Alts and merit abuser a while ago. Need lots of effort to find evidence but action is very rare.

No worries, I don't think he will kick you for tag real merit abuser/trader or seller. But he removed merit source (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2827596.msg47229755#msg47229755) after his statement (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5050263.msg47119519#msg47119519) due to unexpected uses.  

The point is not rewarding me if I find them (even if, you know, is appreciated since it takes a LOT of time ;D) is to punish them.


I know the feeling also @veleor and @cheaterdetector are posting no more there, Nobody is doing something, nobody cares about the situation.
I have, I think 500 of them on my red trust list but it means nothing.

It will be fun if one day those accounts will be tagged and also it will be fun if one day we will tag bad managers who takes cheaters on their campaigns.

Where can one find these rules? How were these rules enacted?

Rules can be implicit / common practice.
It would be nice to have someone come up with a list of DOs /DONTs regarding merit based on roughly 1 year of practice sooner or later.

So far, I guess it's safe to assume that it's considered "blatant merit abuse" if you receive merit in an "obvious" return of merit.
Since that's heavily subjective, usually only cases of "considerable" amounts of merit are sanctioned.
Also, a single merit to a newbie may be scrutinized.

Other than that, I'm at a loss when it comes to "rules".

I'm not one for too many rules. However, if you can just give 50 merits to your alts or mates for making the same 2 posts then let's just stop worrying about merit and I would say after making full member merit should not be really be linked to rank. Lots of good posters in the ALT section will never rank up. Merit can just be a nice way of tipping your hat to a post you agree with or as a friendly gesture. The danger is trying to imply it correlates to the net value of the user in anyway.

I have seen even high merit and high rank members give chunks of merit to posts that are incorrect based on hard observable evidence contained within the same thread. Merit is more for sharing an opinion that demonstrating the post has real objective value.

Also the most damning of all was a bunch of stats that show if you remove all merit passed between the top 0.13% of users on this board (that's if we say 150k real users that have posted this month not the 2 million members that have joined at some point) ... so going towards a 1/10th of 1%.

If you remove their internal merit swapping their merits crash by 50-75%

If you remove the merits gained in meta you would likely see no body except a handful have more than 150 earned merits. I am talking satoshi, theymos and perhaps literally a handful of others.

Those that never leave the alt boards are likely to have zero earned merits whatever they post and bitcoin talk does a bit better.

So to me meta has 2 real applications if taken at face value

1. a weapon against scammers  account farmers (that could be used with way more power with junior boards)
2. a friendly hat tipping and acknowledgement of sharing a view or stance on something and saying thanks for a request.

I have seen so many persons using their merit score as part of an argument as it if lends weight. To me it does not.

I don't actually think there is anything wrong with merit as it is because already it is helping with scammers, account farmers, and is very net positive. However implying there is some deeper objective meaning to it is false.  

I think if we had junior boards even just for the alt discussion board you would over night see the people here just trying to cash cow this board would drop away.

Overall merit is just a stupid intangible shit that is made of thin air, and people give so big fucks about it, whilst they could be doing so many better things in life. I guess this is what it feels to be , when you're broke and anti-social, so you come out here in an internet forum , and try to make yourself feel better whilst earning in small bits and pieces of bitcoin.

I don't get how exactly merit is stopping scammers? Spammers would make sense, scammers not so much.

People really also need to get over merit, its almost a year now, go and actually do something productive.

Agreed.

Well, spammers directly for sure. However it also does prevent account farmers powering up and selling them to scammers. I would also hope that cutting off all spammers of sigs promoting scamming icos will stop them attracting funds and eventually hopefully even stop launching them. I personally view capped icos that meet their hard limit in 30 seconds a huge scam. This is like a huge instamine or even premine in the old pow days. That's not allowing for the icos that just collect and leave with the btc/eth

I am strongly against telling people what they can and cannot do with things they have duely earned, and merit falls into this category by way of the fact they ultimately received merit for making a ‘good’ post at one point.

Also these ‘rules’ are something that a dozen or so people have implemented (and enforce unevenly) out of two million registered users and hundreds of thousands of active users. These people were in no way elected to make the rules and you can’t argue this is a private forum because it’s own is on the record as being against these rules.

Further, the concept of merit, or limited amount of karma that can be sent based on the amount received is a very uncommon concept and I would not be surprised to see many who are unfamiliar with merit testing it out with their alts. Sending merit is not reversible, so if someone does this and later sees it is “against the rules” they are liable to receive negative trust forever even if they conduct themselves in a trustworthy way.

Sending merit to an alt is not akin to scamming, however the presence of a negative rating implies someone is a scammer. If someone sees many people with negative ratings for this reason, they will give less weight to a negative rating to an actual scammer who has legitimately (attempted to) stolen money.

Relax, Quicksy. We've already seen this kind of attempt to redefine "scam" as something that steals money so that you could claim you're not a scammer. However to most sane folks here a scam is a fraudulent scheme even if it doesn't result in actual monetary loss. Pretending to be someone you're not (a high-ranked/meritorious user) is one such scheme. Wear your red tags proudly, you deserve them.