Bitcoin Forum

I foresee a situation where the Trust score will begin to serve as the new requirement for members to rank up. Honestly, Theymos could be harbouring this thought. It's over a year now since the sMerit system was instituted and his silence so far in creating another level after the "Legendary" rank portends something, I should think. What do you guys think?

I don't think so, if you are talking about the feedback people leave, nobody will force you to trade with someone in order to rank up.
If you talking about having a custom trust list in order to rank up. Could be a possibility but I don't think this will be implemented either.
I don't think we should involve trust in the ranking system at all.

I don't think this will happen as theymos has designed the merit system for the sole purpose of putting knowledge persons to higher rank and not for the trust farmers.


He is not silent basically and is actively working on twicking the merit system in the best possible way. The recent DT criteria update is one of his further step and effort.

Making trust as a Ranking requirement is not a decent solution I think. ???

The trust score should never be used as a metric for ranking up, that's not what it's designed for in any case. theymos has said they are not interested in putting up barriers to people being able to rank up this would be just that to many accounts.

Not to mention that when the Trust system changes were introduced he expressed his disappointment in the old system. So I don't see it having ever been given consideration, even now as it's still experimental in itself.

That's actually a good idea, to create a new rank after the LEGENDARY, and the TRUST requirement should only be applicable to them.
So its just like the rankings on DOTA2.

• Legendary
• Ancient
• Divine
• Immortal

Well, this is just an example of ranking names but I know if ever Theymos can think for a better name of the rankings.

Trust is controversial enough as it is, without it being used in the ranking-up system. Just imagine the countless accusations that we would see about people stopped from ranking due to collusion/reprisal/you name it. Besides, conceptually the two features have nothing in common, so intersecting them in the ranking-up process would be like forcing marriage of two acquainted but incompatible characters.

I think there could possibly be a new rank, something like this -

Activity: 2000
Merit: 2000

I don’t think trust rating should have anything to do with it though.

Sssjjj LFC, activity 2000 :o  :P

It can't be possible right now as unlike merits, we have to take into account negative trust feedback. If a user gets positive trust, he ranks up so if he gets negative trust, he'll rank down? That's really weird.

I was onces  advocating (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5100125.0) for some challenges involving new rank after legendary status but after reading some reply and considering the time frame it takes even a quality posters to achieve that status I don't think Introducing a new rank will be fair for them (newly rank-up user). The merit system have stabilize everything only deserving members can now achieve that status.

Concerning OP's prediction, I don't think that'll even be considered as an option. The trust system is already filled with drama introducing it into the rank-up system will just make the case worst. We don't want another merit sorry trust broke my life trend.

LOL!

Just because the Legendary Rank was somewhere between 750 or 780 & 1030. The Merit required to become Legendary 1000 so 2000 for both is double. That seems about right?

Dammit my activity is only 658 but then again i'm only here from 2017 so of-course your right, you are here a long time already talking BTC and everything around it, trying to provide people this healthy space to talk and speak free mind.... so 2000 and 2000 is very very legit.

But damn the Long way I need to go :) "but I don't mind its just another HODL"

Trust and knowledge of bitcoin and the ability to create quality posts are not correlated in any way.
You can know everything there is to know about bitcoin and have 3000 merits but that doesn't necessarily mean that you must have or will have positive trust.
Likewise, you can have negative trust but still be very knowledgeable on different topic and that is why trust and rank requirement (merits+activity) shouldn't be mixed.   

QS is a prime example of this, the bloke knows his shit but his trust score is fucked. Him and I don’t get on but his level of knowledge is admirable.

I don't think it will ever happen.
Not all members here care about trust or  do things that require trust such as trading.
Some of them just come to discuss about different topics or help other members. so what happens to them?

It is too complicated, I don't think theymos has interests with it, and me too.
Over time, trust system and rank system are different and they also have difference roles in the forum ,since their beginnings. I don't see overlaps between them, and don't think the forum should adjust them to have such complex overlaps.
Personally, only one new rank above Legendary is enough. If more and more ranks added over time, the forum will turn into almost same with what we can see in games. Ranks and levels of games' characters added overtime, and years later become overload. But, they are games, and gaming companies need such overload to get income. The forum is totally different, so I don't think theymos will add many more ranks

---

If new ranks added, I suggested to add only one more rank, like Maharishi.
To get that rank, users have to collect 4000 merits in minimum. It will take even outstanding users 4 to 5 years to hit that rank. It also means that we only should think of a next new rank 10 years later. :)

Make it a hybrid: Merit + Activity > 4000: Legend. And yes, I choose this so that I qualify :P
Seriously though: 2000+ Activity and Merit would be good for a new rank.

This is just to much and probably they will not spend too much time working on new ranks. I mean getting into legendary is already difficult for those who just signed-up. I know it is fun to think about it and it's going to be a challenge for those who ranked top already.

I also don't think so and if so I woudn't agree with it. Being untrustworthy can't define how good you make quality post or being neutral doesn't you can't contribute good quality post.

Trust is on a different category and having a trust alone can already be a trademark. Plus this can be very subjective , you can't force anyone to trust you same as you do to them.

Plus currently I found trust system quite complicated in which not everyone can understand.

Edit: We can't simply relate two equal level of system. The ranking system was created having the same level of trust system. Therefore whatever would be your trust score will not affect your ranking system. Unlike merit system in which its main purpose why it was created is to become a requirement for the ranking system.


Plus all the trust dramas that you will see in which you can't really tell whos right. Where are you going to put QS for example on the ranking system if this becomes a requirement? Even tho this user has a lot of issues. We can somehow consider him/her atleast giving some good informations

I guess apart from users Theymos and Satoshi, you will be the first to hit that new rank.

Your Merit pours...

I dunno. I think this will just lead to people trying to farm their feedback to try achieve the rank. I think there should be a new level above Legendary though. There's a big difference now between a new user signing up and eventually achieving legendary and someone who signed up a few years ago and just got it by being here a while. Maybe the activity to get Legendary should be changed so it all has to be earned merit and not airdropped and anyone who doesn't have sufficient merit is demoted to Hero. There's not really any benefits to being a Legendary over Hero anyway other than in name so it won't matter much. That would then at least give the rank some meaning. There's far too many Legendaries about now and there's probably not gonna be many more made naturally so I think there should be some distinction between those who just go lucky.

I've spoke about a new rank before. Fixing Legendary to 960 merit or upping it drastically would still be a good idea:

I don't think the same way and I really hope theymos didn't too. Merit system is doing fine, the shitposters and spammers as well as the good mediocre members (unfortunately) are perished already what more if your suggestion would be implemented? Yeah! The brighter side would be a total eradication of toxic members lurking but at the same time there's a high tendency that most of the members might stop growing (of course, not all of us are as good as the veterans here ;D).

I'm not saying that it wasn't a good idea at all but for me it was not feasible. I will agree more if there will only be a new rank above Legendary.

For now, maybe old generation of Legendary have reason to keep their ranks, but if we look at 10 years later, it will be ridiculous if 10 years after merit system born, they won't earn a single merit and still be a Legendary.
Why only demoted to Hero?
I suggest to have auto-demotion over time.
For example:
4 years after merit system's birthday, if a Legendary won't earn enough 500 merits, account will be demoted to Hero.
6 years after, if a Legendary won't earn enough 250 merits, account will be demoted to Senior Member.
8 years later, a Legendary won't earn enough 100 merits, account will be demoted to Full Member.

I've always said that merit decay should be introduced, maybe not that drastic cut and maybe just based on activity periods as it would be unfair for someone who has been off the board for 8 months to be next to those who have made 2000 bounty posts in that period.

That would make the legendary rank mean something again.
-1 airdrop merit per activity period. Simple, brutal for shitposters, and god for copper membership sales :D.

Back to the trust requirement, although I wouldn't like to see such a requirement for the next rank level I also can't help asking my self, If you don't trade don't leave and receive feedback, why would you want a higher rank? This considering you have already earned 1000+ merits so you're already pretty well known and your opinion is respected even without a new badge.

But it's not going to happen anyway..
 

Trust score as the new requirement to rank up seems too much. Merit is still doing fine. It still keeps spammers and shitposters from ranking up. And Trust is hard to gain here somehow. Just look at the accusations that suddenly pop up. What would be your criteria for giving someone a Trust score? I just can't imagine it happening right now. At least, in merit system, you would know if the post is of good quality and informative enough to deserve merit since we are only talking about the post alone. Maybe another rank after Legendary is more acceptable. But a new requirement? I don't think so.

Trust to be included this this will be little much overrated. Isnt trust for trade purpose, or for some job here done. Merit is received for constructive or funny in topic post if im not mistaken then why would it be necessary to have trust. Isnt trust for members who want to be in DT table. But if this is necessary this could easily be again be manipulated like in the beginning of merit system. Many will try to sell at start or trade for it. Im not that high in rank and dont know if this is good or not but again its no for me to decide only to say my opinion like many of you. But everything new have good and bad sides maybe this will be like this or it will never be implemented at all.

Requiring positive trust to rank up will completely ruin the trust system. People will make tiny irrelevant trades and take out tiny loans they don't need just to build trust. People will leave frivolous ratings for their friends or trade trust between themselves. Some users will inevitably try to buy and sell trust. There would be loads of issues that needed addressing, such as deranking users if their positive trust is removed, or they gain more negative than positive trust.

Merit is for ranking, and trust is for, well, trust. Trying to combine the two would make both systems worse as well as being a total headache.

I also don't see trust needed to rank up, @this time the people who buy and sells on the forum have build a kind of community and knows of each other who's to deal with and when to take precautionary measures before dealing with.... as o_e_l_e_o says and everybody is making tiny trades and giving good trust comments on friends, then the trust system will become unreliable, activity is the main factor in ranking up... only when your really dedicated as a new member you will reach high activity combined with merit to become legendary so even higher will be very tuff as a new member.