Bitcoin Forum

I think the intention of Merit system is good. But unfortunately I do feel that the idea to award a merit count equal to the minimum required for the respective rank to all members was probably not the right decision.

Why? Because, according to me, Merit count on any profile should reflect the quality of the posts made by that person, but actually it is NOT, here its also a function of account longevity.

Meaning of Merit as per legitimate sources;

"the quality of being particularly good or worthy, especially so as to deserve praise or reward."

The current rule is basically assuming that all members have created "meritful" posts till now. I understand there are plenty of senior members (especially active in this Meta) who deserve every single merit they have but there could have been another method to award Merits retrospectively.

Some Bonus for early Adopters :) :) :)
Personally I do not think it is wrong but this system will kill medicore. High quality will be highly benefited and shit will remain the shit.

No. Stop posting stupid suggestions.

Would appreciate if you could elaborate what you mean by "stupid" suggestions. FYI, its an observation & I thought this was an open forum.

It might not be a perfect system, but it will work in combating spam. Over time, the number of accounts with merits which were air-dropped will decrease and there will be a steady state. You might feel that old timers have an advantage, but that is true in all walks of life.


That is the idea.  :)

Look, I don't have an issue with this idea. Rank upgrades should be "earned" and Merits should play a major role in that. My only disagreement is with regards to fact that all members were given an initial merit equal corresponding to their grade. The rule is basically assuming that all members have created "meritful" posts till now.

I wouldn't be against everyone starting from zero but all that would happen if that happened would be older, more popular members would get merits faster than lower ranls then people will be crying about that like they already are even though those members don't even 'need' merit points in the first place. Instead of people complaining about how unfair it is get making quality posts - which people should be doing anyway - and there will be nothing to complain about.

Personally I agree with the OP. I've suggested before that all "grandfathered" members should have their free merit expire after a year or two. This will give them ample opportunity to earn that merit fairly. There's a lot of Hero/Legendary accounts that have terrible post quality that have effectively bypassed the merit system. I fear they'll also be worth a lot in the account buying/selling black market.

Not all legendary members are equals, in term of posting, learning, or even popularity. So it is their fault if they are legendary but still didn't achieve that skills. I guess they are only legendary just because they are signature spammer. And I guess popularity is the key on this. If they re popular enough, I guess it is because they already done something for this forum.

1 question for OP, if all legendary starts from 0, who will help to give you all merit points besides sources?
Making all member to have 0 merit will only make you rank up even slower because all legendary will only give merits to legendary members because they re the most likely to make a high quality and agree-able posts.

That's a big question raised...  But I think the most logical way should have been to credit everyone  (with an account older than 3 month)  5 smerit per month. So there won't be any descrepencies between old accounts and new accounts.  And that smerits are burning each 3 months or so. So all the guys who went to hhigher rank before and actually are not merting their merit will finally get back to lower rank and newbies which are posting good materil can reach higher ranks more easily.

But that's just my thoughts, anyway it will probably be like this for months or years

If you started everybody at zero, then you would need to go through every post made by every member to determine if they were merit worthy. That would probably be the fairest system, but it is  monumental task, and who would be prepared to devote their life to it. The current system is probably a reasonable compromise, but it needs a bit of tuning. One thing would be to reduce the post award cap to one or two merit points. Giving 50 merits to a low grade spam post is a slap in the face for members who try to improve the forum with decent posts. Making sig programme mangers merit faucets is also a bad idea in my opinion - it can lead them into temptation.

Most of them used the general term like 'stupid suggestions', 'shit post', 'junk idea' where they don't leave a clue why your post, idea and suggestions become one of this!, I think you need also to uplift others morale to improve themselves, and you can't do that if you are using some unnecessary lines or words.

1) because you are a newbie with no rep
2) 95% of newbie posts about merit are moaning posts
3) the system is here and running, there is no roll back
4) there has been about a million posts like this and it's boring
5) it's an attempt at merit farming and it will not work

That enough reasons ??

Making a cap on how much merit can be given to someone's post is a good suggestion, but it is like a two sided sword for the community. While the suggestion is good for the distribution of merit points, it will discourage other people who wants to make a high quality posts with interesting way like infographic etc (we ve seen infographic now, maybe later someone can level up the game by using GIF or video) in the future. And later, people will not do extraordinary things to get merits, just posting good enough will give their merits, because merit point amount will be increased in the circulatory of this system in the future. So for me, making a cap is good, but not 1-2 merit points per post, maybe about 15-20 points per post.

I do not know why members here called it a stupid suggestion. This should have been applied in some form:

1) Adding another rank above legendary.

2) Requiring all ranks to earn "n" number of merits per 3 months or so or they loose current level.

May be this is in the mind of admin already.

So if a newbie talk about that he tries to farm ??

Use common sense. Some people have spent years building themselves (and even donated Bitcoin); and by years I mean people that joined even before me (< 2013). They were already pretty pissed with theymoses incompetence as is, and damaging their accounts would make the resentment towards him even worse than it currently is. Just because you newbies can't act like decent human beings, that doesn't mean that everyone should suffer the consequences.

Some ideas are so inherently bad, and backwards, that discussing why they are bad in depth is just a waste of time.

I wasn't suggesting that there should be a merit cap on a post, but that the cap should be imposed on the giver for that post. That way a good post can receive a load of merits, but only if many members consider it to be a good post. Apologies if I wasn't clear in my post.

But why?? Also Lauda you are not English so you should be a shitposter by default.. but surprisingly you aren't.. your English is better than mine. All these moaning fucks need to embrace the change and try to learn English to the level you are at

I agree with you.
Merit system sucks also for this reason.
We have a lot of botters/spammer that now got too many sMerits to give away.

Heh, thanks. All it takes is dedication and learning. English is so easy to pick up as it's used in pretty much every online activity (games, videos, various discussion channels, etc.).

That is not the case; the system is decent. Their sMerit will subside soon and they will be earning next to none. Additionally, it is somewhat easy to spot them giving merit to their alts.