Bitcoin Forum

While I am not in danger of running out of sMerits any time soon, I am burning merits at a very fast rate and my current allocation is not replenishing fast enough to cover for it.

I won't ever claim to be the most informed person when it comes to merits...  I believe theymos had put in place a while ago some sort of system that takes how many sMerits you send and increases it by an amount for your next reload.  Someone else surely knows better, but it was something like every couple of months it takes how many sMerits you've sent and increases it by x%.  So my advice to you is if you want more sMerits, send all that you have every chance you get.  That's why you see the trust network obsessed doling out huge amounts of merit all the time.  It isn't because they like doing it, it's because that's the best tool they have to gain more influence over the trust network.

There are more active people on this forum. It will be good if theymos increase the merit allocation and also add more merit sources. But I can see that you are sending 14 merits each now and that may make your merit allocation to be not enough again. I will advice you to reduce the merit that you are sending so that you will have more posts to send merits to.

If you check well, you will notice that NotATether is running a challenge of 14 days node running for 14 merits and that is why you see the 14 merits he gave recently. NotATether is not a random user who doesn't know how to issue merits. If he drops larger number of merits in a particular posts, check well, the post is worth it.

Theymos, while you're at it increasing merit allocations, it will be nice if you get along to adding new merit sources. My application is already a couple of years old, along with the applications of some other members.

It will be a good halving gift for the fam.

Hmmm, pretty good job, mate!
 
You brought up a very good topic. I really appreciate your work. 
 
Yes, Theymos, you should increase the merit allocation more. Because as we see, day by day, new members are increasing. It means that new people are registering on this superb forum for the understanding of Bitcoin, so if the words are understood properly, they need application based on good opposition/knowledge and that need can be fulfilled only by merit. 
 
So there is a dire need to increase the allocation of merit sources or increase the number of merit sources. Theymos. 
 
On the same topic, I will also discuss a little about my Pakistan local thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=232519.0). Our thread Pakistan is a thread of a good and active user in which the number of new members is increasing day by day, and the problem is that we have only one merit Source except @Shahzadafzal (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1634314), and merit is required in the community. So if @NotATether's words are followed that Merit allocation should be increased then it will be better and if it is not possible then please give us another merit source that will benefit the members of our community.

So one merit source is not enough for all of us. So give us one another. The rest of us can see the previous month's overview of the Pakistan thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5231446.msg63864491#msg63864491), which is better than many other boards.
 
 Thanks!

Perhaps if you stopped gifting the same users (https://loyce.club/Merit/history/2739424.html) [BPIP (https://bpip.org/smerit.aspx?from=NotATether)] HUNDREDS of merits, then you might just have enough merits to gift those who deserve them.

---

---

... and your appear to be using blackmail in your trust feedbacks of others:

It's not blackmail but suggestions to follow so that they can get rid of the negative feedback and the victim receive aids.

The "victim" being himself.  (there's no reference link either)

Simultaneously, he created a flag, so even if he (sly wink) removes the negative trust feedback (which we all know he won't) the flag is there regardless of whether or not anyone supports it.

@Ognasty: Interesting. If you come across that post again, would you be able to link it here?

I've always thought that the sMerit caps were manually specified.


1. I never said I was out of merits. Read the OP again.
2. If you are talking about the challenge thread then perhaps do me a favor and make me aware of it over there?



Why are you bringing up trust feedback in a merit thread? There is no reason for you to believe that any of those feedbacks aren't valid.

This challenge is really helpful to the Bitcoin Network and the 14 merits really worth it, actually NotATether really know how to spend his Merits and also how to use it to motivate members of the forum to do something that would be helpful to the Bitcoin Network don't forget about his previous thread like the free campaign : Bitcoin Clean up  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5415550.msg61039866#msg61039866)
I support Theymos to increase his


To be frank while the global board may not be in need of a new merit source, the Local board really needs a new merit source. The Nigeria local board has been affected by this with our merit source there having an allocation of sMerit less than 120 and we are growing well and many can testify about this base on the LB Monthly chart  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5231446.0), Thank God for merit sources like hugeblack, fillippone and 1miau who has been supporting us there though 1miau has not been active for quite sometime now
While we have two members from our LB who has requested for merit source, here is one of them https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5360200.msg57945007#msg57945007, since Charles-Tim has been the top poster in our LB for months now

You are not getting me correctly. I saw NotATether's merit history and I know when he started that thread. I also know that he is sending 14 merits to the posts if people that posted what he wanted on the thread. But what I am saying is that instead of sending 14 merits, if he has little merit to send, he can reduce it so that he can send merit to more posts. Also I did not say NotATether is sending merits to poor posts but saying he can reduce the merits. He can reduce it from 14 to 10 or lesser.

Every good idea ends up being misused. It's a good initiative to reward everyone who starts a node, but I wouldn't be surprised if it starts to be used for farming accounts. Maybe it's time to pause this contest, so that it continues at some point, when new members arrive.

I count 57 of those transactions since half way January. I followed that topic (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5480200.0) for a while, and got the impression most users only join to earn Merit. It would have been much better if they actually care about running Bitcoin Core, but I highly doubt it. I didn't read all recent posts, but I haven't seen a single user who actually used Bitcoin Core as a wallet instead of only completing the block download.
One of the reasons I followed that topic, was because I hoped I could dump some Merit there. But it didn't feel right. I'd say lower the Merit amounts there, most of the posts aren't worth reading.

That is a good point ;)
Maybe OP should add that in his updated future rules, but even than you can't force anyone to care about something he doesn't want to care about.
I still think that his initiative is a step in a right direction, learning something new is never a bad thing.

I also support for this, for the existing merits sources, there need to be additional allocation for their monthly budgets, especially for those that already have requested for more top up on this, there is no doubt we have been having shortage in the circulation of merits due to the decreasing nature of the source and the ones being active really needs to be added more on their monthly allocation in other for them to be able to discharge the required quantity on posts deserving for such.

If I am in contest that the reward is 14 merits and when it got to my turn, the reward is reduced. I will not feel great.

In every given contest, participants must find a loophole to extort or cheat. When I read that thread, I knew it's something kinda savvy, I concluded that it will be difficult to manipulate. Maybe I was wrong.

It's kinda hard to enforce a rule to make people receive and send a transaction inside Bitcoin Core. Let's say everyone sent some bitcoins to their own wallets. But then those transactions will be in the newest block so their nodes would have to sync anyway before they could spend it.

And on top of that there is no way to prove which transaction belongs to who, without using signed messages. But I am not sure if the signmessage RPC supports the default bech32 addresses. And I really don't want to encourage people to use legacy addresses for this.

But it's doable - Royse777 enforced it during the Mixin Safe review campaign so I definitely know that it's possible, and the transactions might even lead to busting of account farms, but the workload would be too much for me to process at the moment.

Although I do agree with the above guy that reducing the award would be wrong, for now at least.

I guess that's the concept of it all, using merit as an incentive to get users to do something that contributes to them and the community. Many of those users would have gained knowledge about running a node which they never would have bothered to get before. I also saw some inquiry post on some other board from a user asking for more clarity, that's what the concept ains to do.
There's no way to actually quantify "care."

If they already have wallets they are using that works fine and have no need for a extra wallet at this time how possible would it be to start using a different wallet? That is also not the criteria for caring about bitcoin core. There are other good wallets out there that one can use.

I will say we shouldn't be over critical of a contest, or try to suggest what others do with their smerits.

Yeh you can - don't give them merits on what appears to be a whim or need to be seen to be *cough* generously handing out merits.

It would be a nice addition to do after syncing the node.

You're currently asking for screenshots, which can just as easily be faked or bought.

This made me realize another "problem": I bet many of the users who took your 14 day node challenge have never even used Bitcoin from their own wallet. That could be another challenge for Newbies, instead of using centralized exchanges to store Bitcoin. But withdrawal fees are ridiculous for many exchanges.

I was considering my own sMerits ;) It still feels like a burden to get rid of them.

I don't know about that blackmail accusation, but as far as the first statement of yours goes I see a lot of merits being given to Legendary members who obviously don't need them to rank up--and I'm going by BPIP data.  While it's true that anyone is free to give merits to anybody else, isn't one of the main points of having merit sources to have them help lower-ranking members to rank up?  I'm not saying NotATether isn't doing that at all, nor do I have a problem with him, and I'm certainly guilty of meriting Legendary members, but circulating a big portion of your sMerits amongst Legendaries doesn't really keep the merit machine in motion the way it was intended (IMO).

OP, take that constructive criticism in the respectful manner in which it was given. 

Hey Theymos!  Care to drop in and perhaps give us pissants some guidance, thoughts, or anything else regarding the future of the merit system?  Curious minds want to know!

Perhaps an option to keep away some malicious users would be to have a minimum requirement to participate in the challenge... a minimum of activity or a minimum of merits...


I can't say for others, but I participated in this challenge a few weeks ago and I keep my full node working to this day...

here are 39 merits

You complain (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5358182.msg57878152#msg57878152) about how the merit distribution is unfair and that Legendary members are giving merits to each other (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5335045.msg56937789#msg56937789). Why are you bothered by me sending merits to lots of newbies? Actually you should be glad the merit distribution is tilting a little towards the other end.


Yeah that's true. But I actually accept either screenshots or bitcoin-cli output, since most of these people don't know how to use a terminal.

Although at the end of the day, newbies should not be using exchanges. However, even if I wanted to run a campaign to get those people with large balances - who should have no issues with fees - I don't have enough sMerit to keep both running on a sustainable basis. (Not to mention committing the inadvertent sin of revealing other people's bitcoin holdings. I don't want to imagine what might happen if some crooks used that data for extortion.)


According to https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/ddmrddmr/viz/BitcointalkMeritDashboard/PersonalSummary, I have only sent 35% of my sMerit to (now) Legendaries. It will most likely be a little less once last week's data is processed. (Also I always try to refrain from sending merit to people who don't need it, even if their post is good.)


Thank you very much!

I think this could be a reason to ask for a larger sMerit quota. If you're already sending less to posts that deserve it, those high ranking users can't trickle it down either.

Good point.

I think that this part of Merit system works really well. 2 merits = 1 sMerit. Yes, it's hard to give merits regularly but at the same time, I think that it motivates people to earn more merits to send more. If we easily give sMerits to people, then they put less work to fill their sMerit quota.

Overall, I think that it will be good if theymos programs Merit system in a way that if someone doesn't spend sMerits on users, they'll get the equivalent merits removed from their profile. This approach should motivate people to be more active in giving away merits. The more active people will be (to genuinely merit those who deserve it), the more sMerit quota will everyone have.

i cant speak for other sources but personally i couldnt care less and im guessing some others feel the same.

merit and rank only matters for people who want to earn money in sig campaigns and such. the rest of us? not so much.

Perhaps, instead of increasing sMerit limits, you should distribute it more selectively and economically among users? I would like to believe that speed doesn't affect the quality of your distribution.

The solution is obvious: if something is being spent too quickly, then slow down the pace (using it). Otherwise you will have to become a x2 (double) merit source?

You should have called the topic [CHALLENGE] Run A Bitcoin Node: 14 Days To 14 Merits (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5480200.msg63432449#msg63432449) differently, otherwise sending 14 merits will exhaust your limits.

If a merit source demands for more allocation of his monthly smerits, it shows that such user has been fully engaged with the use of the task ahead and needs more to be able to perform better, which i also support the addition of his merits allocation, if not for anything, but the fact that he has been engaging members to learn how to do what will be beneficial to them with the use of bitcoin by running a node, its not about the reward for merits but the profits running a full node challenge will give on every user, i hope Theymos finds this as important and increase base on request.