I haven't, you just can't read. Try going through my post slowly, remembering everything I said. If you still can't understand it, I'll try to write it in simpler language for you.

Then why doesn't theymos remove Lauda from DT by excluding them from his trust list?

There are users set as merit sources that have their merit regenerate each month. The idea is that there will be enough merit sources spreading enough merit for the supply to never run out.

I may collect domain names, it doesn't mean they belong in this section.

Lauda is the highest rank, aTriz is the second highest. Along with this, there is little to no benefit for either to get a higher rank anyway (other than aTriz just being able to say 'Look at me I'm Legendary' - which is admittedly pretty nice).

It's not possible to merit a person, and therefore you have to merit a post that they have made.
An example in my case is my 50 merits to Lutpin. I've known Lutpin for a while and I consider them to be an extremely beneficial member to the forum, and therefore I gave him 50 merit on a post of his.

If you think that Quickseller's negative trust is unjust then you're even dimmer than I thought.

You clearly have some form of mental deficiency if you fail to read a post after being pointed directly to it. I'll leave you to live in your happy little world.

Quickseller ruined his reputation on the forum long before he ever talked about Lauda, TMAN or I. You have little to no idea what you're talking about.

I've explained this to you previously, and you ignored me. Feel free to reply to that whenever you like.

I'm going to ignore the rest of your post, since it is just mindless insults with no actual relevance to me.

The Merit system is intended to be used if you find a post, or the person posting it, constructive and beneficial to the forum. I do agree that this is very general, however whether it is abuse or not does - I think - depend on the people involved.

Providing that the merit system is used as intended, and how the signature campaign was run, that could be a completely legitimate way to use Merit.

For example, if a user is running a signature campaign and would only accept users over a certain threshold of merit then it would be absolutely fine. Since given merit is intended to be used as a way to gauge post quality, only accepting users with a high amount of merit would be a fairly decent way to weed out shitposters.
However, if a user was running a signature campaign and required each participant to give him merit to get paid then it would be wrong and the user would likely be warned/punished for such.

---

This should be fun.

Correct. The issue comes when campaigns aren't done properly, which a significant amount of campaigns on this forum aren't.
If I open a ballpit and the majority of people that use it piss in it, I'm just going to close the ballpit. The 'get rid of signatures' argument is in the same vein.

Which is completely irrelevant on a forum called Bitcointalk. If a community is about something specific, it doesn't matter how much or little popularity that thing has.

I think you're taking what Jet Cash said too literally. From my interpretation he wasn't saying that anything that deviates from Bitcoin is wrong and should be left out, but that the huge amount of useless vapid shit being posted as a result of those abusing campaigns should stop. While Bitcointalk is about Bitcoin primarily, I don't think many would argue that having a section for alts is a particularly bad thing (providing it isn't abused).

You sound like an idiot.

Crestington's merit is now 1,000 because theymos made a change to the system. Because Crestington's activity is within Legendary range, his merit has now been increased to 1,000 to not prevent him from achieving it.

I've done nothing towards you. Before this conversation I didn't even know you existed.

See the above.

Tell you what, do you agree that scamming is a bad thing? I sincerely hope that you do.
What I want you to do, is I want you to find me the rule on that thread that says that a user cannot scam another user. When you find it, feel free to quote or copy it here.

What you will find is that no such rule exists. Now, here comes the tricky part. Does that rule not existing mean that scamming another user is something that you should do? Does it mean that, because that rule isn't on that list, people should ignore the people scamming others?

I don't have any power, nor do I particularly want any. If you want an answer to that question, try the above answer. You should also keep in mind that even though account sales aren't not allowed, they are discouraged, meaning that the forum would rather that you didn't do them.

I fully expect you to ignore everything I just said, and brush it off as just me 'protecting my group'. If you actually try to refute my points though, you'll get some extra brownie points.

Here's the original post Og made before turning on the sass.

---

Each of BTCforJoe's comments are completely valid points from an outsider who hasn't had to deal with you before. Without even trying to refute any of these, you simply state 'Provide evidence'. What a sound and justifiable response to legitimate concerns.

The blockchain can only prove so much. Sending payments doesn't suddenly make the claims in this thread irrelevant. I could show you hundreds of transaction IDs from ponzis and HYIP schemes.

So anyone criticizing your scheme is either nefarious and trolling? No wonder someone so naive lost hundreds of other people's BTC in things like BFL and Pirateat40's obvious ponzi.

Oh my god, some unofficial rules and guidelines said it's okay to do something, that means that it must be a completely fine and legitimate thing to do! Just look at scamming other users, that isn't mentioned as being against the rules, therefore it is completely fine and good for the community to do!

Do you see how stupid your argument is? And it is completely off topic.

---

Giving merit isn't a scam. Giving Lauda merit isn't a scam. Lauda giving merit to someone else isn't a scam.

You heard the man. He is right and you are wrong, provably™! You dare question the mighty OgNasty or anything he is associated with and you will be negative rated for being such a small minded buffoon. Don't you understand? It's all just a load of fun! (providing you don't ask any questions or use logical judgement)

There is, but it's only fun until you have an investment devalue significantly. Come on, dummy.

Not a surprise, and also not the first time this has happened.
The trick to getting around admitting that NastyFans will never get an ROI is to say that he cannot see the future, even though the past has shown it has done nothing but depreciate significantly. Either that or try to measure it in USD, which is irrelevant as investments are made using Bitcoin. When NastyFans only accepts Paypal, that statistic will make sense.

I make a post and it sits for 5+ minutes with no replies. I edit the post and 2 people immediately reply to the older version.

---

I'm not sure about that. The majority of megathreads on this forum are full of nothing but spam. Rewarding people for posting in such won't help anything.

You have to realize that time spent doesn't necessarily correlate with quality. While I am not necessarily saying that your infographic was poor, people may have found it somewhat less helpful than the advice on how to easily open the merit page.

You also have to understand that your post was in the middle of a megathread that is increasing by several pages by the day, and the other post is on the front page of such thread and easy to find.
Nevermind, I misread. In this case though, your post is in the German local section where only a percentage of the forum will even look at. The other post is on the front page of one of the most popular threads in this section, which it's likely a great deal of the forum has visited.