Winners, please post the links to your post(s) that you believe to be the most meritorious. If the merit sponsors agree, they will merit that/those post(s) to award you for winning this challenge.

Merit sponsors, please post when you have awarded the winners. If you do not agree with the winners' selections, please use your discretion to choose a post (or multiple posts, if applicable) to award merit to.

---

---

Meritorious Posts of the Week (in no particular order, and purely speculative, based on my opinion):

• Randomly Generated Private Key Outside of a Computer Environment
• Transaction Malleability Simple Explanation?
• How to Create SegWit P2SH Addresses with Electrum: A Beginner's Guide
• Tether as Debt Security. And Tether Rich List
• Let's talk about Privacy
• vlad230's post review service - Jr. Member and up [OPEN]
• UPDATE DASH/BTC price chart speculation
• Meretrix Becoming: An Erotic Bitcoin Novel [NSFW]
• Re: Will it be possible to user bitcoin core without downloading whole blockchain ?

I just got home, and it's 11PM. I'm going to choose the winner in the morning, but I just want to announce that

Round 5 has officially begun (as of 3 hours ago)

I'll also update the spreadsheet in the morning. I am going to critique a few participants' posts tonight, so I'm turning off the spreadsheet visibility until the winner is announced. Please do not be alarmed if you cannot access it tonight.

Thanks for your patience, guys, and please note that this won't be a regular thing.

Happy Easter, everyone, and see you tomorrow morning!

I just sent you 6 fMerits. Enjoy!

The real joke here is that these stats are, in fact, real.

So what was the point of your post, then? You're a shitposter. Your post adds absolutely nothing to this conversation, and you're simply spamming your signature. GTFO.

---

Hey OP, while I don't necessarily agree with what you wrote, or your view on this merit system, I merited your post because you obviously took a lot of time and thought to present your findings, and it was made with the underlying motion to want to help others.

After reading your post, I also wanted to state what @Kakmakr already stated; your ability or potential to earn merits has NOTHING to do with the length of your post. It just has to resonate with someone that feels that your post is meritorious to one extent or the other. Case in point? I received three merits for posting the following:


Obviously, other users agreed with my short two-sentence statement. Why? Because it was true, and it fit the given context of the situation where I presented my opinion.

While I'm here, I want to leave a shameless plug for a challenge that I run, where the main goal of it is not the rewards involved, but rather a way for me to help out willing participants who want to improve their posts. I critique the participants' posts after every weekly round, and provide feedback to them. If anyone reading this is interested, take a look here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3055616.0

Cheers!

I can do this for you at a 8% rate (0.009355BTC @ preev.com +8%). Needless to say I’d only do this if you’re sending first as friends or family from a verified PayPal account. Send me a PM with your bitcoin address, and I’ll send you my PayPal address. Other than that, I’d like to keep the details of this transaction public. Let me know if you accept my terms!

You still have almost a day to post, so all is not lost yet. I hope everything in your personal life is okay, mate. Let me know if you need anything or if I can help out in any way.

Quoted and verified.

Just under 24 hours remain for this round. Good luck to all participants!

Fair warning: I am feeding over 100 people tomorrow for Easter supper at the local food bank, which I am a board member of. There is a slight possibility that the winner of Round 4 will not be announced until the wee hours of Monday morning. Please be patient with me, as real life always comes first, especially when it comes to local underprivileged families.

Round 5 applications are open!
Make sure to fill out your application for Round 5 by clicking here: https://goo.gl/forms/Ae7BYTy0GilcvFyF2 (remember to apply for every week that you'd like to participate). Applications will be accepted until 9PM (GMT -6) on Monday, April 2.

---

We have now made it a full month into this challenge, and I don't anticipate that it will end anytime soon. We have plenty of Bitcoin in the escrow (Escrow Address: 37ZhBrGgw6BSghMQnPi4ixdmRBLxBTAXCf [current balance: ] (view on Blockchain) and plenty of merit sponsors. So keep on keeping on, and thanks to all the participants and supporters of this challenge. You guys are amazing.

What you may not know is that I don't give a shit about a signature campaign. I've only ever been a part of 3 of them since I've joined this forum, and before re-joining ChipMixer's, I took a long pause in not joining any, simply because I don't want to be misconceived as a shitposting spammer. The only reason I re-applied to ChipMixer's sig campaign is because the majority (and by majority, I mean like 90%) of the posts I've seen by participants in this campaign were extremely substantial. I use ChipMixer to anonymize my coins, and I stand by their service. I am using my signature space personally to vouch for a service that I personally use, and I get to earn a few bucks on top of that.

I could care less if I get paid for my posts or not. I don't post for the purpose of getting paid; I would post the exact same way regardless of what I have in my sig space. Why not give my post history a gander and see for yourself, rather than just trying to passive-aggressively insult me? Or was that your attempt at humor?

#epicfail

Stop posting for the sole purpose of earning an income. That's your problem.

He stated what he did because it’s true. 3rd world shitposters are different than 3rd world contributors. Hell, I currently live in a 3rd world country, yet my contributions to the forums are often extremely valid. The major difference between a shitposter and a contributor? A shitposter’s sole purpose here is to earn an income. That is fine, but when it comes in the form of single sentence spam posts that don’t contribute to anything, it’s merely there to count as a “point” on a scorecard. That is not healthy for the forums in the least bit. A contributor will take their time to construct a post, and think carefully about what kind of message they want to relay. They will often think twice about posting, especially if their answer coincides with someone who has already answered the question. They don’t post in megathreads. They don’t care about the sound of their own voice. They do care about the quality of their post and the health of the forums.

I fully stand by The Pharmacist and what he is doing. He is not singling out individual users that he has a personal vendetta against; he is protecting this forum from substanceless accounts that are only here for the sole purpose of filling the forums with unsubstantial posts.

My advice to you would be to prove that you are a contributive member here for the next several months, and then ask the negative taggers to revisit your trust feedback, and at the very least to change it to a neutral rating. It happens here rarely, but you must be able to show that you’re a substantial member of this community. Are you up for the challenge?

It seems to me as if you are confusing trust and merit. They are separate features here, which is why @theymos didn’t make all DT members merit sources or all merit sources Default Trust members. I do make a difference IRL, as well. I am board member of a charity organization that directly helps the community, specifically the lower advantage families in a third world country. We provide a food bank and a soup kitchen, as well as a literacy program and children’s shelter. What I do here on the forums is a mere extension of my desire to help people. By your admission of statement in stating that you don’t believe that the members here who partake in my challenge are deserving of help implies that you believe yourself to be some sort of dictator. You say you’re a proponent of decentrization, yet you want to hold all the power, along with other merit sources, to be able to dictate how merits are sent and received. That’s my issue that I have with you. You’re directly contradicting yourself, and all it tells me is that you are on a power trip. That you believe that your merits are more valuable than anyone else’s merits. That is simply not the case, and I wish you could understand that.

All merits were created equal.

#meritlivesmatter

Oh, and a protocol for merit distribution is already in place, as implemented by @theymos: merits are distributed and then they are redistributed. Given that sMerits are valued at half the points of merits, your duty as a merit source is simply to introduce new merits into the community; not to dictate how and where they should be distributed by other members.

Dude, 2girls... Quit being so aggressive.

I was once red-tagged for some stupid post where I offered to provide a review service in exchange for being paid for my review. I immediately deleted the post, but I was tagged. I sent a message to the DT user who tagged me, and explained my situation in a calm manner, and that I was apologetic and didn't realize I was actually displaying fraudulent behavior until it was too late. After reading my explanation, the DT user changed the negative feedback rating to a neutral one. He had no reason or obligation to do that, but I think because I approached him fairly and calmly, he gave me the benefit of the doubt.

Over the course of several months, I started becoming more active here, making some friends, and calling this my internet home... I've dedicated countless hours to consciously becoming more contributive until finally, I decided to message that DT user and asked him to review my post history so I can prove to him that I was a contributing member here. I then asked him to remove the neutral trust. He did.

I'm only telling you this example because being nice and respectful can go a long way, and that it's at least possible to get a red tag reduced to a neutral one... You haven't displayed any instances of respect in this thread.

Regarding the reason why The Pharmacist didn't leave a negative trust on those trusted members' accounts? Because they've already proven themselves to be trustworthy. There was no need for them to have to defend themselves, as they've built up their trust. You, on the other hand, have not. That's why you're getting ridiculed here; your aggressive behavior is not going to get you anywhere, and you've got to be delusional if you're seriously comparing your situation to yahoo's, blazed's, or omega's...

Just my personal opinion as I keep seeing this thread progress with your responses.

Because coins and tokens are very different things.

Coins are generally products that are designed to store its own value on its own blockchain, while tokens are products that has to rely on another blockchain, such as Ethereum or WAVES.

Dude, you just referenced the topic that you just posted in. What kind of Inception crap is this?!

MIND BLOWN.

Hey @digaran, I'm going to try my best to keep it civil with you to have a healthy discussion. I'm really trying to understand your point of view, because obviously this seems like a huge issue for you. Help me to understand why, please.

First of all, my challenge actually started months ago. It started weeks before the merit system was introduced to the forums. The idea was actually born to eliminate shitposting on the forums, as can be seen in this thread (Originally titled "🔥🔥🔥Signature space, Avatar & Personal Text Available for rent🔥🔥🔥" before OP edited out his original post). Here is my direct quote:


Merit had absolutely no factor into my decision to give up $50 a month to offer to shitposters to keep them from spamming the boards.

When I introduced the current challenge that you see here, I introduced it to reward a lucky user with $25 and one merit. I had no idea if anyone would actually be interested in this, but even if I got one person to join the challenge, and that one person decided to carefully manicure their posts, instead of continuing to post shitty one-liners, then I'd have been okay with it. My challenge was targeted to existing members of the forum who were not eligible for any significant paid signature campaigns, either due to rank restrictions or negative trust ratings. These users' options were to join shitty altcoin signature campaigns; you know the ones where anybody can join, and the companies that pay for the campaigns don't give one rat's ass about the post quality of its participants.

THESE were the users that I wanted to attract with my challenge. Much to my surprise, I started getting entrants not only from Newbies, but also higher ranked members. I never anticipated the success that this challenge would bring.

You have stated in another thread that you believe that I am doing this for my own personal benefit. How do you gather that? I'm putting up over a thousand bucks a year to run this challenge. That's not chump change, by any means, so what personal benefit are you seeing? The personal benefit for me is knowing that my actions directly benefit the betterment of the forums by taking what would have ultimately been a shitposter and providing feedback to make their posts more constructive. The way that the challenge is designed is so that shitposters won't have any interest in continuing with the challenge knowing that they have a slim chance of winning week after week against other members. So why would they bother continuing the challenge to "farm merits" if they are not receiving any to begin with?

I have never once asked for a single merit from anyone. Not once for myself, and not once for sponsors of the challenge. Every single person that has helped sponsor the winners with merit or cash have done so on their own accord. Personally, I would have been fine with giving up $25 and a merit every single week. But it just goes to show that others do believe in the challenge the same way that I do. Has it blown up to become one of the best ways to earn merit on the forums? Absolutely. But not every participant is entitled to the winnings. It's a competition that encourages quality posts. If it ever comes to a point where the quality of the posts doesn't warrant any merits, then I have no problems ending it. But I encourage you to take a look at the past 3 winners and see for yourself. The quality of the posts by the winners are great.

Are there shitposters in the challenge? Of course. But they all know what they're up against. In fact, I have countless PM's sitting in my inbox from participants who have not earned any rewards THANKING me for letting them be a part of this. Many users have personally thanked me for helping their English-speaking skills. So maybe you're right; I do get personal benefit from this, and it's knowing that I've done my part in helping users become more passionate about posting in the forums and contributing to healthy conversations about Bitcoin/crypto for reasons other than posting for the sake of increasing their post counts.

As you can see, I am very passionate about this. I LOVE the merit system. And like so many other users here, I was getting sick and tired of the spam and shitposts that were starting to flood these forums.

You have also made the assumption that I have not applied to become a merit source because the moderators were busy. I don't know where you got this idea from, but the reason I don't want to apply is because I don't care if I am a merit source or not. I earn plenty of merits to be able to sponsor 1 merit per week, which is what I committed to when starting this challenge. I don't need to be a source to be able to fulfill that. If it ever becomes a problem for me to keep up with the merit demands, then I don't have a problem applying to become a source. Otherwise, why try to fix something that isn't broken? I would rather have people that are interested in the position apply for it. I don't want to have to add things on top of my responsibility of checking, scoring, and critiquing posts every week. I don't work well under obligation, so being a source would just make me feel like I have to pass out the forum's merits, rather than wanting to distribute my own. Huge difference.

Going back to your original topic here, you are criticizing users for giving out their merits without being a merit source. I'd like to remind you that merit sources are not the only ones that are allowed to give merits... The whole merit ecosystem depends on them being distributed by users across the board. However they decide to do that should be up to them. Whether it's by silently perusing the multiple subs and finding quality posts, or by inviting users to submit their posts that they deem meritorious... Either way, merits are meant to be distributed, so I think it's fine that users start topics to offer their merits to qualified recipients.

I don't believe that @theymos would have any issues with these types of threads, or he would have created a definitive rule about it by now. In fact, I believe that we are doing exactly what theymos envisioned when implementing the merit system.

I'm curious to see how others will address your concerns. Merits aren't meant to be a centralized reward to be given only by merit sources. It's a way for users to govern themselves. Yes, you will see merit abuse in the beginning. But once the sMerit supply starts to dry up, you'll see less and less abuse, as merits will become harder to come by. I'm already anticipating that will happen, at which time my challenge will more than likely end becoming a cash-only challenge.

For the record, I have given more merits to members outside of my challenge than I have within the challenge, so that invalidates your argument that I am running a "merit farm".

So @digaran, I would love to hear your argument as to why you feel that what I'm doing is not okay. I know you've addressed it before, but given the nature of this thread, I'm willing to give you a civil answer item by item as long as you commit to remaining civil, as well. I'm glad that you started this topic, as it gives me an opportunity to hear valuable feedback from others, as well.

Cheers.

---

You obviously didn't even click through to any of those posts. None of the merits that are in question are "donated". All of the people providing merit are doing so in exchange for QUALITY posts, as defined in the stipulations of their topics.

Can this be applied to existing Adobe accounts, or is it a pre-designated email address? And what is the expiration date of the 1-year subscription? I have a couple of interested parties.

As always when offering services like this, post your payment proof

In addition to showing screenshots of your profitable trades, provide us your bitcoin address that you've used this method with, along with a signed message from that account. Otherwise, asking for half a bitcoin without any form of payment proof is just a fool's trap.

Indeed, you did. Good job!