Thank you. 120 is but no Merit? And it is not clear how this position will grow?
People award merit to posts they consider are making a valuable contribution to the forum. Your post history is 100% in bounty threads, so you are here only to take. That means you will not get any merit and will remain a Member. |
|
|
|
USER PROFILE : Kousei23 MERIT SUMMARY : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;u=928416PROOF: http://archive.is/vAm7FMISCELLANEOUS: 31 Merit points for this: What do you think is bitcoin growing good?
I think beause bitcoin is quite good in a sense that many people are tested it in terms of generating some income like earning money and use it for their needs as well as wants. And I think bitcoin became popular because of the idea that bitcoin can change our lives which is I think right but of course it always depends on a person wether he work hard to gain or not. Just like everybod says "No Pain, No Gain". Received in the last 120 days Today at 02:02:07 PM: 24 from loading... for Re: What is the reason popularity of bitcoin ? Today at 02:01:08 PM: 1 from plucking23 for Re: What is the reason popularity of bitcoin ? Today at 01:59:40 PM: 5 from Sanugarid for Re: What is the reason popularity of bitcoin ? March 13, 2018, 04:00:27 PM: 28 from alexsandria for Re: Facebook bans ads for cryptocurrencies March 13, 2018, 03:56:59 PM: 27 from Ashong Salonga for Re: Bitcoin is recovering 86 Merit received for 3 shitposts in 2 days. Kousei23 now reciprocating to plucking23 with 50 Merit for https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2438827.msg27255063#msg27255063http://archive.is/iDESG |
|
|
|
The strategy is not meant to game the system and to get extra interest. I just want to reduce the risk of storing large amounts of money, for long periods on a site with proprietary code and unidentified owners.
Example : Take 15 bitcoins and deposit it for a day or two. Get the interest and withdraw it. The interest earned will cover the interest you might have received for weeks, from the deposit of a smaller amount.
Hope you see my plan. ^smile^
I see what you are getting at. Risk a large sum for a short period Vs. risk a small sum for a long period to gain the same return. The problem is that you cannot predict what tx fees will be in a few days time whereas with a longer term investment you can wait it out until the next time fees fall. |
|
|
|
BPIP parses the modlog and keeps track on who has been autobanned and nuked, as well as how many threads/replies have been deleted. example: http://dev.martinlawrence.ca/bpip/profile.aspx?p=Ido_LiberdyI just have the most recent info in there, but a friend is sending me some historical data I hope to populate this week. Thanks for this that is very useful. I think I found a small bug with usernames starting with numbers. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=301817 name 666#666 I can search the UID but get this error when trying to view the user. Server Error in '/' Application. Incorrect syntax near '='. |
|
|
|
EDIT: Asking for MERITS is also not fair/ is against rule?
That'll get you a nice negative trust red badge to wear as it is as obnoxious as using oversized fonts. |
|
|
|
Hero Member 480 activity and 500 Merits - Here maybe I have Hero Member Rank
So it means i need to have/gain 500 merits to get ranked up?
That's what it means. Just like me, you were given a head start with 250 as a Sr. Member at the time, so we only need to earn another 250 to deserve the Hero rank. |
|
|
|
He also mentions that, if this trend is continued, the Merit Sources are too few (although they were recently upped). My point here is, that even the current rate of distribution is too low and even if there are more Sources it wouldn't increase (what I think would be necessary) drastically but only level out. Right now, Merit is a scarce commodity that gets rarer and rarer.
I just wanted to challenge that assumption. theymos has been very clear that it is going to be like a fiat currency with QE on steroids. There is a constant supply so that it will not be a scarce commodity and he's monitoring the situation and will keep adding more until he's happy there is enough. In other words, I'm assuming the trend will not continue. Even if you post valuable content, which is a highly subjective matter, you don't rank up in the same time you would have in the past (even without spamming), because of this decline of available Merit/sMerit and therefore the increase in value.
I don't honestly think it will hold the people who are here for the right reasons back. Looking at LoyceV's first set of data https://pastebin.com/01evJ1jN posted 6th of March (41 days after Merit started) there were 397 accounts with 41 or more Merit. That's probably more than the number of genuine Bitcoin enthusiasts here. I want to keep an eye on that number to see how things progress. |
|
|
|
Mate, you have good ideas and I like your participation in the forums but the "best" example of the "partial" inefficiency of your idea is Deeponion... I will let you enjoy hurting your eyes with ridiculous smerit given to newbies to get 10 smerit at any cost. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;u=1038794I would say, I support your idea but further actions are required... Thanks. I know it is easy to get frustrated with Merit abuse, just look at this fella https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2896910.msg32299023#msg32299023 and it seems that DT are too busy arguing amongst themselves to bother tagging all the cases that have been found. But... It is only a temporary situation, the sMerit will run out. That's why I believe putting in a system like this that requires an ongoing merit threshold or your signature is hidden until you get it will be more effective than trying to catch them all in the long run. |
|
|
|
No offense intended but
Whatever, think what you want but I gave some good advice about trading there and you're welcome to learn from it or ignore it. The market is in a consolidation which means that there are traders in long positions and traders in short positions and when it looks like it is going to break out one side will panic. That is what will decide the direction we go next. Go back and read what I said again. All moves come to an end due to profit taking and that induces others to chase. Oh, and professional traders are not all multi-millionaires. It's a tough job and most of grind out a living. What the article actually says: Analysts like WhalePanda have attributed to the recent fall to....
Hmmm... |
|
|
|
I was thinking about something similar and I tend to agree with your suggestion.
And I more concerned about Jr. Members than high ranked users. Now many bounties are still accepting Jr. Members, despite that they can't wear clickable signatures. So, they don't even need to get Merit if they want to earn from bounty campaigns by shitposting. Offcourse, they will earn less than high ranked users, but it doesn't really matter. Maybe they will never earn any single Merit, but they don't care much about it as long as they earning money on bitcointalk. Additional to what you said,
Thanks, yes that is what is concerning me about the Jr. Members. If they earn 1/10th as much they'll just make 10x as many accounts. I think that even basic signatures should be disabled if user haven't earned any Merits.
That is exactly what I envisaged. No merit in the last 60 days = signature hidden. So nobody would have a signature until receiving their first merit. |
|
|
|
As I read some rules of the forum, I see this merit system has a big impact on reducing spam, but im not agree with this suggestion because I think it is easy for them to get 1 merit especially those account has sMerit stock on them so they can trade some merit points to other people that you call shitposters, and the second way is to create new account and then give 2 merit and get back the 1 merit, I assume those spammers and farmers not only have 1 high rank accounts, the effect of the system you are proposing will cause create more dummy account and they can level up their dummys until member rank. Sorry for my bad english.
Your English is fine but you should have read the thread as I've already answered this. That is why it is an ongoing requirement, they will soon run out of Merit to pass around. |
|
|
|
USER PROFILE : Kousei23 MERIT SUMMARY : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;u=928416PROOF: http://archive.is/vAm7FMISCELLANEOUS: 31 Merit points for this: What do you think is bitcoin growing good?
I think beause bitcoin is quite good in a sense that many people are tested it in terms of generating some income like earning money and use it for their needs as well as wants. And I think bitcoin became popular because of the idea that bitcoin can change our lives which is I think right but of course it always depends on a person wether he work hard to gain or not. Just like everybod says "No Pain, No Gain". Received in the last 120 days Today at 02:02:07 PM: 24 from loading... for Re: What is the reason popularity of bitcoin ? Today at 02:01:08 PM: 1 from plucking23 for Re: What is the reason popularity of bitcoin ? Today at 01:59:40 PM: 5 from Sanugarid for Re: What is the reason popularity of bitcoin ? March 13, 2018, 04:00:27 PM: 28 from alexsandria for Re: Facebook bans ads for cryptocurrencies March 13, 2018, 03:56:59 PM: 27 from Ashong Salonga for Re: Bitcoin is recovering 86 Merit received for 3 shitposts in 2 days.
|
|
|
|
There are a lot of cases where innocent people would be penalized under the proposed system. People who don't post that often, those who go on a break from the forum, people who post in sections where merit sources are still thin, etc would all have a much higher risk of unfairly having their signatures removed. The last thing I'd like to see is decent occasional posters begging for merit or posting when they don't want to just so they can keep their signature.
I do understand your point. I did try and make the requirement as minimal as possible for this reason. One Merit in the last two months doesn't really require being that active. Also, it is only tempory as the signature is only hidden until they do get a merit point. I think the better option is to just let the account farmers continue to get frustrated, and the moderators will find them eventually.
Let's hope so.
Is there any chance for all managers to gather and discuss a standard of merit requirement for the campaign they handle? In my opinion this is an interesting to do because managers can be served as spammer controller and this would be a great addition to the SMAS.
The problem is that in a lot of the altcoin/ico bounties the managers don't give a shit and just want to get as many page impressions as possible regardless. |
|
|
|
Please quote changing bitcoin address below. Old 1AhT39Azr3n6ViEED8T2Hqw4bnpchJ7heg I want to change BTC address from 1AhT39Azr3n6ViEED8T2Hqw4bnpchJ7heg to xvLgJCiLhMbNvPCx35CmciPdZY7DzzaQh8. Publicjud. Bitcointalk. 14.03.2018 H+1EBSk6LWkp6RLQ6+SZKPzF93ZROg1HNg2Y0NDDsfMUDMGDhs8Cq4bJtm+y8ciLnqvS8M6SiTtBwm5n3rZRGeE= New Signature: xvLgJCiLhMbNvPCx35CmciPdZY7DzzaQh8 I want to change BTC address from 1AhT39Azr3n6ViEED8T2Hqw4bnpchJ7heg to xvLgJCiLhMbNvPCx35CmciPdZY7DzzaQh8. Publicjud. Bitcointalk. 14.03.2018 H11/ygBsH8bgeJ30+Q2dvAvNpsjjEO0mgHyDIlM2YPPYcQ4UaBxLaxdy7RCIEXrRQBHc1oTju/9+RUkmT3AvmZQ= Old signature: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=996318.msg21755899#msg21755899Quoted and 1st message verified. The second message is not a valid Bitcoin address. |
|
|
|
I need to hurry to get "jr member" state.
Beside post more non scam msg, any advice?
You can't gain more than 14 activity in a period of 14 days so slow down, you can't get there any faster. |
|
|
|
I think disable sig for all is much easier and fair solution,
It is definitely easier but alas less fair. The forum allows its members to directly benefit from providing content by allowing them advertising space in return. You are suggesting that everyone should be punished because of the actions of some. changing this and that probably can introduce bugs into the system and probably can lead to unknown catastrophic vulnerability.
You should put that crack pipe down. |
|
|
|
I wonder why I did not won any lottery yet, and most amzaginly I am not aware or known personally who wins it , lol
How many tickets did you have and what was the chance of you winning? If you do that sum you will stop wondering. I'm not amazed that you didn't spend the time to search the forum to find the lottery winners that already came forward. |
|
|
|
Eventually the account farmers will run out of merits to tip themselves. Hilariousandco has nailed a few accounts already for merit abuse, as has Lauda I believe. This is when we can successfully implement rules for campaigns(or theymos cam implement them).
Something like users must earn 5 merits a months for their account to display a signature if being done by theymos or managers can make a user earn 1 merit per week to stay in a campaign.
The problem is still gonna be the same managers whom accept anyone and everyone. If all aren't on board it will fail. Kinda why I feel theymos should implement the restrictions.
Making rules for campaigns to follow means that someone has to police them so my suggestion pretty much amounts to the same thing but automated. As to the numbers, I suggested 1 Merit / 2 months, but really if it's 5 Merit / Month or whatever, that's just detail that needs to be finessed.
I like the basis of the idear, however i do think there are a couple high-ranking members that post only very seldomly... If they have only made 1 or 2 posts since the merit system was introduced, they risk losing their sigspace if this system were to be automated. Granted, those members aren't in a sigcampaign to begin with, but they do use their sigspace to promote threads, promote their own businesses, insert funny quotes, show the address of their tipjar,...
I guess it might be better if mods had the power to disable signatures for everybody who received less than 1 merit in the last month... That way the mod could use his own judgement wether or not the person in question is a spammer, or just a very low volume poster that just didn't receive any merits because of their low post frequency.
Just my personal opinion tough...
There is inevitably a little collateral damage as you suggest. My thinking is that a signature is a reward for providing content for the forum, so if you no longer provide content why should you continue to be rewarded in perpetuity?
I don't think that it would solve the problem. The spammers would just send themselves (or buy) one merit point every two months.
Maybe if somebody received a large amount of demerits they could have their signature rights revoked, or maybe an increased cooldown between posts.
They'll soon run out of sMerit. Demerit is open to hundreds of times the level of abuse. |
|
|
|
There is currently no such thing as a "demerit". I'm hoping that the positive merits alone will be fine. I could add demerits pretty easily later on if necessary, though.
Maybe it's time for demerits to be implemented. I think that if a demerit subtracted merit from the sender too, or cost twice as much sMerit it would minimize abuse. I think that is a terrible idea as it will just be used to demerit posts that people disagree with and as part of personal vendettas. I suggested an alternative that I don't think has these disadvantages. Do you have any comment on it? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
