That is only a tempory issue. They are fast running out of the distributed sMerit to abuse and it is clearly observable that there is very little still happening.


It is not a calculation. It is fact that alt accounts are getting caught and tagged red all the time. Before the merit system, they would just be easily replaced by farming more accounts. Now it is very difficult for them to do that.


theymos has always held the attitude that the people that provide the content to the forum should be able to benefit financially from doing so if they wish. That libertarian attitude has been exploited by spammers, especially those paying with worthless pre-mine tokens. The Merit system is an excellent way to deal with that and it is after only 1.5 months already starting to have a positive effect. Give it 6 months and I think you'll see much more.

I said 'past its peak' which would be the same thing.

They have partially implemented Segwit already. All withdrawals are being paid with Segwit transactions. Hopefully, it will not be too long before they start using Segwit deposit addresses as well.

What other problem do you think came out of this solution?


By making it impossible for account farmers to rank up the merit system has cut off the influx of spammers. That is getting to the root cause of the problem.

That just makes it harder to enforce. Who is going to go through all the campaigns and check every account? I just suggested a way it could be automated to make it easier.


Everyone was very aware of it as it has been going on an industrial scale for a very long time. They've been getting caught and tagged for a very long time as well, but until the merit system that was only a minor inconvenience to them as they just farmed more accounts to replace them.


They are not exactly the smartest people so it was fairly easy to anticipate that a lot them would not be able to resist temptation and make themselves easy to spot.

Spam has been reduced by cutting off the flow of new spammers into the system and catching some of the alt accounts and getting them painted red. There's a very simple way to remove the rest but it will not be very popular with a lot of people. Make a change to the forum so that signatures and avatars of anyone that has not earned at least 1 merit in the last 3 months are automatically hidden. That will force all the campaign managers to make earning merit mandatory.

The answer to your question can be found 4 post above:


Have a look in that thread and ask programming related questions there.

There is more to it than that. There has been a reduction in spam from account farmers as they slowly realise that the accounts have no value if they can't get merit to rank them up. Spammers that already have high ranking accounts need to be dealt with in other ways in addition to the merit system. It hasn't failed, it is slowly starting to work by stopping the influx of new spammers.


People that deserve to rank up have no problem getting merit at a faster pace than an average of 1 a day so they will rank up exactly as before. Have a look at the top 50 and see how much they got in the last 30 days:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;stats=topusers


It probably was the point they were trying to make but it is incorrect. It froze the accounts that don't deserve to rank up and has reduced spam to some extent already and will do even more so over time.


This is a terrible idea as it would just be abused by people demeriting things they disagree with.


The other way to deal with that is to increase the supply of merit. That is what theymos has just done by adding another 20 merit sources.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;stats=sources

It means that it is not permitted to put a referral code anywhere in a post so they are effectively banned already. The exception to this is your signature where you are free to advertise a referral link if you want. Low value posts are also banned under rule 1 of Unofficial list of (official) Bitcointalk.org rules, guidelines, FAQ.

I don't think that is the reason the US uses auctions for seized coins. Ignoring Bitcoin for a moment the reason that assets are sold off by auction in bankruptcy and/or law enforcement confiscations is to guarantee a sale and that usually results in lower than market prices, especially when taking into consideration auctioneer fees. Using exchanges and/or OTC services isn't an option for many asset classes but when it is available it will generally result in better prices and lower fees than using an auction.

---

Sure, no doubt he got lucky, but that makes me think that the price having gone past its peak and starting to decline spurred him into action as opposed to his selling causing the peak.

Yes, you can, it works for any rank. You get the option as to whether you want to 'wear' the rank of copper or not after purchasing it. As you already noted there's not really much benefit to a Sr. Member but some people just do it as an alternative to making a donation to the forum.

I get the impression that the initial allocation of merits is pretty well all spent at this time. Also another increase in sources, 20 new sources added.

Edit3: Sadly you're wasting your time posting here. Read up a few posts.

Yup, you don't understand. Spend some time reading the thousands of posts about it and you might have a chance of understanding. In general, just try to read and understand more, then you might have something to say that someone with merit to give thinks is worth merit.

I'm still waiting to get a bit more information on this. He said he sold via exchanges but, for example, Bitfinex offers OTC services for large trades. He may well have used that and/or icebergs we really don't know. Most of the analysis I've seen claiming to identify drops caused by his dumping would have resulted in a much higher average price than the 10k he actually got. I'm taking a lot of what has been published about this with a pinch of salt.

What I am trying to say is that people that use the forum for its intended purpose "A meeting or medium where ideas and views on a particular issue can be exchanged." will get the required merit. There is no false equivalence because you're the one ranting on about quality, not me.


That's a very short term issue, most of the airdrop sMerit has already been abused and that problem has all but disappeared.


It's certainly working. Spammers going to spam. The spam megathreads still get poinless posts tacked on the end of them for signature payment but these guys will never rank up.


I'm not misleading anyone. I was giving myself as an example to prove the person I originally replied to wrong. They stated it was impossible to rank up and I am proof that is not the case. If someone uses the forum in the way I do, mainly to read and learn and then get involved in debates, merit will be less of an obstacle to ranking up than activity is.

Just to show I'm not by any means special here's another example. Full member with 118 earned merit. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1010454

---

Edit. As you back to back posted here's the reply to your second post.


Where? You still don't get it. You can't do statistical analysis of the context of the conversation a post is in.


I'm not being defensive, you just unwittingly pointed out a great example of what I'm trying to explain.

What data? Can you point me to a statistical analysis of merits given in a person to person conversation versus those that are not?

It really depends what you define as 'quality'. "talking to people about issues related to Bitcoin" is quality to me. It has nothing to do with making big long fancy posts. The fact you judged my 30 merit post on the grounds that it was only a few lines long rather than reading the conversation it was part of shows me you just don't get it and I'm wasting my time trying to explain it to you.

You should have read that post and looked at the thread it is in. It's QuestioAuthorities merit thread. I specifically said I wasn't applying for merit but was agreeing with his point about how merit was initially distributed was unfair particularly to higher ranks that were just about to rank up. I wasn't even thinking about myself as I was a couple of months short of having enough activity to make Hero, I was thinking about people who were just a week or 3 away. He decided to look at my posting history anyway and he thought at least 20 of my old post deserved merit (that's his way of doing it). Them Mitchell and Wowcoin came along and gave me 5 more each.

That post is actually an example of what I'm talking about, having conversations and debates, as shortly after theymos came along and explained why he decided to distribute merit in that way.

Maybe the other 117 merit is more representative than those 30?

Again you focus on 'quality', forget that and start talking to people about issues related to Bitcoin, that's what the forum is for.

His job was to get the best price he could between the 9th creditors meeting (27 Sept. 2017) and the 10th creditors meeting (7th Mar 2018).  When he was given that task the price was around $3.5k and he managed to get an average of $10k so I think he'll be pretty pleased.

It really has nothing to do with the length of a post. I actually find long posts annoying and prefer people to be able to get their point across concisely.

(Src: OED)

There is no secret or technique to gain merit, just use the forum for what it is intended. If you are having conversations and exchanging ideas then at least one person is reading your posts. Quality isn't about writing a masterpiece it is about making an important point.