Maybe, but post history and quality is much more important to look at. Some deserve merits and don't get them which makes the system unfair. Wouldn't like to see a great forum contributor over
looked because he didn't earn x amount of merits.
Consider having made a constraint of n-merits/week to stay in the campaign, that would mean more of shady merit exchange dealing happening. In my opinion this type of rule should not be made in any stage in future. But am I just being paranoid to go against the system?
If the distribution of merit was equal in every section you posted in, maybe then this could have been put in. Just consider Bitcoin Discussion section and the Good/Bad post ratio, that is obviously <1.0 and merit sources will not look through them.
Post history and variation is the number of sections they post in would be a better parameter, but as a former campaign member myself, others might think I am being biased.