Merit & new rank requirements

[SparkyU]

Hopefully this helps cut down on the spam a bit but I have a feeling the bots will try none the less to get around it somehow.  Kudos on the addition though.  Something had to be done, this forum is honestly one of the worst I've been on in terms post quality.  There is a lot of great information, but there is also a TON of garbage to sift through to get to that information from a daily usage perspective.

I already don't like the way clicking on +merit takes you away from the thread.  Can you please have it open in a new window?

I would also agree with this, it would be great if the action of using merits didn't take you away from the page.

[CryptiDiiiva]

Hey!

I think it's a good idea.  But as there is merit, it must be Demerit as well. to simply make the difference between profiles, for avoiding spam
we would also like to have on the right of the page the option for merit and demerit without being forced to open another window (as was the case with -0 + 0)

And also want to know where is the place of newbie in this forum ?? It will be hard for some to develop their Rank, expect if there is someone who has an excess of merit, And wants to share ...


Thank you

[CostaRibeiro]

Nice idea but I think it should be a little easier to understand about this merit and smerit thing.

[8Habits]

Merit system is really a good idea but just my opinion, since this is not moderated, might as well add not a demerit but an objection to the merits given so that in case there will be some obvious merit manipulations, the community can contest and object on those merits.

To add to that, there will be a separate and dedicated page where when a certain post received a minimum number of objections to the merits given, the post will be automatically listed on that public dedicated page for final moderation - this way, the moderation is minimal and consolidated in one place and would be easy to decide for the designated moderator.

This is just my opinion though...

[btcton]

This is quite a beautiful change. I can already see the spamming slowing down from this. What worries me the most is the post quality of the people who already have a high activity ranking that they got by spamming. I understand you might not want to put up a de-merit system, but perhaps merit points could be connected to other functionalities of the forums as well. For example, points should go down if a moderator takes down one of your posts for a reason related to spamming or non-constructive posts. I also believe stricter guidelines should be required for defining what a constructive post is. A post that answer's the OP's question should not be considered constructive if the answer has already been posted multiple times in the thread. A system such as this one would tie in well with merit.

[ruletheworld]

Interesting.  Are merits meant to be traded or exclusively earned?

From the original post, it appears that merit is to be exclusively earned. Unless of course, you pay a writer to write quality posts that others give merit to, in which case, indirectly, you'll be paying to get more merit 

[EcuaMobi]

I find these cases strange. Can you clarify theymos?


Jr with 0 Merit instead of 30


Hero with 1000 Merit instead of 500

And is it possible for any existing user to lower their rank because of the introduction of merit? Someone complained about that

[2bfree]

This is quite a beautiful change. I can already see the spamming slowing down from this. What worries me the most is the post quality of the people who already have a high activity ranking that they got by spamming. I understand you might not want to put up a de-merit system, but perhaps merit points could be connected to other functionalities of the forums as well. For example, points should go down if a moderator takes down one of your posts for a reason related to spamming or non-constructive posts. I also believe stricter guidelines should be required for defining what a constructive post is. A post that answer's the OP's question should not be considered constructive if the answer has already been posted multiple times in the thread. A system such as this one would tie in well with merit.

Ha ha, sounds like the East Europe censorship. My countryman would love people like you!

[illiki23]

Well, that is just neat Theymos.  It will change the dynamics of ranking up.  People will actually have to try to come up with meaningful contributions.

Though how do we prevent abuse?

[juicyjanet88]

Is it not a bit unfair with the way that merit has currently been distributed based on previous ranks. Someone who previously had an activity of say 112 (the lowest possible before full member) will only get 10 merit compared to someone with an account only a week older receives 100 merit. Would it not have been fairer initially to offer merit based on activity so as to avoid such scenarios? I feel like a lot of people are going to feel hard done by in that regard.

Also, I see people saying that users will have to go to a new page to gift merit and some solutions such as to have it pop up on the same page. If this is not so easy in terms of coding could you not add a +1 merit box which would be a 1 click thing and then the current option for anyone wanting to give more than 1 merit?

[U2]

Ok, I've understood all about this new system, however I have a consideration:

I usually go to the Beginners & Help forum, so that I can help newbies, I like it. But why I'll do this now? The newbies don't have sMerit to send me if they like my post, right?

Maybe you guys should think in something else in order to solve this and help the community to grow even more.

Why did you help newbies before? Maybe your reasoning shouldn't change just based on a random points system. Maybe helping out newbies just makes you a good person and good things will come your way.

[LeGaulois]

Ok, I've understood all about this new system, however I have a consideration:

I usually go to the Beginners & Help forum, so that I can help newbies, I like it. But why I'll do this now? The newbies don't have sMerit to send me if they like my post, right?

Maybe you guys should think in something else in order to solve this and help the community to grow even more.

The newbies didn't have sMerit before, so what?. Can't you help people for free without looking to get something back? So then if a day you have a question or need something we will be able to ask you what we get to help you?
It doesn't hurt to help, you never know if a day you will need help as well, it is what we call a community!

[Lutpin]

Is there a place we can see the posts we've earned merit from?

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

Interesting.  Are merits meant to be traded or exclusively earned?

You have Merits, those you cannot send.
You also have sMerits, those you can only send, they have no other purpose.

When someone gives merit to you they lose sMerit of the amount transfered and you gain Merit as well as sMerit (which in case you can send again).

Eg should I send 10 Merit to you for a post, my sMerit would decrease by 10.
Your merit would increase by 10 and your sMerit would increase by 5.


Merits are exclusively earned, but the sMerit part you also get keeps the circulation flowing.

(Ignoring merit sources here, for the sake of making an easy example.)

Jr with 0 Merit instead of 30

The junior member rank requires 0 merit and 30 activity. Everyone below member has 0 merit to start with.
Members have 10. I assume you're mixing up merit with activity here.

And is it possible for any existing user to lower their rank because of the introduction of merit? Someone complained about that

I think there were a few bugs, I saw a few full members rank down to junior for a while (fixed already).

[vanobe]

Interesting.  Are merits meant to be traded or exclusively earned?

Lutpin has a special status of a merit source. He gets loads of extra merits, but also gets a warning that he's not allowed to sell them.

I'm only a standard member, and I only get one spendable merit every 30 days, but I don't get a warning that I'm not allowed to sell it. Perhaps theymos will soon add the warning to all accounts. It's ambiguous without a warning.

There is a new +Merit button besides the quote button.
Leading to a new page that reads:

You have received a total of 500 merit. This is what determines your forum rank. You typically cannot lose this merit. You have 88 sendable merit (sMerit) which you can send to other people. There is no point in hoarding sMerit; keeping it yourself does not benefit you, and we reserve the right to decay unused sMerit in the future.

You are a merit source. The next 100 merit you spend will come from your source rather than your sMerit balance. Merit spent from your source will come back in 30 days. Unused source merit is wasted. It is not allowed for merit sources to sell their merit.

This is the message I get when I try to send someone my merit point.

Bitcoin Forum > Merit

You have received a total of 10 merit. This is what determines your forum rank. You typically cannot lose this merit. You have 1 sendable merit (sMerit) which you can send to other people. There is no point in hoarding sMerit; keeping it yourself does not benefit you, and we reserve the right to decay unused sMerit in the future.

[achow101]

I find these cases strange. Can you clarify theymos?

Read the merit schedule, it does not line up directly with the activity schedule.

Jr with 0 Merit instead of 30

Required merit for Jr. Members is 0, so they get 0 merit.

Hero with 1000 Merit instead of 500

He's eligible for legendary, so he gets 1000 merit.

And is it possible for any existing user to lower their rank because of the introduction of merit? Someone complained about that

No. All users got the requisite amount of merit for their rank automatically.

[OptimusFries]

Good thing there's no demerit on this new feature, because if there is, these abusive moderators will hit unlimited demerits on the members they wanted to. You know who you are.

[EcuaMobi]

[img ]https://i.imgur.com/5myxjQx.png[/img]
Jr with 0 Merit instead of 30

The junior member rank requires 0 merit and 30 activity. Everyone below member has 0 merit to start with.
Members have 10. I assume you're mixing up merit with activity here.

Oops, yes I misread it

[img ]https://i.imgur.com/BTVw8Up.png[/img]
Hero with 1000 Merit instead of 500

He's eligible for legendary, so he gets 1000 merit.

Well, "eligible" is random but it would definitely be too harsh to get just 500. I get it now

[Lutpin]

[img ]https://i.imgur.com/BTVw8Up.png[/img]
Hero with 1000 Merit instead of 500

He's eligible for legendary, so he gets 1000 merit.

Well, "eligible" is random

The user is a legendary member now, I assume they already were tagged as one when the initial merit score was calculated.

but it would definitely be too harsh to get just 500. I get it now

That's what I got 

[Namiks]

Not sure how I feel about this.

While it's very different, it gives me a similar feeling to Reddit's dumb upvote/dislike censorship; hopefully this merit thing never holds any actual weight towards content visibility and layout.

[EcuaMobi]

but it would definitely be too harsh to get just 500. I get it now

That's what I got  

So not everyone above 775 activity (eligible?) gets 1000 merit. He was just lucky to become Legendary just now and you weren't. It is harsh!
I would suggest users with 775+ activity to get 1000 merit, or at least the same merit as their activity.

But you're very close to getting those required 1000 on your own