Merit & new rank requirements

[coinsniperX]

It seems like I will ATN (All Time Newbie)  And It doesn't matter, except the time between posts, that 360 seconds makes me angry)

I gave you one merit to contribute to your rank up and put you at peace.

I can't imagine what 360 between posts must feel like!

He-hey! Thank you good man! But I'm angry again, coz I need to wait 360 sec to reply you  

[1715307431]

1715307431

[1715307431]

1715307431

[1715307431]

1715307431

[1715307431]

1715307431

[Ascredo]

I think that we need to review the formula for raising the rank:
Rank = number of posts * time of arrival on the forum * merit * activati;
That Merit was not the main factor of raising the rank on the forum, because the shadow business for the sale of merit will be huge.
And the multiplayer will be an order of magnitude smaller.

Anyone abusing merit will be easily to identify especially if they are selling it to random accounts.

It will be just less noticeable for the forum, a person will write regular posts and he will be flown to every post by merit.
If you think about it, how do beginners become non-beginners?)

[wklt2002]

The problem is that nobody will put merit to Newbie and Jr. Member because they will be able to give nothing in exchange

You don't need to give anything in exchange, you need to make quality posts.

[crafty]

Wouldn't this be a problem for cases like mine where I was near to becoming sr. member (238 points when this change happened) and instead only got 100 merits, so even if this week I will have above 240 activity, I will have to wait to get to 250 merit points?

150 likes would take significant time and why would people give away their merits if they also need it for their rank promotion?

These questions may have already been answered, and I will read the whole thread to know more.

same boat buddy, we need to get to 250 merit now even if we have enough activity but we got this

You at least got 11 additional merits! Way to go. I was literally away by 2 points

[crafty]

Wouldn't this be a problem for cases like mine where I was near to becoming sr. member (238 points when this change happened) and instead only got 100 merits, so even if this week I will have above 240 activity, I will have to wait to get to 250 merit points?

150 likes would take significant time and why would people give away their merits if they also need it for their rank promotion?

These questions may have already been answered, and I will read the whole thread to know more.

giving merit doesnt take away from your merit pool. There is a seperate pool, smerit that is used.

Yes, read that carefully after clicking +merit on other members. I believe you get 1 smerit per post and can spend that then. Thanks.

[Mitchell]

Yes, read that carefully after clicking +merit on other members. I believe you get 1 smerit per post and can spend that then. Thanks.

You clearly have not read the OP, since you get 0.5 sMerit for every merit you receive.

You get merit points when someone sends you some for one of your posts. Additionally, when someone sends you merit points, half of those points can be sent by you to other people.

[Deena]

Anyone abusing merit will be easily to identify especially if they are selling it to random accounts. Not to mention this should prevent people from farming hundreds of accounts and selling them.

And then what? It's easy too to identify trust system abuse, yet it continues all the same!

[Welsh]

Anyone abusing merit will be easily to identify especially if they are selling it to random accounts. Not to mention this should prevent people from farming hundreds of accounts and selling them.

And then what? It's easy too to identify trust system abuse, yet it continues all the same!

If you think anyone is abusing the trust system then go and post about it in the reputation section with evidence. If anyone else agrees with you then they will likely be given a negative rating just like people abusing the merit system.

[lartiste]

If I'm not a legendary member tonight, I'd ruin my life, shit world, crappy system, conspiracy, iluminaty, area 51 and its aliens.
I will not be able to sleep tonight with this new system of merit.
I would do a live on youtube, come to like my video shit!
#life of shit
#I'am too tired of life

All that to say, stop complaining, screaming and waving your arms in all directions.
Stop polluting the topics for nothing!
Stop complaining!

[drwhobox]

There are a lot of people that are abusing the Merit system. They are using their alternate account just to send merits to his/her main account. Also known as Merit famers.

Many are abusing the new system.

[wklt2002]

There are a lot of people that are abusing the Merit system. They are using their alternate account just to send merits to his/her main account. Also known as Merit famers.

Many are abusing the new system.

That wouldn't work, or they have to make quality posts. You can't generate merit without a source account?

[Deena]

If you think anyone is abusing the trust system then go and post about it in the reputation section with evidence. If anyone else agrees with you then they will likely be given a negative rating just like people abusing the merit system.

Be realistic and honest. Plenty of times trust system abuse has been pointed out. The trust moderators belong to one clique who are always backing each other. That same clique is now handing out merit points to each other like +1 trust before.

[bobq]

For current members, your initial merit score is equal to the minimum required for your rank. Of that, a certain amount (less than the usual half) is spendable. The spendable amount was calculated based on your current rank and the number of activity points you earned in the last year. A Legendary member who hasn't posted in the last year would still be Legendary, but would not have any spendable merit.

I don't agree with this, this is just like giving the "old members" (including me) a head start. I'm not saying that earning merits is a race but giving us a head start also means giving us a free reputation out of nothing. That does not necessarily mean we need to rebuild our reputation from zero, I mean there are so many members that have earned a good reputation on this forum.
So I think the merit points for old members have to be given based on their reputation now and without affecting the rank.
Anyway, I think this is gonna be the end of account farming.

The new system is surely better than the previous one, even though it is over-rewarding "old members". I guess nobody who has joined Bitcointalk in the past six months will EVER manage to become Legendary Member, at least not in less than one or two decades. Fine, this could be a price to pay to avoid the forum getting even more trashy, I fully agree. But I think that the implementation of this new system could be done in a more fair way. The fact that initial merit score is equal to the minimum required for one's rank is not a big deal for Newbies or Juniors, but for higher ranked members, like Senior or Hero Members, it can create big inequalities. For example a freshly ranked Senior Member is now getting the same merit score as someone who has already been a Senior Member for almost half a year and is about to become a Hero. Even more dramatic would be the case of a Hero who has already the activity to be a Legendary but the random system did not grant him the rank yet. A more fair way to distribute the inital merit would be to calculate it proportionally to the actual activity. This would avoid that people like me (I don't want to make it personal but I'm the first example which comes to my mind) who is missing only 4 points of activity (and 5 days) to the rank of Hero Member, instead of getting, let's say 470-480 merits (instead of the 500 of people who already are Heroes), is getting only 250 merits like someone who has just ranked Senior Member 10 days ago, and instead of 5 days it may now suddenly take me years before I can become a Hero - how many very good posts has one to do before he gets 250 merits? If you receive one merit every 4 post you do (on average you are likely to get less IMO) it will take you 1000 more posts to rank up from Senior to Hero, and if you like me were only 4 points of activity from that target, and now suddenly you need another 1000 posts, to say that this is becoming extremely frustrating is a big understatement. On the other side, with a more proportional and balanced initial distribution of merits I think nobody would feel that the system is penalizing them more than it penalizes others - which means people would be more inclined to recognize its substantial fairness, or at least that every effort has been done to achieve the maximum possible fairness.

Fully agree with you! My rank of Sr.Member still young (2 months only) but for people who near of rank changes its a tragicly! Needs a corrections of initial merits!

totally agree with you , I'm waiting 4-5 month (next wednesday) rank up to Sr (just missing 2 Activity with old ranking system) , I think you waiting 8-9 month rank up to Hero member , same as you , system only give us Full member (100 merit) & Sr Member (250 merit) , don't care account activity is only (120 or 238) and (240 or 476) , merit reward is same , I think need to more fair to reward merit ...
Just example , Why don't wait for next activity date (old ranking system) , after that only start new ranking system

Because next week there will be someone in the exact same position as you, who is one activity week away from a new rank. You're right in that it is not a 'fair' way to do it because someone who is just one activity period ahead of you is now a long way ahead, but your suggestion isn't the solution.

His suggestion isn't the solution, but mine would. The problem is that if the initial merit score is equal to the minimum required for the rank you have, at least half of the people of this forum (those whose activity is closer to the upper range of their rank than to the lower one) will feel they have been treated in a way which is not fair. That's 50% of the members of Bitcointalk. And those who were only one week away from the next rank will feel particularly bad, especially if you are going for a higher rank (like from Senior to Hero) and in one moment you are losing 6 months of activity, since activity without the corresponding merit has no value any more. On the other side, if the initial merit score is more progressively and proportionatelly distributed, nobody would feel the system has treated HIM in an unjust way. Someone has said that now it's too late for changes because the system has already been implemented. This would be true if you had to take away merits from people. But in fact, what I'm suggesting is that people would get some additional merits to fit or anyway somehow reflect their activity count more than just their rank. What I'm saying is that more precision here would mean much more justice. My view is that as much justice as technically possible is badly needed in any big community which doesn't want to fall apart.

[stompix]

One small suggestion for theymos, and hope it doesn't end up buried in this megathread

On the recent merit page
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;stats=recent

Today at 08:37:49 PM: 1 from LoyceV for My Bitcoin journey
Today at 08:37:42 PM: 50 from Hawker for Re: Türk Malı Crycash Coin (Crysis oyun yapımcılarından)
Today at 08:37:34 PM: 5 from istklin for Re: Aнaлитикa, aнaлиз, пpoгнoзы, нoвocти.
Today at 08:36:50 PM: 50 from Hawker for Re: ETHEREUM UZUN VADE DE İYİ BİR YATIRIM ARACI MIDIR?

Could you show the link to the profile of the receiver also?

Like:

Today at 08:37:49 PM: 1 from LoyceV to MR2O4 for My Bitcoin journey

[Raist]

His suggestion isn't the solution, but mine would. The problem is that if the initial merit score is equal to the minimum required for the rank you have, at least half of the people of this forum (those whose activity is closer to the upper range of their rank than to the lower one) will feel they have been treated in a way which is not fair. That's 50% of the members of Bitcointalk. And those who were only one week away from the next rank will feel particularly bad, especially if you are going for a higher rank (like from Senior to Hero) and in one moment you are losing 6 months of activity, since activity without the corresponding merit has no value any more. On the other side, if the initial merit score is more progressively and proportionatelly distributed, nobody would feel the system has treated HIM in an unjust way. Someone has said that now it's too late for changes because the system has already been implemented. This would be true if you had to take away merits from people. But in fact, what I'm suggesting is that people would get some additional merits to fit or anyway somehow reflect their activity count more than just their rank. What I'm saying is that more precision here would mean much more justice. My view is that as much justice as technically possible is badly needed in any big community which doesn't want to fall apart.

May be not 50% but a lot of them for sure. Cannot believe that it is so technically hard to apply initial merit points equal to activity points.

[drwhobox]

There are a lot of people that are abusing the Merit system. They are using their alternate account just to send merits to his/her main account. Also known as Merit famers.

Many are abusing the new system.

That wouldn't work, or they have to make quality posts. You can't generate merit without a source account?

They would just make some sense less topics that is literaly pointing out of nothing and just put the sMerits that the alt accounts can give to their main accounts. Wishing that Theymos could do something to prevent this.

[Godwans]

So....I was ready to move up to member on Tuesday, now due to this i have to wait until i receive merit points..Garsh

[suchmoon]

They would just make some sense less topics that is literaly pointing out of nothing and just put the sMerits that the alt accounts can give to their main accounts. Wishing that Theymos could do something to prevent this.

They could do that once, if their alts have some of the initial sMerit "airdrop". Then they would have to earn sMerits like anyone else.

Abuse might be possible but it would be more complicated and expensive than just farming a bunch alts.

If you think anyone is abusing the trust system then go and post about it in the reputation section with evidence. If anyone else agrees with you then they will likely be given a negative rating just like people abusing the merit system.

Be realistic and honest. Plenty of times trust system abuse has been pointed out. The trust moderators belong to one clique who are always backing each other. That same clique is now handing out merit points to each other like +1 trust before.

Who are those evil trust moderators?

[kenzawak]

This system means fewer posts ,fewer members ,fewer people able to wear an avatar or a big sig...that will make the board less attractive for ICO promotions because it will look less popular .
I'm not sure anybody here wants that .

[rapsaodan84]

This system means fewer posts ,fewer members ,fewer people able to wear an avatar or a big sig...that will make the board less attractive for ICO promotions because it will look less popular .
I'm not sure anybody here wants that .

I disagree. more people will post more to have more chances of getting merit points. i'm sure that has already happened.
is there some place where we can see the number of posts per day? i'm sure it increased during the last day