Merit & new rank requirements

[gentlemand]

This made me laugh but I don't know if that makes it merit worthy?

Give your merit to someone in greater need than I.

[ccsang]

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.

By definition half of the people would be closer to the upper threshold of a ranking activity range and half would be close to the lower range. You could obviously imagine also some being exactly in the middle Of course, the closer the people would be to the upper range, and therefore to the next rank, the more they would now feel the injustice.

You don't know that without looking at the actual forum distributions. I don't think the distribution would be uniform.

But the larger point about making this fair, here are some suggestions -

• Make the initial Merit equal to the Current Activity, so give more Merit to everyone. It seems like no one would complain in that case, since no Merit is taken away, just given to members.
• If not, at least make the distribution more granular. For example, instead of treating all Hero Members the same, treat them in say 5 tiers, with Activities between 500-1000+, and redo the Merit calculation based on which tier they belong to. You can then again apply the same algorithm of lower bound for the tier that you belong to, but the tiers are more granular.

It would greatly help the adoption of this system by the community if the initial distribution is perceived to be fair.

people would get some additional merits to fit or anyway somehow reflect their activity count more than just their rank

yes, your solution is better than me , we need to wait for other member to send us smerit, I've try to send my smerit , but I don't think people will send back to me , actually as you said that distribution initial merit more fair way based on current activity and not member rank

[Hueristic]

This made me laugh but I don't know if that makes it merit worthy?

Give your merit to someone in greater need than I.

I shall, but I was using your post as an example as you do tend to make me smile with your posts.

[suchmoon]

This looks about as incomprehensible as the trust system, which is jolly incomprehensible, but my brain has gone these days and I've always had little merit anyway.

This made me laugh but I don't know if that makes it merit worthy?

I don't see a description of what should be considered a merit worthy post?

While we will not be directly moderating this, I encourage people to give merit to posts that are objectively high-quality, not just posts that you agree with.

So it's up to you really... I'm using my sMerits as "thank you, that was useful/helpful to me and/or others" and yes, I think I would use it if something made me laugh.

[apvmoreira]

Ok, but members like me, that are not here for the signature bonuses, but don't make state of the art articles, will be discriminated. I'm not extraordinary, and i don't want to be stuck waiting for someone to merit my posts. I want to help the community and learn from it at the same time, but from now on, will the community spend time thanking me for doing it?

If you're not here for the signatures - why do you care about ranks? How exactly are you discriminated?

To post faster, to get access to some campaigns, like bounties or airdrops. Don't take me wrong, i still like money, just don't see this forum as a way of getting rich by posting x posts per week to get some bitcoin.

I remember being a noob here and had to wait to reply almost 5 minutes. NO access to campaigns, good airdrops, even signatures. Not even quoted until i've reached higher rank. People tend to look at what you write, you can write faster and you evolve like that, not by likes. Imagine that you can only post in Facebook from 5 to 5 minutes until you have 10 likes... and your friends have limited supply of those. Not logical imo.

But let's see where it goes.

[JetSet11]

I would be in favour of a system in which some merit is generated to give for all users. That is, a newby may get 1 merit every month to give away, a junior 2 merit, etc...

Leaving Junior Members without signature has been a bad idea, I am sure many of them were in the middle of a signature campaign and now they will loose all their effort. Even a "grace period" of 1 month on this regard would have been a life saver for many.

More importantly, I'm only a bit off from becoming a Member. I hope the merit percolates throughout the forum, and to me, soon.

[suchmoon]

I would be in favour of a system in which some merit is generated to give for all users. That is, a newby may get 1 merit every month to give away, a junior 2 merit, etc...

Free sMerits would encourage account farming on a massive scale.

Ok, but members like me, that are not here for the signature bonuses, but don't make state of the art articles, will be discriminated. I'm not extraordinary, and i don't want to be stuck waiting for someone to merit my posts. I want to help the community and learn from it at the same time, but from now on, will the community spend time thanking me for doing it?

If you're not here for the signatures - why do you care about ranks? How exactly are you discriminated?

To post faster, to get access to some campaigns, like bounties or airdrops. Don't take me wrong, i still like money, just don't see this forum as a way of getting rich by posting x posts per week to get some bitcoin.

I remember being a noob here and had to wait to reply almost 5 minutes. NO access to campaigns, good airdrops, even signatures. Not even quoted until i've reached higher rank. People tend to look at what you write, you can write faster and you evolve like that, not by likes. Imagine that you can only post in Facebook from 5 to 5 minutes until you have 10 likes... and your friends have limited supply of those. Not logical imo.

But let's see where it goes.

I don't know much about how those rank-based airdrops work, but if they want more participants then I guess they could always relax the requirements.

Facebook isn't a good example of quality content. Literally the birthplace of fake news.

[monbux]

Why is bitcointalk doing this? This is getting so complex and making our life more difficult. Where is the petition to change this?!

Simply put, to reduce the amount of shit in the current community.

Edit: I really like the Top-merited recent topics section.

[joletartare]

This new "Merit" system is probably an answer to problem I don't have the main idea of.
It must have been implemented with the aim to increase the global quality of posts...

...but for some (like me  ) who were very close to increase their rank (just 3 days to become member) and who waited for that to participate in interestings bounties, it's a little discouraging.

As my mother told me not to beg, I won't... and will do my best to increase quality of my posts in order to seduce the "merit sources" 

[RodeoX]

I'm still going to form my opinions based on what y'all write and do, and I assume others will also. Just do good things. The points are just to deal with the small minority that can't live with the world.

[EcuaMobi]

Request:

I'd like to see a link to download raw data regarding the latest merit activity.
Basically this https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;stats=recent but as txt, json, csv or similar format including name/id of sender, name/id of receiver and post ID.

When the DT was provided as text some interesting processing was possible.
With merit raw data we could easily write scripts to find suspicious activity, to show it graphically, advanced stats, among other things.

[ruletheworld]

Request:

I'd like to see a link to download raw data regarding the latest merit activity.
Basically this https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;stats=recent but as txt, json, csv or similar format including name/id of sender, name/id of receiver and post ID.

When the DT was provided as text some interesting processing was possible.
With merit raw data we could easily write scripts to find suspicious activity, to show it graphically, advanced stats, among other things.

I second this request. It would be good for the moderators to try and visualize on a graph the accounts that are abusing the system or worse, trying to sell their Merit scores. It would be good for researchers to see the trends and propose improvements as well. I would be very interested in this data set personally, and provide my findings to the community as well.

[pxo.011]

So now i know why i am still a member, it would be nice for the member has effort to discuss what her/his opinion but not on the member saying yes in a long phrase goodjob.

[libert19]

First, I thought in next couple months I will reach sr member rank easily but after merit system being implemented I feel I am going to be sitting at current rank for pretty long time now lol

[jimmywh]

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.

By definition half of the people would be closer to the upper threshold of a ranking activity range and half would be close to the lower range. You could obviously imagine also some being exactly in the middle Of course, the closer the people would be to the upper range, and therefore to the next rank, the more they would now feel the injustice.

You don't know that without looking at the actual forum distributions. I don't think the distribution would be uniform.

But the larger point about making this fair, here are some suggestions -

• Make the initial Merit equal to the Current Activity, so give more Merit to everyone. It seems like no one would complain in that case, since no Merit is taken away, just given to members.
• If not, at least make the distribution more granular. For example, instead of treating all Hero Members the same, treat them in say 5 tiers, with Activities between 500-1000+, and redo the Merit calculation based on which tier they belong to. You can then again apply the same algorithm of lower bound for the tier that you belong to, but the tiers are more granular.

It would greatly help the adoption of this system by the community if the initial distribution is perceived to be fair.

people would get some additional merits to fit or anyway somehow reflect their activity count more than just their rank

yes, your solution is better than me , we need to wait for other member to send us smerit, I've try to send my smerit , but I don't think people will send back to me , actually as you said that distribution initial merit more fair way based on current activity and not member rank

Please don't go all Smeagol on us. I will give you a little +1.

[jimmywh]

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

I know the feeling brother. 

I have done some digging in your post history. I can see that your posts are rather helpful to people. For that I give you the sMerit I have left. I hope it will help you reach your goal next week.

[trademark]

I like this new ranking requirement.  It helps cleans up the forum.  I think many people will be stuck at Full Member rank permanently due to this change. 

[omitusaf]

A nice way of ridding the forum of low-quality posts. This has been becoming much of an issue for me as I don't have the time to scour through many garbage posts to find good ones.

[asapjoshyy]

I like this new ranking requirement.  It helps cleans up the forum.  I think many people will be stuck at Full Member rank permanently due to this change. 

it is good , but it sucks for Full Members like me who are so close to Senior Member and dont just post junk... but oh well i guess its best for the community, just wondering how long it will take to get 250 merit when ill probably get 1 merit point for like 10 good replies of help......

[thaayb]

I somewhat fear, that this will result in buying/selling merit points....