Merit & new rank requirements

[GiorgosK]

Merit is indeed a positive thing in this forum and very welcome to see it and will definetelly help with the quality.

I think though that it would be fairer to start everyone's merit not with the required merit for their RANK (as it did)
but by interpolating their post count between their required merit and the next RANK's required merit
because right now someone just a few posts away from next rank is treated as if they have just entered their RANK

[suchmoon]

Another question: Why is the initial merit score equal to the minimum required to your rank? Why not proportionally to the actual activity?

Has someone an answer for this, please? Is there a good reason for this? OP only says that you get the minimum. Why? If a new commodity is created, why isn't it exchanged in a fair way?

Everybody got the minimum so that they could keep the same rank when the new rank formula is applied. To get the next rank they need to follow the new rules. A rule change is often unfair to someone.

[CryptoChanel]

Merit is a new system where older users can withhold merit from younger users so they can't rank up and earn all the bounties!

I don't think so, just look at this thread, a lot of higher rank members are already giving merits to lower rank members. This new method is not about hoarding bounties, this is about preserving the quality of the forum. There are a lot of forums in the internet that are already using the merit system in terms of likes and upvotes and so far it's been helping improve the quality of their forums.

Not sure you can say that at this stage though.. just because a trickle of new users in this thread (maybe 10% or so) are getting merit doesn't mean it's working. A lot are getting merit just because they are complaining that they don't have any merit and that it's unfair lol.

Out there in the wild: it may turn out that new users seldom get any merit at all.

Check this young account out..

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2828014.0

right attitude, quality post.. lots of merit from lots of people.. it is working fella

Again, that is just one sample, one data point. It could even just be an anomaly.

For every one user that makes a hot post/thread and gets tons of merit. You could have 99 users who get next to nothing or anything substantial.

Well, I am not sure that this is a very appropriate case study. Or are you willing to tell me that the only way to get merits is to make threads and posts where you unconditionally praise the new rules with a deferential attitude? BTW, I happen to agree with every line written in that OP as I have also stated in one post of mine in that same thread. But in that same post I've also outlined what in my opinion will not work with this new system.

[mithrim]

Another question: Why is the initial merit score equal to the minimum required to your rank? Why not proportionally to the actual activity?

Has someone an answer for this, please? Is there a good reason for this? OP only says that you get the minimum. Why? If a new commodity is created, why isn't it exchanged in a fair way?

Everybody got the minimum so that they could keep the same rank when the new rank formula is applied. To get the next rank they need to follow the new rules. A rule change is often unfair to someone.

Well, it wouldn't have been that unfair if the activity would have been translated into merit points: Needed activity from one rank to the next equals 100%. You get the minimum merit for the rank you've got plus #% of merits needed for the next rank equal to the percentage in the old activity calculation for a rank-up.

The way you handled it you punish those who were just shy of a rank-up and let's face it, merit = value/money
That is why I asked for a reason. Or is it capriciousness?

[Fenderr]

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

Same here man. I feel stagnated already as I'll have to wait to receive merit points 

[caytienbct]

Merit is indeed a positive thing in this forum and very welcome to see it and will definetelly help with the quality.

I think though that it would be fairer to start everyone's merit not with the required merit for their RANK (as it did)
but by interpolating their post count between their required merit and the next RANK's required merit
because right now someone just a few posts away from next rank is treated as if they have just entered their RANK

That's it. Unfair distribution of merits for different users at the same rank of level but have very different number of activities. Additionally, merit system should be adjusted for both internal and external efforts of each users. 50% merits they can earn by themselves, and 50% from others help.  It will be good by doing that way.

[JayJuanGee]

Merit is a new system where older users can withhold merit from younger users so they can't rank up and earn all the bounties!

I don't think so, just look at this thread, a lot of higher rank members are already giving merits to lower rank members. This new method is not about hoarding bounties, this is about preserving the quality of the forum. There are a lot of forums in the internet that are already using the merit system in terms of likes and upvotes and so far it's been helping improve the quality of their forums.

Not sure you can say that at this stage though.. just because a trickle of new users in this thread (maybe 10% or so) are getting merit doesn't mean it's working. A lot are getting merit just because they are complaining that they don't have any merit and that it's unfair lol.

Out there in the wild: it may turn out that new users seldom get any merit at all.

Check this young account out..

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2828014.0

right attitude, quality post.. lots of merit from lots of people.. it is working fella

Again, that is just one sample, one data point. It could even just be an anomaly.

For every one user that makes a hot post/thread and gets tons of merit. You could have 99 users who get next to nothing or anything substantial.

Well, I am not sure that this is a very appropriate case study. Or are you willing to tell me that the only way to get merits is to make threads and posts where you unconditionally praise the new rules with a deferential attitude? BTW, I happen to agree with every line written in that OP as I have also stated in one post of mine in that same thread. But in that same post I've also outlined what in my opinion will not work with this new system.

I have a personality and a way of writing that does not appeal to very many people; however, if I had a lower rank or I was just coming to the forum, I may consider either modifying my way of posting to rank up or just keeping with my regular style and to find out whether I receive very many merits. 

Even if you do not rank up, you are not really hurt either way in terms of being able to communicate ideas and to brainstorm ideas, and no one is stopping you from posting your ideas.  I have found that my style and my ideas resonate with some folks (that seems to be a kind of minority), and they do not resonate with others, yet over the years, I have pretty much stuck to my guns, and it seems to work out o.k. with me in terms of various forums and also in terms of my real world interactions.   

[fer3219]

so , is more hard now rank up , my predictions for this new system is really bad , i mean , people getting profit by offering a certain number of merit points  for a certain amount of money , people selling their accounts , getting discriminated again by not your rank btw your merit points.

[suchmoon]

Well, it wouldn't have been that unfair if the activity would have been translated into merit points: Needed activity from one rank to the next equals 100%. You get the minimum merit for the rank you've got plus #% of merits needed for the next rank equal to the percentage in the old activity calculation for a rank-up.

The way you handled it you punish those who were just shy of a rank-up and let's face it, merit = value/money
That is why I asked for a reason. Or is it capriciousness?

Don't blame me, I'm just stating a fact... I can't tell if it's fair or not because I don't care much about the ranks. One could argue that the old system was unfair because it rewarded shitposting.

Equating merit to value/money is wrong though. The primary purpose is to put quality over quantity. Rank is just a bonus for being a good poster.

[milugau]

Merit is indeed a positive thing in this forum and very welcome to see it and will definetelly help with the quality.

I think though that it would be fairer to start everyone's merit not with the required merit for their RANK (as it did)
but by interpolating their post count between their required merit and the next RANK's required merit
because right now someone just a few posts away from next rank is treated as if they have just entered their RANK

It is fairer if users have been allocated merit points which correspond to their current activities, not with the required merits for their ranks. Additionally, users which have been still lack a couple of activities to be ranked up to higher levels should be exceptions, by which I meant users who will be upgraded in the next counted round of their acitivities. I know that the idea is hard to implement or go back to implement it, everything finished by Theymos, so we have to accept and follow new rules. it just my opinion.

[Vaniaayu]

this rule seems to strangle us who are still full member down, it only benefits the legendary members, please for the dt admin, give us waivers so we can also develop like you guys

[mithrim]

Don't blame me, I'm just stating a fact... I can't tell if it's fair or not because I don't care much about the ranks. One could argue that the old system was unfair because it rewarded shitposting.

Equating merit to value/money is wrong though. The primary purpose is to put quality over quantity. Rank is just a bonus for being a good poster.

I'm not blaming you personally, sorry if it came across that way. In fact, I'm not blaming anyone here, I'm just asking because it doesn't make sense for me.
What's bothering me though is that you say that merit doesn't equal value or money, it does. Denying it doesn't change the fact that your BCT rank has a value that you can sell. The higher the rank, the more it is worth. So ranking up is valuable and merit is needed in order to rank up. Therefore merit = value.

So, rank isn't just a bonus for good posting, higher rank means real money. Maybe you don't like it but it's a fact. A way to reduce shitposting would've been to disable signatures and avatars (not that I'd prefer that). As long as rank has value, people will try to rank up.

Just because you don't attribute value to it doesn't mean that it isn't done by others  
What really bothers me is that those kinds of systems almost always punish those people who don't try to exploit them in the first place. Those who did will find new ways to cheat and that way the gap gets even bigger.

[Mitchell]

this rule seems to strangle us who are still full member down, it only benefits the legendary members, please for the dt admin, give us waivers so we can also develop like you guys

It shouldn't be a problem to get enough merit to rank up if you make good posts, however, your last 3 pages aren't very promising. Quite a few posts in bounty threads and a lot of posts like this:

I have a future plan with a deep union coin, I'm sure the price will jump up more than now, therefore I buy it for long-term investment, because I see dev so active, it makes me sure about this project

I'm sure this is something different from most crypto projects, it's really very promising for future benefits, hopefully the development of this project is good for the future. good luck and success for this project

another very promising project dev, I'm interested in investing in your project, maybe I will invest a little initially, but if your project is good and well developed, I will invest more

[suchmoon]

Don't blame me, I'm just stating a fact... I can't tell if it's fair or not because I don't care much about the ranks. One could argue that the old system was unfair because it rewarded shitposting.

Equating merit to value/money is wrong though. The primary purpose is to put quality over quantity. Rank is just a bonus for being a good poster.

I'm not blaming you personally, sorry if it came across that way. In fact, I'm not blaming anyone here, I'm just asking because it doesn't make sense for me.
What's bothering me though is that you say that merit doesn't equal value or money, it does. Denying it doesn't change the fact that your BCT rank has a value that you can sell. The higher the rank, the more it is worth. So ranking up is valuable and merit is needed in order to rank up. Therefore merit = value.

So, rank isn't just a bonus for good posting, higher rank means real money. Maybe you don't like it but it's a fact. A way to reduce shitposting would've been to disable signatures and avatars (not that I'd prefer that). As long as rank has value, people will try to rank up.

Just because you attribute no value to it doesn't mean that it isn't done by others  
What really bothers me is that those kinds of systems almost always punish those people who don't try to exploit them in the first place. Those who did will find new ways to cheat and that way the gap gets even bigger.

You're right, I don't value the ranks. I also think that this monetary valuation is the source of many problems in this forum, spamming/shitposting being one of those problems. Spammers try to rank up at the expense of others just to make a few pennies in sig campaigns etc. I hope the merit system will reduce spamming incentivized by this irresponsible pursuit of income.

I disagree that this new system widens the gap between cheaters and honest users. It appears to make it harder for shitposters to rank up. So in the long run quality posters should benefit by having fewer competing cheaters.

[StelioKontos]

this rule seems to strangle us who are still full member down, it only benefits the legendary members, please for the dt admin, give us waivers so we can also develop like you guys

It shouldn't be a problem to get enough merit to rank up if you make good posts, however, your last 3 pages aren't very promising. Quite a few posts in bounty threads and a lot of posts like this:

I have a future plan with a deep union coin, I'm sure the price will jump up more than now, therefore I buy it for long-term investment, because I see dev so active, it makes me sure about this project

I'm sure this is something different from most crypto projects, it's really very promising for future benefits, hopefully the development of this project is good for the future. good luck and success for this project

another very promising project dev, I'm interested in investing in your project, maybe I will invest a little initially, but if your project is good and well developed, I will invest more

It is a problem indeed.

In the same way (1) you found those three useless posts from that guy which rightly didn't receive any merits, (2) you can find, if you're willing, three or more excellent posts made by some other guy which didn't receive any merits either even if he deserved.

[NakiRR]

i'm walking around btt, reading, watching and can say that this merit system changed this forum forever, and not at the good side. today it is absolutely another place, not that was yesterday. Today it is a forum of one little group Hero's/Legendary's and their 'sixes'. Very bad... If i would be Satoshi i will never more enter this place. it is really disgusting to watch that what was happened in last days...  And i don't care if you some hero fanatic will give me "red trust" for this post. Coz i'm writing now from thousands of people, who are scared by this little group of 'nobodies' which means themselves like "gods...

We are all PEOPLE, do not forget THIS

[thaayb]

i'm walking around btt, reading, watching and can say that this merit system changed this forum forever, and not at the good side. today it is absolutely another place, not that was yesterday. Today it is a forum of one little group Hero's/Legendary's and their 'sixes'. Very bad... If i would be Satoshi i will never more enter this place. it is really disgusting to watch that what was happened in last days...  And i don't care if you some hero fanatic will give me "red trust" for this post. Coz i'm writing now from thousands of people, who are scared by this little group of 'nobodies' which means themselves like "gods...

We are all PEOPLE, do not forget THIS

You are free to leave and create an own forum to prove you can do better.

Basically nothing has changed, there are no posting restrictions at all, so stop complaining!

[nrm4bits]

I just translated the thread in the Spanish local section, you can find it here.
 

[Lutpin]

It is a problem indeed.
In the same way (1) you found those three useless posts from that guy which rightly didn't receive any merits, (2) you can find, if you're willing, three or more excellent posts made by some other guy which didn't receive any merits either even if he deserved.

Find them, point me to them, I'll merit them (or you can merit them yourself, you know?).
There already are several threads by people that are looking to be pointed towards good posts so they can give merit as rewards.

[Deena]

i'm walking around btt, reading, watching and can say that this merit system changed this forum forever, and not at the good side. today it is absolutely another place, not that was yesterday. Today it is a forum of one little group Hero's/Legendary's and their 'sixes'. Very bad... If i would be Satoshi i will never more enter this place. it is really disgusting to watch that what was happened in last days...  And i don't care if you some hero fanatic will give me "red trust" for this post. Coz i'm writing now from thousands of people, who are scared by this little group of 'nobodies' which means themselves like "gods...

We are all PEOPLE, do not forget THIS

Thanks for standing up in the name of so many scared people NakiRR. I have much appreciation for people who dare to confront unjustice. It may seem that you are alone in your view and experience, but I garantue you that you are not. I sometimes have compared the situation here with Orwell's Animal Farm. Have you read / seen that story? Where the pigs get in charge and harass all the other animals? Stating that all animals are equal but that some animals are more equal? The situation here is similar.