Merit & new rank requirements

[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.

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.   

I have marked bold the crucial part of your post. That's actually the problem. To rank up (right or wrong most people want to rank up, be it because they want to run signature campaigns, be it for simple reasons of prestige) people WILL change the way they are posting, but the move may not be in the desired direction. I will make an example to make this case clear.
I don't know if you are familiar with the DeepOnion project and how it unfolded. As soon as their "airdrop" (in fact a signature campaign) had become economically valuable, many people wanted to join it. But in the community there were also a lot of critical voices, who were raising doubts and critics. They all got banned from the airdrop and their critical posts were deleted from the thread. Which has been the consequence? The consequence has been that this "system of reward and punishment" has selected a community made only by people fanatically in favor of the status quo. I am not judging the quality of that project here, I'm just exposing a pattern of human behavior.
Of course you cannot compare the new rules of BCT with that totalitarian management of DeepOnion's thread, but both has something in common: they end up rewarding those who praise the system and the status quo and punish those who raise a critical voice.
And you can already see the first signs of such a tendence here in these threads about the new merit system. Juniors who are posting here to praise the system get plenty of merits, critical voices don't.
Which do you think will be the consequences long term?
DeepOnion's thread has rapidly become unreadable, consisting in a mere chorus of enthusiastic hyping statements.
What will happen to Bitcointalk?
Shitposting will be reduced - and this is GOOD. But variety of opinions will as well shrink, because of natural selection. You'll have less shitposting but much more buttlickingposting. And worse of all, more and more a single line of thought.

[Lutpin]

Of course you cannot compare the new rules of BCT with that totalitarian management of DeepOnion's thread, but both has something in common: they end up rewarding those who praise the system and the status quo and punish those who raise a critical voice.
And you can already see the first signs of such a tendence here in these threads about the new merit system. Juniors who are posting here to praise the system get plenty of merits, critical voices don't.

That is not entirely true, TMAN for example has given a lot of merit to users who openly disagreed with the change or criticized certain aspects. Others have been doing similar things, some more, some less.
I also have given a few merits to people being sceptic, as long as they had a well explained position or provided some alternative they believe to be more suited.
It's not about opinion not about agreeing with someone or disagreeing with them, it's about how you voice that opinion.
People who outright cry and shout "No, no, no" without giving reasons or alternatives don't get merit. Posts like that are neither constructive, nor "high quality".
If you make a well written post, explaining your position and opinion, bring something to the conversation, or just sum everything up really well, you will get merit, regardless of your opinion and stance.

[bitmet]

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.   

I have marked bold the crucial part of your post. That's actually the problem. To rank up (right or wrong most people want to rank up, be it because they want to run signature campaigns, be it for simple reasons of prestige) people WILL change the way they are posting, but the move may not be in the desired direction. I will make an example to make this case clear.
I don't know if you are familiar with the DeepOnion project and how it unfolded. As soon as their "airdrop" (in fact a signature campaign) had become economically valuable, many people wanted to join it. But in the community there were also a lot of critical voices, who were raising doubts and critics. They all got banned from the airdrop and their critical posts were deleted from the thread. Which has been the consequence? The consequence has been that this "system of reward and punishment" has selected a community made only by people fanatically in favor of the status quo. I am not judging the quality of that project here, I'm just exposing a pattern of human behavior.
Of course you cannot compare the new rules of BCT with that totalitarian management of DeepOnion's thread, but both has something in common: they end up rewarding those who praise the system and the status quo and punish those who raise a critical voice.
And you can already see the first signs of such a tendence here in these threads about the new merit system. Juniors who are posting here to praise the system get plenty of merits, critical voices don't.
Which do you think will be the consequences long term?
DeepOnion's thread has rapidly become unreadable, consisting in a mere chorus of enthusiastic hyping statements.
What will happen to Bitcointalk?
Shitposting will be reduced - and this is GOOD. But variety of opinions will as well shrink, because of natural selection. You'll have less shitposting but much more buttlickingposting. And worse of all, more and more a single line of thought.

I think so too. this is a forum, and it should have many opinions, and for this many new people and an incentive for development on the forum. MERIT is a good idea, but this idea needs to be further improved.

[freedoge.co]

Merit is a big slap in the face for account farmers. I can imagine how disapointed are they now, imo that's the only reason why it's been implemented.

[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

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

Gave ya a little help there bud, hope you get there soon.

+1

[Florr]

Only with quality post I can earn merit? Good

[mithrim]

Merit is a big slap in the face for account farmers. I can imagine how disapointed are they now, imo that's the only reason why it's been implemented.

Well, I'm no farmer but my face is still stinging and if I look closely enough, I see the traces of the hand as a slightly reddish tint on my cheek, Sr. Member was almost in reach 

And I highly doubt that this was the sole purpose. But I'm also a realist, moping about things you can't change is pointless, so I adapt.

[freedoge.co]

Merit is a big slap in the face for account farmers. I can imagine how disapointed are they now, imo that's the only reason why it's been implemented.

Well, I'm no farmer but my face is still stinging and if I look closely enough, I see the traces of the hand as a slightly reddish tint on my cheek, Sr. Member was almost in reach 

And I highly doubt that this was the sole purpose. But I'm also a realist, moping about things you can't change is pointless, so I adapt.

Yes I got slap too as I could have 1000 merits but yeah it is as it is.

[TMAN]

Merit is a big slap in the face for account farmers. I can imagine how disapointed are they now, imo that's the only reason why it's been implemented.

Well, I'm no farmer but my face is still stinging and if I look closely enough, I see the traces of the hand as a slightly reddish tint on my cheek, Sr. Member was almost in reach 

And I highly doubt that this was the sole purpose. But I'm also a realist, moping about things you can't change is pointless, so I adapt.

Yes I got slap too as I could have 1000 merits but yeah it is as it is.

Ouch... the newbies don't see higher ranking member missing out like this as an issue

[wwzsocki]

There is a big chance that even if you post only quality content you will be left with no merits at all.

First, people don't know what that is and how to use it. Second, nobody likes to give merits because it fills like you are losing them.

There will be a lot of abuse for sure. We will see merits sent to low-quality friends post and accounts providing upvotes for money or in exchange.

I see there is a discussion to add bad merits to downvote spam. I am afraid that people will use it as a weapon to downvote posts they do not agree with or just because they don't like the author.

[Lutpin]

Second, nobody likes to give merits because it fills like you are losing them.

This thread has been posted not even 3 days ago.
In these 3 days, "22,265 merit has been sent in total."
I would say that refutes your point, wouldnt you agree?

[vapourminer]

And you can already see the first signs of such a tendence here in these threads about the new merit system. Juniors who are posting here to praise the system get plenty of merits, critical voices don't.

That is not entirely true, TMAN for example has given a lot of merit to users who openly disagreed with the change or criticized certain aspects. Others have been doing similar things, some more, some less.
I also have given a few merits to people being sceptic, as long as they had a well explained position or provided some alternative they believe to be more suited.
It's not about opinion not about agreeing with someone or disagreeing with them, it's about how you voice that opinion.
People who outright cry and shout "No, no, no" without giving reasons or alternatives don't get merit. Posts like that are neither constructive, nor "high quality".
If you make a well written post, explaining your position and opinion, bring something to the conversation, or just sum everything up really well, you will get merit, regardless of your opinion and stance.

this is my take as well. merits should be awarded for posts with accurate, helpful information or clarifying a point of view in a concise way, not for some "old boys club" or "you merited me, so +merit for you" thing. whether or not you agree with that position. i have no problem with meriting a post i dont agree with as long as that post contributes to the thread in a meaningful way.

this whole obsessiveness about rank seems blown out of proportion anyway. are there THAT many people in sig campaigns where rank makes a difference? i mean the only advantage to rank is sig campaigns anyway (aside from the recent "serious discussions" and "ivory tower" forums which are a welcome addition btw). i honestly dont know how many folks have sigs as i have sigs turned off so i never see them. the only sig ive ever had was a plug for cgminer back when btc was mined on gpus.

personally ive never paid attention to forum ranks. now am i proud of my legendary status? sure, ive been here since 2011 and ive tried to help whenever i can. but i post when i feel like it and what i feel like. its not for post count or to level up.

[Godwans]

There is a big chance that even if you post only quality content you will be left with no merits at all.

First, people don't know what that is and how to use it. Second, nobody likes to give merits because it fills like you are losing them.

There will be a lot of abuse for sure. We will see merits sent to low-quality friends post and accounts providing upvotes for money or in exchange.

I see there is a discussion to add bad merits to downvote spam. I am afraid that people will use it as a weapon to downvote posts they do not agree with or just because they don't like the author.

You see, this right here is why we need a 'Like' button..
Folks like me, with limited sMerits will be less likely to give them to someone of higher rank, even for a quality post.

(gave you my last)

[djangocoin]

this whole obsessiveness about rank seems blown out of proportion anyway. are there THAT many people in sig campaigns where rank makes a difference? i mean the only advantage to rank is sig campaigns anyway (aside from the recent "serious discussions" and "ivory tower" forums which are a welcome addition btw). i honestly dont know how many folks have sigs as i have sigs turned off so i never see them. the only sig ive ever had was a plug for cgminer back when btc was mined on gpus.

Sig campaigns is not the only reason. Airdrops are sometimes tied to rank: min rank req, and higher rank=bigger AD etc.

Also, many people may just skip over newbie posts and only read the ranked ones etc.

So, there are several reasons why it may be desirable to be a higher rank

[mithrim]

And you can already see the first signs of such a tendence here in these threads about the new merit system. Juniors who are posting here to praise the system get plenty of merits, critical voices don't.

That is not entirely true, TMAN for example has given a lot of merit to users who openly disagreed with the change or criticized certain aspects. Others have been doing similar things, some more, some less.
I also have given a few merits to people being sceptic, as long as they had a well explained position or provided some alternative they believe to be more suited.
It's not about opinion not about agreeing with someone or disagreeing with them, it's about how you voice that opinion.
People who outright cry and shout "No, no, no" without giving reasons or alternatives don't get merit. Posts like that are neither constructive, nor "high quality".
If you make a well written post, explaining your position and opinion, bring something to the conversation, or just sum everything up really well, you will get merit, regardless of your opinion and stance.

this is my take as well. merits should be awarded for posts with accurate, helpful information or clarifying a point of view in a concise way, not for some "old boys club" or "you merited me, so +merit for you" thing. whether or not you agree with that position. i have no problem with meriting a post i dont agree with as long as that post contributes to the thread in a meaningful way.

this whole obsessiveness about rank seems blown out of proportion anyway. are there THAT many people in sig campaigns where rank makes a difference? i mean the only advantage to rank is sig campaigns anyway (aside from the recent "serious discussions" and "ivory tower" forums which are a welcome addition btw). i honestly dont know how many folks have sigs as i have sigs turned off so i never see them. the only sig ive ever had was a plug for cgminer back when btc was mined on gpus.

personally ive never paid attention to forum ranks. now am i proud of my legendary status? sure, ive been here since 2011 and ive tried to help whenever i can. but i post when i feel like it what i feel like it. its never for post count or to level up.

I get what you're saying but that's the problem 'merits should be awarded for posts with accurate, helpful information'. If you implement a system then sure, you think of a way it should be used. And then there is the way it is used.
To answer your question: Yes, there are THAT many people in sig campaigns and there is a lot of money involved. This can't be argued away and as long as it is like this, you need to take this into account.

Don't hate on me if I quote mayself from a couple of pages before:

The best example is this post https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2828014.0 where many gave merit points. But ask yourself, is this a valuable post? It took time to make it, sure, but what makes it valuable. It purely reflects an opinion. It doesn't discriminate or list pros and cons, there is no contrast. It tells the supporters of this new system what they want to hear and of course, they merited it, ridiculously high if I might add.
There are hundreds of posts in this forum that have more value than this post, I wonder if all of them get 61+ merit.

Please, have a look and decide for yourself. And as I said, I'm not jealous, this member did everything right. But it shows how the merit system is used in contrast to how it should be used.

[Godwans]

And you can already see the first signs of such a tendence here in these threads about the new merit system. Juniors who are posting here to praise the system get plenty of merits, critical voices don't.

That is not entirely true, TMAN for example has given a lot of merit to users who openly disagreed with the change or criticized certain aspects. Others have been doing similar things, some more, some less.
I also have given a few merits to people being sceptic, as long as they had a well explained position or provided some alternative they believe to be more suited.
It's not about opinion not about agreeing with someone or disagreeing with them, it's about how you voice that opinion.
People who outright cry and shout "No, no, no" without giving reasons or alternatives don't get merit. Posts like that are neither constructive, nor "high quality".
If you make a well written post, explaining your position and opinion, bring something to the conversation, or just sum everything up really well, you will get merit, regardless of your opinion and stance.

this is my take as well. merits should be awarded for posts with accurate, helpful information or clarifying a point of view in a concise way, not for some "old boys club" or "you merited me, so +merit for you" thing. whether or not you agree with that position. i have no problem with meriting a post i dont agree with as long as that post contributes to the thread in a meaningful way.

this whole obsessiveness about rank seems blown out of proportion anyway. are there THAT many people in sig campaigns where rank makes a difference? i mean the only advantage to rank is sig campaigns anyway (aside from the recent "serious discussions" and "ivory tower" forums which are a welcome addition btw). i honestly dont know how many folks have sigs as i have sigs turned off so i never see them. the only sig ive ever had was a plug for cgminer back when btc was mined on gpus.

personally ive never paid attention to forum ranks. now am i proud of my legendary status? sure, ive been here since 2011 and ive tried to help whenever i can. but i post when i feel like it what i feel like it. its never for post count or to level up.

I get what you're saying but that's the problem 'merits should be awarded for posts with accurate, helpful information'. If you implement a system then sure, you think of a way it should be used. And then there is the way it is used.
To answer your question: Yes, there are THAT many people in sig campaigns and there is a lot of money involved. This can't be argued away and as long as it is like this, you need to take this into account.

Don't hate on me if I quote mayself from a couple of pages before:

The best example is this post https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2828014.0 where many gave merit points. But ask yourself, is this a valuable post? It took time to make it, sure, but what makes it valuable. It purely reflects an opinion. It doesn't discriminate or list pros and cons, there is no contrast. It tells the supporters of this new system what they want to hear and of course, they merited it, ridiculously high if I might add.
There are hundreds of posts in this forum that have more value than this post, I wonder if all of them get 61+ merit.

Please, have a look and decide for yourself. And as I said, I'm not jealous, this member did everything right. But it shows how the merit system is used in contrast to how it should be used.

I have to agree with you here. This poster(while nicely written) was just parroting what all the 'OG's' of BCT wanted to hear and was rewarded for falling in line.
I would venture that most of the sMerits-to-give never click inside an alt thread.

[b3j0]

I consider merit like a challenge so I can make quality posts and useful for others. when merit is hard to come by it is not impossible that merit will be traded. I hope there is a special team to prevent this.

[lobcmt2]

There is a big chance that even if you post only quality content you will be left with no merits at all.

First, people don't know what that is and how to use it. Second, nobody likes to give merits because it fills like you are losing them.

There will be a lot of abuse for sure. We will see merits sent to low-quality friends post and accounts providing upvotes for money or in exchange.

I see there is a discussion to add bad merits to downvote spam. I am afraid that people will use it as a weapon to downvote posts they do not agree with or just because they don't like the author.

You are missing a point by misunderstanding one of very fundamental characteristics of merit. You cannot send your merits to anyone, the ones you can send is sMerits (sendable merits). You won't lose your merits by sending sMerits to others. Please donate 1 merit if my thread is contributive and useful (at least for you)

[lobcmt2]

Guys, any chance that current period will be counted as previously (without merits yet)?
2 activity till Senior member  

Me too. 4 more activities before being Member.

[Sowik]

There is a big chance that even if you post only quality content you will be left with no merits at all.

First, people don't know what that is and how to use it. Second, nobody likes to give merits because it fills like you are losing them.

There will be a lot of abuse for sure. We will see merits sent to low-quality friends post and accounts providing upvotes for money or in exchange.

I see there is a discussion to add bad merits to downvote spam. I am afraid that people will use it as a weapon to downvote posts they do not agree with or just because they don't like the author.

THIS is how I feel as well.

Do you guys really believe that all people who deserve to be merited will be merited?

A like system will be better. Only higher rank people will be able to like posts, will be easy to filter out multi accounts and spammers.