Merit & new rank requirements

[coin5haker]

"Wow, this the best system which will eliminate all shit posters and do the greatest good to the forum. If you cannot rank up, means you're shit poster. Like me getting merit every day!:" Then I check this guy, and all his merits are from posts like that, kissing asses and pleasing some legendary members. Now it surely increased people-pleasing miserable posts from newbies and juniors, spam and "What altcoin will make me rich" posts count are still the same.

[1713437551]

1713437551

[1713437551]

1713437551

[JayJuanGee]

By using the system like this, no-one would be born with a "grandparent" advantage, and at the same time no-one would have the right to feel "cheated".
 

Your phraseology of "grandparent advantage" causes a pretty strong inference that you do not understand the basic fairness that is meant to come from the employment of such a principle.  Grandfather clauses are not meant to cause injustices, disadvantage, unfairness or exploitation of new users in favor of old but instead are meant to allow a fair transition in systems that does not prejudice prior membership or prior members' reliance on earlier terms.. it is a kind of basic transitional remedy that is used in a lot of places to cause fairness rather than unfairness.

[jimmywh]

Are you actually saying that all people who became Full Members and above before merit was implemented wrote quality posts? In order to rank up before merit was introduced, you didn't have to write quality posts, they just couldn't be shit posts worthy of deletion.

I didn't say that. But you also can't claim that NO ONE is worth having those merits and should be set to 0. Without going through every post ever made and re-evaluating everything (completely unfeasible) I don't think it's possible to come up with a totally fair formula. Just to make this clear - I would be fine with 0 merits. I don't see any significance in the starting number at all. I'm saying that if theymos had started everyone with 0 the moaning would be just as loud.

I agree that with merit introduced everybody should have started from 0 to make the merit system more transparent. By starting at 0 I don't mean that Hero members would have to earn 1000 merits to become legendary. However, they would need the 500 equal to the difference between Hero and Legendary. What I would prefer is the following:

Jr. Member -> Member 0-10
Member -> Full Member 0-90
Full Member -> Sr. Member 0-150
Sr. Member -> Hero Member 0-250
Hero Member -> Legendary 0-500
Legendary 0-0

By using the system like this, no-one would be born with a "grandparent" advantage, and at the same time no-one would have the right to feel "cheated".

Win/win

This scheme wouldn't work when those old members need to get to the next rank after their first rank-up. Sr. Member who started at zero earns 250 and becomes a Hero Member. Then what?

This is a status quo scenario. Building up to the next rank a person who went from Sr. Member to Legendary would need 750 merits from the introduction of the merit system. It would mean exactly the same in term of rank progression as the current system, but it would separate the good legendaries and heroes from the no good.

By using the system like this, no-one would be born with a "grandparent" advantage, and at the same time no-one would have the right to feel "cheated".
 

Your phraseology of "grandparent advantage" causes a pretty strong inference that you do not understand the basic fairness that is meant to come from the employment of such a principle.  Grandfather clauses are not meant to cause injustices, disadvantage, unfairness or exploitation of new users in favor of old but instead are meant to allow a fair transition in systems that does not prejudice prior membership or prior members' reliance on earlier terms.. it is a kind of basic transitional remedy that is used in a lot of places to cause fairness rather than unfairness.

You fail to see that not all grandparents are worthy of grandparent advantage. That being said, I think you fail to see that my suggestion won’t take any advantages from such. Quite the opposite actually. It will make the worthy people with great seniority stand out even more.

[JayJuanGee]

By using the system like this, no-one would be born with a "grandparent" advantage, and at the same time no-one would have the right to feel "cheated".
 

Your phraseology of "grandparent advantage" causes a pretty strong inference that you do not understand the basic fairness that is meant to come from the employment of such a principle.  Grandfather clauses are not meant to cause injustices, disadvantage, unfairness or exploitation of new users in favor of old but instead are meant to allow a fair transition in systems that does not prejudice prior membership or prior members' reliance on earlier terms.. it is a kind of basic transitional remedy that is used in a lot of places to cause fairness rather than unfairness.

You fail to see that not all grandparents are worthy of grandparent advantage. That being said, I think you fail to see that my suggestion won’t take any advantages from such. Quite the opposite actually. It will make the worthy people with great seniority stand out even more.

Again your phraseology of the grandfather situation is a bit much, and even if you have good intentions with your proposal, I fail to see your attempt to question bygones be bygones under the previous system.   

Certainly, I have no intention to protect the bad conduct and abuses of previous posters, but the new system is not an attempt to rectify past bad conduct (to the extent that it existed) but instead to reward future good conduct.  So, I think that any system, such as your proposal that seems to meddle too much with the past, goes too far and creates additional injustices that are not necessary to stir up.

[suchmoon]

This is a status quo scenario. Building up to the next rank a person who went from Sr. Member to Legendary would need 750 merits from the introduction of the merit system. It would mean exactly the same in term of rank progression as the current system, but it would separate the good legendaries and heroes from the no good.

So this would be a far more complicated system and it would make a blanket assumption (users who earned activity before the merit system are "no good"?) that isn't any better than the current implementation.

[Soke]

jimmywh.  If everyone started with 0 merits.  How do you expect to receive any merits?  You have to have merits in order to have sMerits.  If you take a look at the merits you have received so far, they are mostly from high ranking members.  Guess what? if they had started with 0 merits, you would probably still be at 0.  Don't fight the system, accept it.  

[JayJuanGee]

This is a status quo scenario. Building up to the next rank a person who went from Sr. Member to Legendary would need 750 merits from the introduction of the merit system. It would mean exactly the same in term of rank progression as the current system, but it would separate the good legendaries and heroes from the no good.

So this would be a far more complicated system and it would make a blanket assumption (users who earned activity before the merit system are "no good"?) that isn't any better than the current implementation.

It would be worse, and that is part of the problem with jimmywh's proposal and similarly aligned ones.   

[evdokimo]

jimmywh.  If everyone started with 0 merits.  How do you expect to receive any merits?  You have to have merits in order to have sMerits.  If you take a look at the merits you have received so far, they are mostly from high ranking members.  Guess what? if they had started with 0 merits, you would probably still be at 0.  Don't fight the system, accept it.  

If everyone started with 0 merits, this system would have still worked. Major portion of merits comes from merit sources not senior members.

[ozkraut]

This is a status quo scenario. Building up to the next rank a person who went from Sr. Member to Legendary would need 750 merits from the introduction of the merit system. It would mean exactly the same in term of rank progression as the current system, but it would separate the good legendaries and heroes from the no good.

So this would be a far more complicated system and it would make a blanket assumption (users who earned activity before the merit system are "no good"?) that isn't any better than the current implementation.

It would be impossible to perform a post mortem review on all previous posts to assess legacy merit. A line drawn in the sand, such as has been decided, is the only way to go. The permutations and wasted energy of any other approach would be mind boggling and futile.

 To me the discussion is over and its time to move on. And I am just a few posts away from hero based on my pre-merit activity. So I am mildly 'disadvantaged' but live goes on and bicycles continue to fall over in Beijing....

[pvk444]

jimmywh.  If everyone started with 0 merits.  How do you expect to receive any merits?  You have to have merits in order to have sMerits.  If you take a look at the merits you have received so far, they are mostly from high ranking members.  Guess what? if they had started with 0 merits, you would probably still be at 0.  Don't fight the system, accept it.  

a) there are still merit sources.  And more importantly,
b) not receiving merits by default, does not mean that sMerits's coudn't have been allocated by default.

But frankly, the fact that merits were distributed does not make a lot of difference from a rank-advancement perspective. Whether sombody needs 500 starting from 250 or needs 250 merits from 0, is practically the same.

I am just personally disappointed, as I was about 3 posts away from becoming full member before the merit system kicked in. So instead of 3 posts, I need now to get 90 merits ... which, is rather a dismotivation. And I know of others who has been in a similar or even worse position.

There was no "grandfathering" of being "almost" at the next level.

[ozkraut]

jimmywh.  If everyone started with 0 merits.  How do you expect to receive any merits?  You have to have merits in order to have sMerits.  If you take a look at the merits you have received so far, they are mostly from high ranking members.  Guess what? if they had started with 0 merits, you would probably still be at 0.  Don't fight the system, accept it.  

a) there are still merit sources.  And more importantly,
b) not receiving merits by default, does not mean that sMerits's coudn't have been allocated by default.

But frankly, the fact that merits were distributed does not make a lot of difference from a rank-advancement perspective. Whether sombody needs 500 starting from 250 or needs 250 merits from 0, is practically the same.

I am just personally disappointed, as I was about 3 posts away from becoming full member before the merit system kicked in. So instead of 3 posts, I need now to get 90 merits ... which, is rather a dismotivation. And I know of others who has been in a similar or even worse position.

There was no "grandfathering" of being "almost" at the next level.

Well here is 10 if it makes you feel better. Cheers

[sonulrk]

This is Bitcoin forum. Not a bounty forum. The fact that most complainers seem to be focused on making money is a good indication that the merit system is a step in the right direction.

You re missing one point out there, which is, an account cant give merits all the time, they will run out of their merit points, unless they are a "merit sources". So there will be no much biases on this merit system i guess. The key here is obviously to give merit to the right person, and who is that right person?
1. Who posts a quality posts.
2. Has a great forum manner.
3. Can decide a good posts out of bias.
I guess they must fulfill this 3 category to a user before they give the merits. So the person who are given the merit can pass the merit to the right person too, and in the end the merits will be circulated in to right person and will diminish people who only join this forum to rank up and gain money. And for now, i guess the old high rank members/users are persons that have enough knowledge in crypto and have good forum manner so thats why some of them are sources, so just let them do their job and hope they will do it perfectly.
Dont get me wrong, i love getting money from this forum, but i am not like people who only focusing this forum to earn money, and when they can not get the money, they will whine about it in this forum because of merit. For all people who whine about it, you are a worker not a boss here, the boss can search other people who has more knowledge and experience and replace you, in fact, there are lot of people who can do that besides you, if you dont step up your game, no one will hire you in the end.

Your whole argument just don't have any value and collapsed on its own weight when you have inserted just one word above (in red). There is spamming because this forum can be used to make money. This merit system is introduced to control the spamming and shit-posting and it's only retarded the speed of users to be ranked up. It is just like to give opium to control a naughty kid.

[pugman]

I don't know if this has been discussed before or not,but I think I might have found a little bug while sending merits.
What happened is I gave 1 merit to a user and when I refreshed my merit page to check my sMerits count,another merit is automatically sent by the system to the last user I sent the merit to! This has happened twice so far,can't think of it to be coincidence or an accident.
Am I the only one who faced this bug? Are there others too?
Also stop whining and fighting like kids about the merit system. Grow up already. You came to this forum for learning about bitcoin(at least 5% of the people did). So do that instead of non-stop whining.
Oh Ffs,it has happened thrice now. 

[TheQuin]

I don't know if this has been discussed before or not,but I think I might have found a little bug while sending merits.
What happened is I gave 1 merit to a user and when I refreshed my merit page to check my sMerits count,another merit is automatically sent by the system to the last user I sent the merit to! This has happened twice so far,can't think of it to be coincidence or an accident.
Am I the only one who faced this bug? Are there others too?

This has been reported by other people earlier in the thread. You can try the Enhanced merit UI [1.1] to avoid the problem or just always remember to close the tab after sending merit.

[pugman]

I don't know if this has been discussed before or not,but I think I might have found a little bug while sending merits.
What happened is I gave 1 merit to a user and when I refreshed my merit page to check my sMerits count,another merit is automatically sent by the system to the last user I sent the merit to! This has happened twice so far,can't think of it to be coincidence or an accident.
Am I the only one who faced this bug? Are there others too?

This has been reported by other people earlier in the thread. You can try the Enhanced merit UI [1.1] to avoid the problem or just always remember to close the tab after sending merit.

Unfortunately,I can't use it. As I always use incognito mode on my pc and on my phone also such is not possible
Thanks though!

[binuk]

Where is the button to give out Merit?
Do that disappear because my merit is 0? :thinking:

[Vod]

Where is the button to give out Merit?
Do that disappear because my merit is 0? :thinking:

You need (s)Merit to give it out.  :/

Since you have zero merit, you also have zero sMerit to give out.  

The link will not appear until you have sMerit to send to others.   You will get one sMerit for every two Merit you receive.  

(This may not be allowed, but please send me all your current sMerits!  Please!)

[pugman]

Where is the button to give out Merit?
Do that disappear because my merit is 0? :thinking:

It is right there,look:
Just click the +merit button

You have sMerit to give out - he doesn't.  The link won't show for him.

Didn't know about this,thanks for letting me know.

[Vod]

Where is the button to give out Merit?
Do that disappear because my merit is 0? :thinking:

It is right there,look:
Just click the +merit button

You have sMerit to give out - he doesn't.  The link won't show for him.

[binuk]

Where is the button to give out Merit?
Do that disappear because my merit is 0? :thinking:

You need (s)Merit to give it out.  :/

Since you have zero merit, you also have zero sMerit to give out.  

The link will not appear until you have sMerit to send to others.   You will get one sMerit for every two Merit you receive.  

(This may not be allowed, but please send me all your current sMerits!  Please!)

Thank you. I've merited you.....in my mind