Merit & new rank requirements

[JayJuanGee]

I found the new ranking requirement is not logic. It requires way too many merit points in order to gain higher rankings. For example, I am a Member now, and from Member to Full Member:

Requirements:
   Member   60   10
    Full Member   120   100

I need 60 posts and 90 Merit points. How many posts I can get 90 merit points? Well, some posts I just reply to other people's posts, with my comments, for those, I probably get no merit points. I need to post long and original info or thoughts in order to get merit points. Say every 3 posts I get 1 merit point, I'd do 270 activities to get 90 merit points, and this is probably the best scenario, and admin will need to notice every of my good posts  

Therefore, I think this system is not rational. To the least, the requirement of the activities and merit need to be consistent. The purpose of the merit is to make people write quality posts. So with 3:1 ration this could be reasonable, which means if we keep that Full Member requires 120 activities, then the merit point requirement should be 10+60/3 = 30, instead 100, for the Full Members. This will encourage people to make quality posts and don't find other ways to cheat.

Hey.. you made a pretty decent post, here, but the content seems to be whining about stupid shit (meaning already beaten to death points, if you bothered looking through this thread, for example).  

I would think that if you had made some decent points about something relatively important and significant, then the way that you back up your points, such as here, and describe the situation would likely be more attracting of smerits (at least one, and you might get one here, too.. because sometimes even whiners find common cause with other whiners who happen to have some smerits that they are willing to spend on a common cause whiner).

Anyhow, you can also attempt to study into the matter and see that higher earning merit post members could provide some examples about how you could earn merits, to the extent that merits are important, anyhow for someone who merely wants to read posts.. .. and throw in a few responsive posts from time to time... assuming that there is even any real need to rank up for folks who mostly just read, rather than posting in interactive kinds of ways (which there are a variety of ways that your posts could end up earning merits, if you looked into the matter a bit (rather than just whining some seeming bullshit and seeming non-studied points)).

I went through the posts, just want to raise the issue. I am not whining here, I just hope the system be more reasonable.

It could be that I misread your knowledge base and how much you really thought about the subject, and surely if you go through the various posts on the topic or even think through the rationale(s) for the merit system, if you are a reasonable person, you should also be able to recognize that the system was put in place based on reasonable considerations (or at least attempts at reasonableness).

Perhaps there could be better systems or better reasons, but in the end, I would have a difficult time concluding that theymos was not at least attempting to be reasonable about what he implemented and what changes that he made based on goals that he was attempting to achieve (namely largely attempting to disincentivize account farming and spamming/shit posting).

I think that theymos is also open to suggestions that would make this merit system better, but there with any rolling out of any system, there are also going to be attempts to go with what you got and to tweak rather than abandon the already taken direction, unless there is another path that is relatively clear and likely better.

Afterall, the merit point is not there for fun, it's to encourage people to post better.

I largely agree with you, except I would phrase it differently.

I think that it is meant to discourage shitposting, rather than encouraging good posts, even though they seem to be two ends of the same coin... but I don't think that the new system is attempting to cause any burdensome obligations on regular members (even though you might see it that way and even if it ends up becoming more difficult to rank up).

But with this kind of unreasonable system,

Again you are assuming the system to be unreasonable, and I think that is too BIG of an assumption that is not based on facts or logical backing.

it does not achieve its goal.

First, if you have the goal wrong, then you might consider that the new system is not achieving it.

Second, if the goal is to cut down on spamming and farming accounts, I think that there is evidence that the new system might have made some progress in that direction.  I don't feel like I need to provide that evidence, but at least if you are looking at the actual goals, then that would be a step in the right direction (or redirection).

I, as many here, are enthusiast of Bitcoin and blockchain technology. I come here to get information and ideas.

I don't see how this current merit system would be hindering you from getting information and ideas, and if overall there is less spamming and account farming (assuming that to be the case), then it would seem that some of your objectives would be improved.. to get better information and ideas with less clutter?  Perhaps?

Of course I'd like to be as high ranking as possible.

You have not really stated any reason for that?  Of course, all of us like to have recognition and status, but in a forum like this, some people do not have time to spend a lot of time on posting and getting known by other members, so there could be too much of a cost, and perhaps if you are just sharing information and ideas, then I don't see what purpose rank has in that?  Unless you want to sell something or if you want to participatate in a signature campaign or something like that.  You have not asserted those to be either of your goals.  At least not yet.

But the system as is, I doubt it will help any, at least for myself, I don't care and it does not encourage me to make any better posts.

Again, I doubt whether the goals of the system are as you describe, which is to encourage you to make better posts, especially if you are not a previous shit poster or a spammer.  Of course, if you have a goal to rank up, then at least on the margins, the system might create such incentives to get you to post in such a way that will inspire others to merit your posts/contributions.  

Your overall points are not really bad and your way of expressing them are pretty decent, but I still don't arrive at similar kinds of conclusions as you, and I believe that part of the reason for our differing conclusions is that I consider the goals of the merit system to be a bit different from your consideration(s) and it seems to me that theymos (and other admin/mods who are influencing his thinking) is attempting to be reasonable (even if his reasonableness differs from some other members - including you, presumably).

[Kopyleft]

First, if you have the goal wrong, then you might consider that the new system is not achieving it.

Second, if the goal is to cut down on spamming and farming accounts, I think that there is evidence that the new system might have made some progress in that direction.  I don't feel like I need to provide that evidence, but at least if you are looking at the actual goals, then that would be a step in the right direction (or redirection).

The most important plus from the updated newbie restrictions, is bringing out the quality content from the former shitposters and spammers, who due to wrong orientation, prioritized quantity over quality.

We now have, lots of self made, member, full members, since the restrictions we're implemented. Contrary to popular opinion that they would return to spamming after achieving the minimum merit requirement needed to wear signatures.

[krishnaverma]

what if others will only buy/ sell merit even though their post is garbage? they should be ban

That is already being done to members abusing the merit system. You should focus on own post quality and thus adding value to the forum. If you have some additional time left, you can also report the misuse of merits if you notice it.

[Direwolve735]

I think that it is meant to discourage shitposting, rather than encouraging good posts, even though they seem to be two ends of the same coin...

I don`t think that the merit-system somehow discourages and blocks the way to shitposting. Rather, it`s a kind of an obstacle to getting money for spam (although this is a hurdle in the form of one merit, unfortunately, you can easily get around). After all, the merit system doesn`t prohibit writing bad posts. Even if you remain a newbie, you can still spam and write low-quality comments. But you cannot wear a signature and participate in bounty campaigns. Therefore, the merit-system reduces the chances of earning money and the scale of these incomes, but not the opportunity to write shitposts.

That`s why I`m more inclined to think that merits encourage the writing of better comments. At the very least, they become a way to rise in rank (what most forum participants want). What are the motives of the members, who strive to earn merit, is another question. But at least they try to write more constructive posts.

[JayJuanGee]

First, if you have the goal wrong, then you might consider that the new system is not achieving it.

Second, if the goal is to cut down on spamming and farming accounts, I think that there is evidence that the new system might have made some progress in that direction.  I don't feel like I need to provide that evidence, but at least if you are looking at the actual goals, then that would be a step in the right direction (or redirection).

The most important plus from the updated newbie restrictions, is bringing out the quality content from the former shitposters and spammers, who due to wrong orientation, prioritized quantity over quality.

We now have, lots of self made, member, full members, since the restrictions we're implemented. Contrary to popular opinion that they would return to spamming after achieving the minimum merit requirement needed to wear signatures.

I am not sure what you are saying the facts are?

Did prior spammers earn their minimum merit and then go back to spamming? or are you saying something else?  Of course, there is going to be some anectdotal evidence, but do we have larger trend data, rather than just a few examples of smarties?

[coinlocket$]

I found the new ranking requirement is not logic. It requires way too many merit points in order to gain higher rankings. For example, I am a Member now, and from Member to Full Member:
~

After almost 1 year of merit system from what I can see at the actual state of the system, is to easy to get junior rank status, and is way to hard to get hero + status, especially legendary when you need 500 merit but if you are lucky only 250~ activity more than hero.
Decreasing the merit for legendaries to 800 could be a good thing, as always what is the difference from earning 0-800 merit to 0-1000? Is the 800 merit earner don't deserve the rank when we have many legendaries shitposting everyday? (free status with almost 0 merits earned on 1 year?)

[tranthidung]

Medians of daily merits shown in the following plot decrease gradually over the period from 19th February 2018 to 18th November 2018 (the first four weeks since 24th Jan. 2018 to 18th February 2018 dropped due to extreme outliers; and the first three days of the last incomplete week dropped).

There are about 15% difference between the highest and the lowest during the last 20 weeks, at 733 and 626, respectively.

It is snapshots, for more details please visit via the link

[Coinifyx]

I found the new ranking requirement is not logic. It requires way too many merit points in order to gain higher rankings. For example, I am a Member now, and from Member to Full Member:

Requirements:
   Member   60   10
    Full Member   120   100

I need 60 posts and 90 Merit points. How many posts I can get 90 merit points? Well, some posts I just reply to other people's posts, with my comments, for those, I probably get no merit points. I need to post long and original info or thoughts in order to get merit points. Say every 3 posts I get 1 merit point, I'd do 270 activities to get 90 merit points, and this is probably the best scenario, and admin will need to notice every of my good posts  

Meanwhile we see accounts of "Sr. Members" with 250 merits and barely 300 posts only because they were registered before you

And those accounts work as a source of possible scammers for newbies

-----

This is how the ranking system should be imho:
5 merits + 100 posts - Jr. Member
10 merits + 200 posts - Member
20 merits + 300 posts - Full Member
50 merits + 500 posts - Senior Member
100 merits + 1000 posts - Hero Member
250 merits + 2000 posts - Legendary Member

Without the free merits from signup date

[JayJuanGee]

I found the new ranking requirement is not logic. It requires way too many merit points in order to gain higher rankings. For example, I am a Member now, and from Member to Full Member:

Requirements:
   Member   60   10
    Full Member   120   100

I need 60 posts and 90 Merit points. How many posts I can get 90 merit points? Well, some posts I just reply to other people's posts, with my comments, for those, I probably get no merit points. I need to post long and original info or thoughts in order to get merit points. Say every 3 posts I get 1 merit point, I'd do 270 activities to get 90 merit points, and this is probably the best scenario, and admin will need to notice every of my good posts  

Meanwhile we see accounts of "Sr. Members" with 250 merits and barely 300 posts only because they were registered before you

And those accounts work as a source of possible scammers for newbies

-----

This is how the ranking system should be imho:
5 merits + 100 posts - Jr. Member
10 merits + 200 posts - Member
20 merits + 300 posts - Full Member
50 merits + 500 posts - Senior Member
100 merits + 1000 posts - Hero Member
250 merits + 2000 posts - Legendary Member

Without the free merits from signup date

You seem to NOT understand.

Even though I understand what you are attempting to say, there are no "free merits"

The merits that were distributed on January 24, 2018 were an attempt to approximate merits that members should have based on then rank and recent activity as of then.

It's a concept called grandfathering, and which does not mean that you start over (like you seem to be suggesting) but intending NOT to take away anything from members who were operating under the previous system (that did not have merits, as you recognize).

[Coinifyx]

I found the new ranking requirement is not logic. It requires way too many merit points in order to gain higher rankings. For example, I am a Member now, and from Member to Full Member:

Requirements:
   Member   60   10
    Full Member   120   100

I need 60 posts and 90 Merit points. How many posts I can get 90 merit points? Well, some posts I just reply to other people's posts, with my comments, for those, I probably get no merit points. I need to post long and original info or thoughts in order to get merit points. Say every 3 posts I get 1 merit point, I'd do 270 activities to get 90 merit points, and this is probably the best scenario, and admin will need to notice every of my good posts  

Meanwhile we see accounts of "Sr. Members" with 250 merits and barely 300 posts only because they were registered before you

And those accounts work as a source of possible scammers for newbies

-----

This is how the ranking system should be imho:
5 merits + 100 posts - Jr. Member
10 merits + 200 posts - Member
20 merits + 300 posts - Full Member
50 merits + 500 posts - Senior Member
100 merits + 1000 posts - Hero Member
250 merits + 2000 posts - Legendary Member

Without the free merits from signup date

You seem to NOT understand.

Even though I understand what you are attempting to say, there are no "free merits"

The merits that were distributed on January 24, 2018 were an attempt to approximate merits that members should have based on then rank and recent activity as of then.

It's a concept called grandfathering, and which does not mean that you start over (like you seem to be suggesting) but intending NOT to take away anything from members who were operating under the previous system (that did not have merits, as you recognize).

Look at this account:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=106181

249 posts
250 merits
No merits received or sent in the last 120 days lol

And they have the audacity to say I need to earn 100 merits just to become a full member, and I can't even ask for them or I get banned, this just makes me feel like:
1) I should leave the forum, because it's not worth it
2) Or I should buy an account, but I don't want to since I am not a scammer

Admin should understand that every post makes him earn more traffic and therefore money in the long term, every post directly or indirectly feeds the platform and the community. You shouldn't work on a way to obstacle new members but on a way to obstacle scammers, for example by spreading escrow and middleman services across the website, rather than letting people deal with sketchy PMs.

Hell you could even have a contract system moderated by the source of merits, but no you decided to punish all new members for the abuse of some.

[JayJuanGee]

I found the new ranking requirement is not logic. It requires way too many merit points in order to gain higher rankings. For example, I am a Member now, and from Member to Full Member:

Requirements:
   Member   60   10
    Full Member   120   100

I need 60 posts and 90 Merit points. How many posts I can get 90 merit points? Well, some posts I just reply to other people's posts, with my comments, for those, I probably get no merit points. I need to post long and original info or thoughts in order to get merit points. Say every 3 posts I get 1 merit point, I'd do 270 activities to get 90 merit points, and this is probably the best scenario, and admin will need to notice every of my good posts  

Meanwhile we see accounts of "Sr. Members" with 250 merits and barely 300 posts only because they were registered before you

And those accounts work as a source of possible scammers for newbies

-----

This is how the ranking system should be imho:
5 merits + 100 posts - Jr. Member
10 merits + 200 posts - Member
20 merits + 300 posts - Full Member
50 merits + 500 posts - Senior Member
100 merits + 1000 posts - Hero Member
250 merits + 2000 posts - Legendary Member

Without the free merits from signup date

You seem to NOT understand.

Even though I understand what you are attempting to say, there are no "free merits"

The merits that were distributed on January 24, 2018 were an attempt to approximate merits that members should have based on then rank and recent activity as of then.

It's a concept called grandfathering, and which does not mean that you start over (like you seem to be suggesting) but intending NOT to take away anything from members who were operating under the previous system (that did not have merits, as you recognize).

Look at this account:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=106181

249 posts
250 merits
No merits received or sent in the last 120 days lol

You seem to want to change the topic and drag the situation into some kind of mud that was not even a part of your original post.

If members ranked up in accordance with the previous system, then they are not going to be deranked merely because they are not active under the current system, unless theymos makes new poliies regarding those kinds of issues, which does not seem likely.

The issue we have here, or your beef, seems to be how theymos had credited accounts with merits at that time of the new system, which is largely already explained in OP and really has been hashed out already in terms of criticisms that seems to have caused a few additional tweaks, but largely has been considered to be overall a fair balance to transition from the old system to the new system.   

And they have the audacity to say I need to earn 100 merits just to become a full member, and I can't even ask for them or I get banned, this just makes me feel like:
1) I should leave the forum, because it's not worth it
2) Or I should buy an account, but I don't want to since I am not a scammer

Again, new points that you are making, and bringing up some other issues.  Actually, how many merits you need and the policies regarding merits are largely set by admin, so it does not matter what any other members say about it, except you seem to NOT like what they are saying because they are just informing you of the current policy. 

Of course, you can choose whether or not to continue as a forum member under the current system and whether you believe the forum to provide value to you.

Admin should understand that every post makes him earn more traffic and therefore money in the long term, every post directly or indirectly feeds the platform and the community. You shouldn't work on a way to obstacle new members but on a way to obstacle scammers, for example by spreading escrow and middleman services across the website, rather than letting people deal with sketchy PMs.

I doubt that there is any intention to burden new accounts, and of course, if a forum is built, admin is going to understand that part of the value of the forum has come from the contribution of members over the life of the forum and continuing incentives to contribute.  I doubt that those considerations  of the value of member contribution would be lost on the admin(s) of this forum.

Hell you could even have a contract system moderated by the source of merits, but no you decided to punish all new members for the abuse of some.

Again, it does not appear that the merit system was created to punish or burden all new member, but instead as a means to lessen the farming of accounts and shit/spam posting.  So your claims seem to go a bit far in terms of what you are proclaiming the merit system policies to be causing.

[Coinifyx]

You seem to want to change the topic and drag the situation into some kind of mud that was not even a part of your original post.

If members ranked up in accordance with the previous system, then they are not going to be deranked merely because they are not active under the current system, unless theymos makes new poliies regarding those kinds of issues, which does not seem likely.

The issue we have here, or your beef, seems to be how theymos had credited accounts with merits at that time of the new system, which is largely already explained in OP and really has been hashed out already in terms of criticisms that seems to have caused a few additional tweaks, but largely has been considered to be overall a fair balance to transition from the old system to the new system.

I linked you an example of how wrong this approximation have been, almost looks like it was done in this way on purpose. When someone with less than 250 posts has 250 merits and no merits received in the last 120 days, you can easily comprehend that there is no merit in that, it was simply a privilege bestowed by the admin to previously registered members.

Indeed I will call this the privilege system, not the ranking system from now on 

Again, new points that you are making, and bringing up some other issues.  Actually, how many merits you need and the policies regarding merits are largely set by admin, so it does not matter what any other members say about it, except you seem to NOT like what they are saying because they are just informing you of the current policy. 

Of course, you can choose whether or not to continue as a forum member under the current system and whether you believe the forum to provide value to you.

The admin can do whatever he wants, it is his website, and since I am allowed to post I will say my opinion about it. His calculation was lazy and wrongly interpreted, not accurate with the actual value of an account, gifting scammers an opportunity to act like sharks.

Again, it does not appear that the merit system was created to punish or burden all new member, but instead as a means to lessen the farming of accounts and shit/spam posting.  So your claims seem to go a bit far in terms of what you are proclaiming the merit system policies to be causing.

What's the purpose of farming accounts? To scam when they become established.
How do you prevent being scammed? By using an escrow or middleman service.

Yet, you can't find a single mention of an escrow or middleman service in the marketplace, ex. (Currency Exchange section)
https://i.gyazo.com/0c35adda069d7af38f11e9088f5ac999.png

This forms a sea, where sharks(gifted members) can act on the best prey, they wait for the right person to add on skype and go all in/exit scam, because they didn't earn any merit they inherited the privilege...so they got a worthy account for free.

[JayJuanGee]

You seem to want to change the topic and drag the situation into some kind of mud that was not even a part of your original post.

If members ranked up in accordance with the previous system, then they are not going to be deranked merely because they are not active under the current system, unless theymos makes new poliies regarding those kinds of issues, which does not seem likely.

The issue we have here, or your beef, seems to be how theymos had credited accounts with merits at that time of the new system, which is largely already explained in OP and really has been hashed out already in terms of criticisms that seems to have caused a few additional tweaks, but largely has been considered to be overall a fair balance to transition from the old system to the new system.

I linked you an example of how wrong this approximation have been, almost looks like it was done in this way on purpose. When someone with less than 250 posts has 250 merits and no merits received in the last 120 days, you can easily comprehend that there is no merit in that, it was simply a privilege bestowed by the admin to previously registered members.

I looked up your example on https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=angryrob, and it appears that he has never received any merits under the new system.  So the amount of the merits that he received on January 24, 2018 appears to have been 250, which would have been based  on having a minimal activity of 240 at that time... if I am reading OP correctly..

Is there something unusual beyond the subsequent inactivity?   

Indeed I will call this the privilege system, not the ranking system from now on 

You can call it whatever you want, but if you intend to communicate with other forum members it is good to explain your references, especially if you are not using familiar terms.  Furthermore, if you start out in a combative framework, you are likely NOT to get any response because you are just coming off as bitter and disgruntled rather than really attempting to contribute in some kind of meaningful way.

In other words, people might not need to agree with you, but if you are trying to move people to change their minds, they usually are not going to want to get caught up in a bunch of confusion that you seem to want to cause with your seemingly baggage ladden references.

Again, new points that you are making, and bringing up some other issues.  Actually, how many merits you need and the policies regarding merits are largely set by admin, so it does not matter what any other members say about it, except you seem to NOT like what they are saying because they are just informing you of the current policy. 

Of course, you can choose whether or not to continue as a forum member under the current system and whether you believe the forum to provide value to you.

The admin can do whatever he wants, it is his website, and since I am allowed to post I will say my opinion about it. His calculation was lazy and wrongly interpreted, not accurate with the actual value of an account, gifting scammers an opportunity to act like sharks.

Of course, you are free to have your own conclusions and opinions, but if you don't back them up, I doubt that those opinions and conclusions are going to persuade anyone to agree with you - unless they happen to share ill-backed bitter disgruntledness with you... so I have some difficulties understanding your purpose, if you only want to complain and whine.  I would think that trying to persuade with facts and logic would be a better approach, but that remains your choice, as you already indicated.

Again, it does not appear that the merit system was created to punish or burden all new member, but instead as a means to lessen the farming of accounts and shit/spam posting.  So your claims seem to go a bit far in terms of what you are proclaiming the merit system policies to be causing.

What's the purpose of farming accounts? To scam when they become established.
How do you prevent being scammed? By using an escrow or middleman service.

Again, you seem to be going into another topic.  I was merely referring to what seemed to have been part of the motivation to establish merits for ranking up.    You may have to read through this thread and become a bit more informed about what you are attempting to criticize, if you don't even seem to understand what motivated the system that you are criticizing to get put in place..

Yet, you can't find a single mention of an escrow or middleman service in the marketplace, ex. (Currency Exchange section)
https://i.gyazo.com/0c35adda069d7af38f11e9088f5ac999.png

This forms a sea, where sharks(gifted members) can act on the best prey, they wait for the right person to add on skype and go all in/exit scam, because they didn't earn any merit they inherited the privilege...so they got a worthy account for free.

I am not embedded in the life of scouting out various forms of membership abuse and ways to make money with forum accounts, so probably some other member will need to chime in about your points that seem to be deviating quite a lot from the topic of this thread..and what seemed to had been your original point(s).

[Coinifyx]

I looked up your example on https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=angryrob, and it appears that he has never received any merits under the new system.  So the amount of the merits that he received on January 24, 2018 appears to have been 250, which would have been based  on having a minimal activity of 240 at that time... if I am reading OP correctly..

You can call it whatever you want, but if you intend to communicate with other forum members it is good to explain your references, especially if you are not using familiar terms.  Furthermore, if you start out in a combative framework, you are likely NOT to get any response because you are just coming off as bitter and disgruntled rather than really attempting to contribute in some kind of meaningful way.

In other words, people might not need to agree with you, but if you are trying to move people to change their minds, they usually are not going to want to get caught up in a bunch of confusion that you seem to want to cause with your seemingly baggage ladden references.

Of course, you are free to have your own conclusions and opinions, but if you don't back them up, I doubt that those opinions and conclusions are going to persuade anyone to agree with you - unless they happen to share ill-backed bitter disgruntledness with you... so I have some difficulties understanding your purpose, if you only want to complain and whine.  I would think that trying to persuade with facts and logic would be a better approach, but that remains your choice, as you already indicated.

You have facts and logic at the very beginning of your post. If that's not enough for you, to consider this a privilege system, then I am not interested in convincing you. The "policy" implemented should be reviewed and adjusted in light of those facts.

Again, you seem to be going into another topic.  I was merely referring to what seemed to have been part of the motivation to establish merits for ranking up.    You may have to read through this thread and become a bit more informed about what you are attempting to criticize, if you don't even seem to understand what motivated the system that you are criticizing to get put in place..

I am not embedded in the life of scouting out various forms of membership abuse and ways to make money with forum accounts, so probably some other member will need to chime in about your points that seem to be deviating quite a lot from the topic of this thread..and what seemed to had been your original point(s).

I didn't deviate from the topic of this thread, I am discussing it and its effects, and I didn't deviate from my original post indeed consider my last posts an extension of the first post.

[JayJuanGee]

I looked up your example on https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=angryrob, and it appears that he has never received any merits under the new system.  So the amount of the merits that he received on January 24, 2018 appears to have been 250, which would have been based  on having a minimal activity of 240 at that time... if I am reading OP correctly..

You can call it whatever you want, but if you intend to communicate with other forum members it is good to explain your references, especially if you are not using familiar terms.  Furthermore, if you start out in a combative framework, you are likely NOT to get any response because you are just coming off as bitter and disgruntled rather than really attempting to contribute in some kind of meaningful way.

In other words, people might not need to agree with you, but if you are trying to move people to change their minds, they usually are not going to want to get caught up in a bunch of confusion that you seem to want to cause with your seemingly baggage ladden references.

Of course, you are free to have your own conclusions and opinions, but if you don't back them up, I doubt that those opinions and conclusions are going to persuade anyone to agree with you - unless they happen to share ill-backed bitter disgruntledness with you... so I have some difficulties understanding your purpose, if you only want to complain and whine.  I would think that trying to persuade with facts and logic would be a better approach, but that remains your choice, as you already indicated.

You have facts and logic at the very beginning of your post. If that's not enough for you, to consider this a privilege system, then I am not interested in convincing you. The "policy" implemented should be reviewed and adjusted in light of those facts.

Again, you seem to be going into another topic.  I was merely referring to what seemed to have been part of the motivation to establish merits for ranking up.    You may have to read through this thread and become a bit more informed about what you are attempting to criticize, if you don't even seem to understand what motivated the system that you are criticizing to get put in place..

I am not embedded in the life of scouting out various forms of membership abuse and ways to make money with forum accounts, so probably some other member will need to chime in about your points that seem to be deviating quite a lot from the topic of this thread..and what seemed to had been your original point(s).

I didn't deviate from the topic of this thread, I am discussing it and its effects, and I didn't deviate from my original post indeed consider my last posts an extension of the first post.

O.k.  I will consider that we are not really making much progress in our discussion because I responded to your various points with my opinion, and I even thought that your points were fairly weak from the start, but I was willing to entertain them, but we did not seem to go anywhere. 


Hopefully another member can respond to your points because I personally think that you are not really making any clear case.  Think about it.  '

A merit system is implemented with various goals in mind that are communicated to the members, and if you, as a member, are suggesting to change the system, then you have the burden to provide facts and logic in order to convince others (especially forum administration - theymos) that changes that you are suggesting are warranted or would be helpful. 

In the end, members do not make the policies of the forum, but instead it is theymos, perhaps through the suggestion and recommendations of members (and moderators) but in the end, he decides if he is going to make changes in accordance with suggestions and criticisms.  Whether you deviated or not, I am not following what seems to be more like a stream of consciouness production rather than any decent points that make sense to me.  Perhaps some other member will be able to follow and chime in better than me.

[Flagship11]

I wish I had more merit so I could participate in some of the bounties.
It seems to be the same people exchanging merit on this board.
Maybe, if I'm lucky, I will receive some merit one of these days.

[Coinifyx]

I looked up your example on https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=angryrob, and it appears that he has never received any merits under the new system.  So the amount of the merits that he received on January 24, 2018 appears to have been 250, which would have been based  on having a minimal activity of 240 at that time... if I am reading OP correctly..

You can call it whatever you want, but if you intend to communicate with other forum members it is good to explain your references, especially if you are not using familiar terms.  Furthermore, if you start out in a combative framework, you are likely NOT to get any response because you are just coming off as bitter and disgruntled rather than really attempting to contribute in some kind of meaningful way.

In other words, people might not need to agree with you, but if you are trying to move people to change their minds, they usually are not going to want to get caught up in a bunch of confusion that you seem to want to cause with your seemingly baggage ladden references.

Of course, you are free to have your own conclusions and opinions, but if you don't back them up, I doubt that those opinions and conclusions are going to persuade anyone to agree with you - unless they happen to share ill-backed bitter disgruntledness with you... so I have some difficulties understanding your purpose, if you only want to complain and whine.  I would think that trying to persuade with facts and logic would be a better approach, but that remains your choice, as you already indicated.

You have facts and logic at the very beginning of your post. If that's not enough for you, to consider this a privilege system, then I am not interested in convincing you. The "policy" implemented should be reviewed and adjusted in light of those facts.

Again, you seem to be going into another topic.  I was merely referring to what seemed to have been part of the motivation to establish merits for ranking up.    You may have to read through this thread and become a bit more informed about what you are attempting to criticize, if you don't even seem to understand what motivated the system that you are criticizing to get put in place..

I am not embedded in the life of scouting out various forms of membership abuse and ways to make money with forum accounts, so probably some other member will need to chime in about your points that seem to be deviating quite a lot from the topic of this thread..and what seemed to had been your original point(s).

I didn't deviate from the topic of this thread, I am discussing it and its effects, and I didn't deviate from my original post indeed consider my last posts an extension of the first post.

O.k.  I will consider that we are not really making much progress in our discussion because I responded to your various points with my opinion, and I even thought that your points were fairly weak from the start, but I was willing to entertain them, but we did not seem to go anywhere.  


Hopefully another member can respond to your points because I personally think that you are not really making any clear case.  Think about it.  '

A merit system is implemented with various goals in mind that are communicated to the members, and if you, as a member, are suggesting to change the system, then you have the burden to provide facts and logic in order to convince others (especially forum administration - theymos) that changes that you are suggesting are warranted or would be helpful.  

In the end, members do not make the policies of the forum, but instead it is theymos, perhaps through the suggestion and recommendations of members (and moderators) but in the end, he decides if he is going to make changes in accordance with suggestions and criticisms.  Whether you deviated or not, I am not following what seems to be more like a stream of consciouness production rather than any decent points that make sense to me.  Perhaps some other member will be able to follow and chime in better than me.

I am not against a merit system

I am against those who received an oversized amount of free merits and now have worthy accounts to scam with

That was the point of my first post beside my opinion on the ranking system and I think it is a fair point

Admin could sell the website tomorrow if he wants so let's stop this here

[JayJuanGee]

[edited out]

I am not against a merit system

I am against those who received an oversized amount of free merits and now have worthy accounts to scam with

That was the point of my first post beside my opinion on the ranking system and I think it is a fair point

Admin could sell the website tomorrow if he wants so let's stop this here

Seems like I responded to all your points to the extent that I am able to.

[RivAngE]

Is it just me who feels there was an increase in merit-giving when new sources were added in September and now we're in a deadlock again?
*Checking the thread's history*
Okay I'm not the only one who thinks that!

I was expecting to have unlocked the avatars by now but I've got nothing in October and just 3 merits in November.
Maybe some merit sources have gone inactive or they're all around the Bitcoin section while I'm mostly in the altcoin section?

[DdmrDdmr]

<...>

The effect of the newly added merit sources during September 2018 is relatively small on aggregate, and only had a large effect during a week in appearance (but in the aftermaths, more likely than not, the peak reached in September was due to Alt TXs for the most).

This is a summary of the merit awarded by section/subsection during November 2018 (up until last update on the 23rd of this month):

Code:

section                       subsection                         nTX       nMerits   nFrom     nTo       
Alternate cryptocurrencies    Altcoin Discussion                 146       348       96        123       
Alternate cryptocurrencies    Announcements (Altcoins)           332       910       205       260       
Alternate cryptocurrencies    Marketplace (Altcoins)             49        129       44        39        
Alternate cryptocurrencies    Mining (Altcoins)                  72        105       34        53        
Alternate cryptocurrencies    Speculation (Altcoins)             45        75        32        37        
Bitcoin                       Bitcoin Discussion                 212       523       110       122       
Bitcoin                       Bitcoin Technical Support          85        149       27        27        
Bitcoin                       Development & Technical Discussion 264       589       63        75        
Bitcoin                       Mining                             156       311       35        62        
Bitcoin                       Project Development                48        85        33        23        
Deleted                       Deleted                            86        132       61        77        
Economy                       Economics                          1030      1632      180       225       
Economy                       Marketplace                        453       869       160       222       
Economy                       Trading Discussion                 338       696       121       132       
Local                         Arabic                             35        41        10        18        
Local                         Chinese                            22        28        7         11        
Local                         Croatian                           91        104       18        26        
Local                         Dutch                              4         4         3         4         
Local                         French                             154       237       24        35        
Local                         German                             488       668       75        112       
Local                         Greek                              2         10        1         1         
Local                         Indian                             9         12        6         8         
Local                         Indonesian                         347       517       49        64        
Local                         Italian                            196       346       16        33        
Local                         Japanese                           8         16        6         5         
Local                         Other Languages                    10        45        9         9         
Local                         Philippines                        6         8         6         6         
Local                         Polish                             41        99        12        8         
Local                         Portuguese                         21        24        8         17        
Local                         Russian                            752       1182      240       347       
Local                         Spanish                            100       177       13        39        
Local                         Turkish                            128       303       56        86        
Other                         Archival                           5         13        5         2         
Other                         Beginners & Help                   180       268       61        99        
Other                         Meta                               686       1347      136       137       
Other                         Off-topic                          68        128       31        41        
Other                         Politics & Society                 162       434       35        57        
Other                         Serious discussion                 164       320       29        56        

nTX is the number of awarding sMerit TXs, nMerits the total awarded sMerits, nFrom the number of distinct Senders and nTo the number of distinct Receivers.

Bitcoin Discussion is better-off than Altcoin Discussion in terms of TXs and sMerit, but the number of players (nTo,nFrom) is similar in both cases.