Merit & new rank requirements

[STT]

It is obviously that theymos deserves thousands of merits for this thread.

He really doesnt need them though, its a nice thought but in percentage terms taking someone from 0 merit to at 1 or more for a post they make cant be equalled anywhere else because it sets them on the road forward.   I think its also easily possible they will notice the merit and appreciate it far more, your use of merit has far more effect when used on a new member.   I think that is the best use.
   If it was possible to use merit and it was kind of like a bookmark for a post I want to refer back to I would definitely end up using it on a few famous posts etc. but since the history gets wiped from recent I don't tend to do that and just go for maximum effect.

[1715038193]

1715038193

[1715038193]

1715038193

[1715038193]

1715038193

[LoyceMobile]

but since the history gets wiped from recent I don't tend to do that

See http://loyce.club/Merit/history/124876.html for your full Merit history.

[tranthidung]

Update:

ABSTRACT
Intra-day merits
- Median of intra-day merits over the period is 624;
- Minimum and maximum of intra-day merits (full dataset) are 295, and 13018, on 03/8/2019 and 24/1/2018, respectively.

Intra-week merits
- Median of intra-week merits is 4491;
- Minimum and maximum of intra-week merits are 3072 and 30960, in 2018w35, and 2018w4, respectively.

Outliers
- Intra-day merits: beyond 213 or 1053; and there are 34 outliers in total, only six of them occured in 2019.
- Intra-week merits: beyond 2435 or 6483. 12 weeks are outliers, in total; and there is only one outlier week occured in 2019, in 2019w2 at 6632.

Time series plots:

(1) Intra-day merits:
Full dataset:

Truncated dataset:

(2) Merits over days of week:
Outliers displayed as red circles.

Outliers non-displayed.

(3) Intra-week merits:

(4) Time series plot of median and interquartile range

(5) Weekly earned merits of top 100 merited profiles over 4 groups

(6) One year anniversary of enhanced merit system

For more details, please get them there:
Time Series Analysis on Distributed Merits in the forum (daily, weekly, monthly)
Interquartile range of intra-day merits with time series plot
One year anniversary of merit system
Weekly earned merits (median) of top 100 merited users (newest)
One year anniversary of enhanced merit system

[100bitcoin]

Is there any way yet to know the list of merit sources?

[suchmoon]

Is there any way yet to know the list of merit sources?

No. Why?

[CryptopreneurBrainboss]

Is there any way yet to know the list of merit sources?

Just have to assume you're asking a genuine question without any bad intentions. There isn't an officially list but  unofficially you can identify them through this thread; [TOP-200] The most generous users giving merits. Merit sources are highlighted in bold letters. There could be few mistake as some merit source are yet to be identify while other smerit generous givers could be mistaken for merit sources nevertheless, the list is 99% accurate.

[100bitcoin]

Is there any way yet to know the list of merit sources?

No. Why?

Because, we have default trust list here - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust.

But, no such merit source list here - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;stats=sources

Hence, I thought, if I am missing something.

Is there any way yet to know the list of merit sources?

Just have to assume you're asking a genuine question without any bad intentions. There isn't an officially list but  unofficially you can identify them through this thread; [TOP-200] The most generous users giving merits. Merit sources are highlighted in bold letters. There could be few mistake as some merit source are yet to be identify while other smerit generous givers could be mistaken for merit sources nevertheless, the list is 99% accurate.

Thanks. Was aware of suchmoon, LoyceV, DarkStar_, OgNasty and a few others. But did not know that so many of them are unofficially identified.

[suchmoon]

Because, we have default trust list here - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust.

But, no such merit source list here - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;stats=sources

Hence, I thought, if I am missing something.

I mean - why do you need it? What would you use it for?

[100bitcoin]

Because, we have default trust list here - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust.

But, no such merit source list here - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;stats=sources

Hence, I thought, if I am missing something.

I mean - why do you need it? What would you use it for?

Have not thought of any specific usage. But, so far, I have seen if theymos chose a group of users for whatever purpose, it is public. Forum moderators, the erstwhile default trust, users holding forum fund... all are public. This is probably the first time, there is no official list of people chosen by him. Hence, I was a bit surprised and wanted to confirm.

[fillippone]

There is an obvious reason why board administrators are public.
Trust lists are inherently public.
There is a good reason why forum funds custodian are public.
There are no reason why merit source list should be made public.

[Timelord2067]

Is there any way yet to know the list of merit sources?

No. Why?

Some identify themselves, others are identified by others. You could work out who some of them are if you applied yourself.

There are no reason why merit source list should be made public.

There is *one* reason - waste.

e.g. When said merit sources go on sprees splashing large numbers of merits to high ranking members such as in threads specifically designed to trash others.

[malevolent]

There are no reason why merit source list should be made public.

This is the reasoning:

I will not be posting a definitive list of merit sources (so that people don't bug them too much), though you'll soon figure out who they are if you pay attention.

Another reason I can think of against making the list public is it would make it easier to buy merits by contacting every one on the list and hoping at least one of them is willing to profit from their position.

[fillippone]

I said there are no reason why such a list would need to made public.

Of course there are reasons why this list need to be kept private! (Theymos argument and your one are two correct examples, but there might be others too).

Those are two different statements.
Sorry for nitpicking the logic.

[DdmrDdmr]

I haven’t posted on recent weekly merits per board for two months now, so here’s an update:

 

What I’m showing is merit distribution over the last 10 weeks (weeks 36 to 45), with all previous data aggregated (2018 and 2019 "compress"), in order to reduce the number of columns. Week 45 is still partial (lacking the weekend’s data).

I’ve highlighted in yellow some (not all) of the most significant changes over between the last few complete weeks:

-   Announcements (Altcoins) had an atypical peak on week 41.
-   Bitcoin boards picked-up on weeks 41 and 42 quite a bit, but have fallen back to previous week’s numbers (and even lower on week 44).
-   German Local board has dropped by around 60% over the last 4 weeks (compared to previous 4 weeks).
-   Turkish Local board has improved, more than doubling over the past 4 weeks in comparison to prior weeks.
-   By art of magic, Meta has improved nearly threefold over the past weeks (and may have drawn some attention away from Bitcoin boards).

[phillymogul]

This merit system seems out of balance with Member to Full Member. 
Why 10 to be Member but 100 to be Full Member, a 10X increase?

If this is true, Full Member to Sr Member should be 2400 merit, and similarly 4800 to Hero etc.

A more in line Merit from Member to Full would be around 20 - 25 IMO

[LoyceV]

A more in line Merit from Member to Full would be around 20 - 25 IMO

The Merit required for Full Member and higher is close to the required Activity. If anything is out of balance, is that Jr. Members and Members require less Merit.

[JayJuanGee]

A more in line Merit from Member to Full would be around 20 - 25 IMO

The Merit required for Full Member and higher is close the the required Activity. If anything is out of balance, is that Jr. Members and Members require less Merit.

Hahahaaha...

You are correct Loyce, and the whole point about striving to achieve "in line" merit system is ludicrous at best, at least in terms of considering the trajectory in terms of percentages.

Currently, there seems to be a decently low threshold for members to get started in achieving some kind of rank by having low thresholds to get started.  They get some skin in the game by achieving some rank relatively quickly, as long as someone finds enough value in their post(s) to send some smerit love in their direction, but yeah as a percentage those values are pretty great between member and full member, even while there should seem to be no real desire to line up the percentages because then, as you imply either the earlier ranking would have to become more difficult, even while phillymogul seems to be suggesting that upper ranking could be made easier.

In other words, even though percentage thinking might make sense in terms of how you allocate the value of your bitcoins versus shitcoins versus other investments, and in might make sense in terms of considering BTC price movements, it makes a lot less sense in terms of ranking up, so in that regard the current ranking up system does seem to strike a decently aligned balance to allow contributory members to rank up to regular member status fairly quickly but then necessitate the garnering of a lot more merits, in substantive terms (even though not really in percentages) in order to achieve the higher ranks.

[hd49728]

A more in line Merit from Member to Full would be around 20 - 25 IMO

I don't offend our opinion but if the merit requirements for the Full member rank is 20 or 25, full members are not too different than Members.
Non-difference in their post quality compared to closest lower rank (the Member rank) and there are more Full member users.

I assume with 100-required merits for Full member rank, there are 1000 self-made Full members.
Then, if the requirement reduces to 25 merits (as you wanted), there are likely 4000 self-made Full members.
Those figures above are only assumed, not real ones but from the assumption and results you can see your odds to be accepted in campaigns (4000 applicants rather than only 1000 applicants) will be decreased roughly four times with 25-required merits for the Full member rank. Do you want it?

[tranthidung]

Lots of spikes in daily and weekly merits (due to the Art contest's effects), so I come back to this thread.

What an impressive last week!

The last week (2019w46) is the third highest week since the merit system released. It stays only behind the first two weeks when the forum saw the merit system.

Code:

. list merit week if merit >= 6373 | merit <= 2645

     +-----------------+
     | merit      week |
     |-----------------|
  1. | 30960    2018w4 |
  2. | 19979    2018w5 |
  3. | 14251   2019w46 |
  4. | 13313    2018w6 |
  5. | 11745    2018w7 |
     |-----------------|
  6. |  8833    2018w9 |
  7. |  8767    2018w8 |
  8. |  7837   2018w38 |
  9. |  7317   2018w11 |
 10. |  7261   2018w10 |
     |-----------------|
 11. |  6952   2018w12 |
 12. |  6744   2018w13 |
 13. |  6632    2019w2 |
 14. |  6423   2018w14 |
     +-----------------+

Intra-day merits:
Full and truncated datasets, respectively:

Merits over days of week:
As you can see, most of the outliers (especially very extreme ones) over days come from the last week.
Outliers displayed (in red circles) and non-displayed, respectively.

Interquartile range of intra-day merits

Intra-week merits:

The Art contest's effects:

For details, please see: tranthidung's statistical threads on bitcointalk

[fillippone]

Well actually there are three factors that weighed in the last couple of weeks.

I would say we can list them in decreasing order of importance:

• The art thread. One-off event, with theymos creating merits out of the thin air (sort of QE in the merit economy) to reward participants.
• New merit sources, promoted and replacing inactive merit sources
• 175% increase in the monthly allowance of the old merit sources, compared to the average held in the past 6 months

So perhaps the increase may not be so temporary (although not at these levels, of course).