Unofficial merit source application thread

[MadZ]

The addition of merit scores has created a new forum designation: merit source.

What is a merit source?

Certain users are designated as "merit sources". They can create new merit out of nothing, up to a limited number per month (which differs per source). 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.

How does one become a merit source?

If you want to be a merit source:

 1. Be a somewhat established member.
 2. Collect TEN posts written in the last couple of months that have not received nearly enough merit for how good they are, and post quotes for them all in a new Meta thread.
 3. We will take a look at your history and maybe make you a source.

I am especially eager to have merit sources in sub-communities such as the local sections.

Rather than creating an individual thread for each new application, I believe it would make more sense to consolidate all applications into one thread. Meta is already full of topics about the new system, and creating a new thread for each application will only increase this clutter. In addition to lowering the total volume of topics in the Meta section, this will also give potential applicants a better chance of being selected. In my opinion, it will be much easier for theymos/whoever rejects/accepts users to periodically check one thread rather than hunt down each individual thread on their own.

Should people find this thread useful, I would be happy to keep the OP updated with a list of applications, including member name, date, and link to their application in order to help organize the process. Also, I understand there is no public list of merit sources, but I think it might help to at least indicate when an application has been "processed", without specifying whether this means acceptance or denial. Let me know what you guys think of this idea.

Current Applications

Member Name	|Date	|Link	|Processed
PalindromemordnilaP Joel_Jantsen OgNasty DarkStar_ Micio paxmao findingthemoon CoolWave digaran stingers LFC_Bitcoin RegulusHr aleksej996 ludbega LoyceV junoreactor IIOII pugman HabBear Aegean Skipper zaq130 sparg trankil_ sabotag3x baba0000000000 Toughit mhanbostanci wiser	|1/25/18 |1/25/18 |1/25/18 |1/25/18 |1/25/18 |1/26/18 |1/26/18 |1/26/18 |1/26/18 |1/26/18 |1/26/18 |1/26/18 |1/27/18 |1/29/18 |1/30/18 |1/31/18 |2/3/18 |2/11/18 |1/30/18 |2/12/18 |2/18/18 |2/27/18 |3/2/18 |3/5/18 |3/9/18 |3/10/18 |3/11/18 |3/21/18	|Link |Link |Link |Link |Link |Link |Link |Link |Link |Link |Link |Link |Link |Link |Link |Link |Link |Link |Link |Link |Link |Link |Link |Link |Link |Link |Link |Link	|Yes |Yes |Yes |Yes |Yes |Yes |Yes |Incomplete |Yes |Yes |Yes |Yes |Yes |No |No |No |No |No |No |No |No |No |No |No |No |No |No |No

<Table updated -theymos>

[suchmoon]

The whole merit source thing is still kinda murky. Even with the clarified requirements I'm still not sure what makes a good merit source. I'm just gonna sit back and see how this shakes out.

Edit: but I agree with the single thread idea. Even if applicants insist on posting separate threads maybe you can link them in your OP.

[MadZ]

The whole merit source thing is still kinda murky. Even with the clarified requirements I'm still not sure what makes a good merit source. I'm just gonna sit back and see how this shakes out.

Edit: but I agree with the single thread idea. Even if applicants insist on posting separate threads maybe you can link them in your OP.

I think in addition to simply being able to distinguish constructive posts, a good merit source should be fairly active in a particular area of the forum. Out of the 35 members who were initially picked, there might be certain areas of the forum, such as local sub-forums or less popular sub-forums, where none of them visit. For instance, a good application would ideally highlight why that particular user would be good at covering a section of posts that are otherwise not often read by other merit sources.

And you're right, perhaps adding a few existing threads to my OP would help get this started. I'll go through and edit it tomorrow.

[MadZ]

List updated for the posts I could find. Feel free to post in this thread if I have missed yours.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

OP going to have to drop you a Merit point here - Good work, thanks.

[ibminer]

The Joel_Jantsen thread was technically a nomination for someone else, not sure it should really count as a submission... but if it somehow is, it would be for DannyHamilton.

[suchmoon]

The Joel_Jantsen thread was technically a nomination for someone else, not sure it should really count as a submission... but if it somehow is, it would be for DannyHamilton.

But Joel got the rules backwards. You can't really nominate an author. You can nominate someone who is good at finding merit-worthy posts.

[MadZ]

OP going to have to drop you a Merit point here - Good work, thanks.

No problem, glad to help.

The Joel_Jantsen thread was technically a nomination for someone else, not sure it should really count as a submission... but if it somehow is, it would be for DannyHamilton.

Eh, I felt it made sense to add it this way. Being a merit source is about finding good posts, not making them. Technically, there's no rule that says you can't make all 10 posts from 1 person   Obviously I will update this if he applies again, but I'll remove it if he asks.

Should be up to date as of now.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

The Joel_Jantsen thread was technically a nomination for someone else, not sure it should really count as a submission... but if it somehow is, it would be for DannyHamilton.

DannyHamilton is one of the best posters on the entire forum, very trustworthy & very knowledgable. He’s personally helped me with a few things (re: bitcoin) over the years.

I would 100% be an advocate for him.

[Thirdspace]

Should people find this thread useful, I would be happy to keep the OP updated with a list of applications, including member name, date, and link to their application in order to help organize the process. Also, I understand there is no public list of merit sources, but I think it might help to at least indicate when an application has been "processed", without specifying whether this means acceptance or denial. Let me know what you guys think of this idea.

Merit sources
There are 49 merit sources with a total merit generation of up to 9925 sMerit per 30 days

since there is no official answer or public announcement from theymos for who the 49 merit sources are
I suggest it's better to have another thread with title an Unofficial Merit Sources
though I am not sure what contribution would that thread have except exposing them

give it a month or two, we can figure out who's who the merit sources are
should be something like merit send > (merit received *2) ,
sending a lot more merits than receiving should be the cue of his/her merit source status

[aleksej996]

I just applied for the merit source for our local thread.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2831325.0

[Lauda]

You should paint the people that are red tagged appropriately in that table using [color=red  ].

[MadZ]

I just applied for the merit source for our local thread.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2831325.0

Added!

You should paint the people that are red tagged appropriately in that table using [color=red  ].

I will consider adding that in the future. I don't think red trust necessarily disqualifies someone from being a merit source, and I'm sure theymos or whoever chooses takes it into account already. I might also add a note for accounts that have sent a suspiciously large amount of merit to individuals for no obvious reason. That being said, I'm pretty sure that's also already being looked at when choosing.

[DarkStar_]

theymos not responding in the thread does not mean the application was not processed.

Nevermind, I took the "N/A" as a No for some reason.

[MadZ]

theymos not responding in the thread does not mean the application was not processed.

Nevermind, I took the "N/A" as a No for some reason.

Obviously, those who are accepted will know, but I think it's also fair to inform those who were not accepted that they will need to re-apply. Interestingly enough, theymos merited a few of the application posts, which I assume means acceptance.

[Lauda]

You should paint the people that are red tagged appropriately in that table using [color=red  ].

I will consider adding that in the future. I don't think red trust necessarily disqualifies someone from being a merit source, and I'm sure theymos or whoever chooses takes it into account already. I might also add a note for accounts that have sent a suspiciously large amount of merit to individuals for no obvious reason. That being said, I'm pretty sure that's also already being looked at when choosing.

What are you trying to say here? That someone who is a scammer is going to properly distribute merit points among the users, without abusing it in any possible way? That's just outright naivety.

[MadZ]

You should paint the people that are red tagged appropriately in that table using [color=red  ].

I will consider adding that in the future. I don't think red trust necessarily disqualifies someone from being a merit source, and I'm sure theymos or whoever chooses takes it into account already. I might also add a note for accounts that have sent a suspiciously large amount of merit to individuals for no obvious reason. That being said, I'm pretty sure that's also already being looked at when choosing.

What are you trying to say here? That someone who is a scammer is going to properly distribute merit points among the users, without abusing it in any possible way? That's just outright naivety.

Not too long ago, you yourself had red trust. There are other users, such as TMAN, who have red trust, yet would make fine merit sources in my opinion. Obviously, the vast majority of users who have negative trust would be terrible choices, my point was simply that red trust does not necessarily equate to being a scammer in some cases.

My main reason for not tagging people with red trust is because theymos has explicitly stated the merit system was released with the intention of putting an end to the trend of giving people negative trust for being shitty posters.

That's partially why I sped up work on merit. I don't agree with using the trust system for pure spam; that's not what it was designed for.

Whether you or I agree with this or not, I am trying to interfere with the selection process as little as possible. Do you really think any of the sig spammers who have been tagged actually have a shot of getting accepted anyway? I highly doubt it.

[Thule]

You should paint the people that are red tagged appropriately in that table using [color=red  ].

I will consider adding that in the future. I don't think red trust necessarily disqualifies someone from being a merit source, and I'm sure theymos or whoever chooses takes it into account already. I might also add a note for accounts that have sent a suspiciously large amount of merit to individuals for no obvious reason. That being said, I'm pretty sure that's also already being looked at when choosing.

What are you trying to say here? That someone who is a scammer is going to properly distribute merit points among the users, without abusing it in any possible way? That's just outright naivety.

Haven't you been proofen to be a scammer for extortion?
Ohh a scammer who is abusing also the merit.You talk from your own experience

[LFC_Bitcoin]

I made the cut, go me. I’ll be handing out Smerit points fairly & for constructive, helpful posts only.

[suchmoon]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;stats=sources

There are 57 merit sources with a total merit generation of up to 11975 sMerit per 30 days

There were 49 before, so it looks like out of 12 processed applications 8 have been approved. Well, maybe not. Theymos could have added sources not necessarily from this list.

I made the cut, go me. I’ll be handing out Smerit points fairly & for constructive, helpful posts only.

Congrats, don't spend it all in one place