Seriously bitcointalk, why this merit point system ???

[TMAN]

Signed: a full member who will probably never pass senior...

Signed: a one line, useless, semi-spammer who doesn't deserve to pass anything*. Fixed that for you.
Another useless complaint thread from another useless poster. Contribute and get rewarded or just leave. Enough of this whining.

Lower ranked members need to learn from them and post such threads.

They should learn a lot before they even make their first post. Unfortunately, that is almost never the case.

"semi-spammer" ahah

With your 22K msg and your "GUNBOT Licenses -15% with ref. code 'GrumpyKitty'", please, just shut up.
You're exactly the kind of cancer I hate on this forum, so don't come here to decay my thread with your message

you are slightly retarded fella.. Lauda fights scams, account sales and idiots all day long to make this a better place to be..

calling lauda a cancer is silly.. call them rude or opinionated is correct... but cancer??

[legendster]

Did you notice the quality of those threads made by well-known members who got merits ? Can you say that majority of them did not deserve the merits they got ? Lower ranked members need to learn from them and post such threads.

Kindly read once again and tell have i even mentioned about their posts quality? I have seen many Hero and seniors with good posts not getting merits that is what I had said. I just said people are giving merits to just the well known members.
And maybe even you should have a look on your posts once  all one liners
[/quote]

That's a valid argument, you see now only the upper tier of high merit people would get to decide who gets to rank up and who doesn't. This acts as a screening / filter to only let the really good talkers into the "you can talk & get paid for it" club.
Getting Merit is not a matter of right but a privilege. So is getting to earn from this place. You can't just write a good post and put your foot down and demand a merit. That's like holding someone at gunpoint & making them admire you. Rather one should actually hang around long enough and ACTUALLY use this place to connect to the community, then they too would get a lot of Merits. Figuratively and literally. 

[Photographer]

This is totally unfair for those account who are below hero member ranks, and I totally agree with you that this new ranking system will surely slow the promotion for a higher rank. Hero and Legendary members are the one who will benefit as they can now join bounties hassle free.especially to those account that has the power to rule entire FORUM.
It's unfair to those accounts who honestly giving their best to post with quality and with content, just to support their family.
I am also after with those signature campaigns but that is only my 3 reason why I joined BCT.
I hope there will be some changes regarding this.

But you do understand that bounty campaigns are NOT the reason this forums exists? It could have been great if there were no spammers around and people just posted constructive and meaningful posts and also join bounties to get some extra cash. But unfortunately things didn't quite went in this direction and instead the forum suffered from a huge amount of spammers. Yes it makes life harder for newcomers if they want to participate in bounties, but if you keep posting good quality posts you'll get your merits.

Yes, it is annoying when you read about these people who are here only for the money while this forum has existed for almost a decade for totally different reasons, and what's most disturbing is that they don't absolutely realize how offensive they are for those who are here only (or primarily) to discuss.
This being said, it is true that with the current rules almost nobody will any more be able to rank up beyond the rank of Member. Or it will in best case scenario take 10X the time compared to before.

[BobbyZounours]

Firstly, if you are only here on BitcoinTalk because of the existence of signature campaigns then you're here for the wrong reason. A forum is meant to be a corner for meaningful discussion, the sharing of ideas and innovations, and a friendly environment to grow and learn, not somewhere that a horde of users force out quotas of meaningless drivel. I understand the fact that monetary rewards for discussing is appealing, but the fact that there is this much complaint about a system that is designed to limit this reward against people who spam solely for signature campaigns says something about the condition of the forum.

The number of points divided by 2 for each allocation will quickly show these limits and I doubt that the new points distributed monthly can counterbalance this.

It is a new idea, and as many newly implemented ideas are, I'm sure that if the current number of users who are able to merit without limit isn't enough to bring enough merit around the forum to reward the average user, it will be drastically changed to fit the need.

Moreover, this distribution of points each month to a small number of users isn't an insult to our beloved decentralization? To this system set up by Satoshi who wants to free ourselves from the institutions?
When we see those who received the most merit points today (theymos, lutpin, satoshi...) Everything is said.

There will always be a natural gradient and those who provide the quality content that the forum needs will be rewarded in the forum. I see no problem with that, considering that merit points are not "all going towards the small number of users" - there's still plenty to go around for those who deserve it. And wouldn't you rather see the users who are positively contributing to the forum ranking up rather than having the rank system be a measure of consistency? Although it may not seem like it now, rank will gradually become much more meaningful.

I'm also afraid that a real arranged traffic will develop around these points. "I'll give you 10 points, so you owe me 10." That people dont give points to quality posts, but to people who are likely to give them back.

This has been brought up several times, but I doubt that this will be a real issue with the system of deteriorating merit as it is distributed. If it is, then, as mentioned before, it will be adapted and improved according to how the community uses it.

I am also afraid, as we have already noticed, that a system of begging is being set up : "I'm willing to answer your question, if you give me merit points."...

I don't particularly see this being an issue as people should expect others to utilize the merit system where need be. And if one refuses to help someone in need just for a few digits on a computer screen, they don't deserve to be here; the community should be on the lookout for those users and discourage that kind of behavior by acting out against them.

I invite all users to spend their merit points honestly and intelligently (the legendaries don't need it for example)

The merit system is purely to reward posts that deserve it. Continue contributing quality and you won't have to worry about who receives merit.

The new merit system won't be friendly for newbies since they won't be able to post quality comments because they still lack knowledge.

Newbies will be able to spend 8 weeks here until they are first limited by merit (@ 60 activity to become a member). That is plenty of time if they are serious about learning bitcoin.

Well, it may be very nice for you from the top of your billions of merit allotted automatically (without anyone really verifying the quality of your posts otherwise), but it is to deny the very origin of the bitcoin project: democracy and freedom. You reproduce both the vices of Soviet Union and ultraliberalism: that is, authoritarian decisions taken unilaterally without any democratic vote on the one hand, and on the other, a system that favours in a vicious circle the higher caste of the forum with the best ranks.
You became what you despised, even if accusing spammers who made the celebrity and forum activity is convenient to you.
If you were really righteous, and not just attracted by airdrop, as you say, you would accept a reset of ALL accounts. But well, I guess hypocrisy still has a bright future ahead of it.

[KWH]

Firstly, if you are only here on BitcoinTalk because of the existence of signature campaigns then you're here for the wrong reason. A forum is meant to be a corner for meaningful discussion, the sharing of ideas and innovations, and a friendly environment to grow and learn, not somewhere that a horde of users force out quotas of meaningless drivel. I understand the fact that monetary rewards for discussing is appealing, but the fact that there is this much complaint about a system that is designed to limit this reward against people who spam solely for signature campaigns says something about the condition of the forum.

I vote to have this post as a sticky.

[Wheelige]

Let's contribute good, or high quality threads or topics, then merits will automatically come to your account.

I think the issue is that there are a number of threads (mainly alt-coins/token threads) where if you do not blindly love the project then you wont pick up merit. I've seen numerous articles where there has been a very well crafted and thought out post which does not blow smoke up a projects ass and it doesn't get the recognition it deserves. While i can get behind the increasing of the height of the bar, merit should be given where merit is deserved (i understand that there are people who will be demanding merit because they put in a post of more than 10 words but hopefully they are in the minority).

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Red trust is not enough to prevent spamming and other negative deeds on this forum,

It's not enough; it's wildly unpopular; it's a bad use of the feedback system; it's tedious; and it's a job for about 20 members to patrol all the shitposts, so I am overjoyed with this merit system. 

I think Theymos did a really good thing for the forum, and it's a clever device to deter shitposters--along with the rule that merit is not to be sold.  That's important.  There are definitely flaws in the system, but I'm going to try to use it for the good, and that includes giving merit to low-ranked users and not just everyone I've been associated with.  The system has me in a sufficient good mood, and I'm feeling like love-spreading.

[cmmhbct]

Let's contribute good, or high quality threads or topics, then merits will automatically come to your account.

I think the issue is that there are a number of threads (mainly alt-coins/token threads) where if you do not blindly love the project then you wont pick up merit. I've seen numerous articles where there has been a very well crafted and thought out post which does not blow smoke up a projects ass and it doesn't get the recognition it deserves. While i can get behind the increasing of the height of the bar, merit should be given where merit is deserved (i understand that there are people who will be demanding merit because they put in a post of more than 10 words but hopefully they are in the minority).

Of course, higher-ranked users don't have so much free time to read all threads/ topics in the forum. However, those users are very smart (most of them), skilled, knowledgeable after long period joining the forum. They can skim and scan threads, then identify which ones are good, or high-qualitied, and might give authors of those topics merits, and sMerits.

As you emphasized, there are several threads missed by chance. It doesn't matter. For example, if a newbie want to be ranked up to Member rank, this guy have to collect at least 60 posts which corresspond to 60 activities. Those number of activities should have at least 10 merits from others to be qualified enough for ranking up to Member rank. I dont think there is big problem with the merit system.
10 merits from 60 high-qualitied posts, it is possible, right? Or they can make 100 -150 posts to have 10 merits. I think users who are eagerly to learn can do it for sure.

Good luck.

[gawlea]

The merit system will not provide the expected return of good quality post just because the newbies won't help anyone as they are newbies and not very knowledgeable, and the old-school guys with higher ranks doesn't need the merit points to rank up anymore (Legendary ranks) or they don't need too (Full Members, Sr.Members or Hero Members), because they don't participate in the signatures campaigns as they have made some money from crypto since they are higher ranks. I'm speaking here about the majority as there are exceptions, of course. In my opinion the merit system is kind of useless for the forum quality posts, but it is what it is. My 2 cents!

[athanz88]

Good evening everyone,

I have created a special thread for more visibility about this discussion.

Why did you add this new merit point system??

I find this new system totally unfair, useless and even harmful for the future of our beautiful forum.

Please tell us how this merit system is a harmful addition for the future of our beautiful forum

I understand your fight against fraud, multi-accounts, farming, spams etc... It's a real priority for you and the community.
Unfortunately, this system penalizes a very large number of perfectly honest users.

In fact, honest users will be benefitted from this system. Do you think how many person with alt-accounts join in the same campaign or bounties? Now that alt-account people can only focus to 1 account because getting merit for more account is a tiring thing.

Like many, I participate in signature campaigns, which are sometimes a very good way to invest in projects that we like without taking any risks, if we don't have a lot of money. So my rank is very important for me because the reward depends on it. Unfortunately, with this new merit system, I'm sure that I will never reach the next rank. The number of merit points required is too high...

I can say that earning dollars from this forum is a great feelings and great things, can not deny it. But if you are here only for the signatures or bounties and make it as a main reason you are here, then you dont treat this forum right. A forum is place to gather a community to talk and share interest into a same thing (for this forum it is bitcoin and cryptocurrency apparently). If you are not here for that, then you came to the wrong neighborhood mate.

The number of points divided by 2 for each allocation will quickly show these limits and I doubt that the new points distributed monthly can counterbalance this.

Moreover, this distribution of points each month to a small number of users isn't an insult to our beloved decentralization? To this system set up by Satoshi who wants to free ourselves from the institutions?
When we see those who received the most merit points today (theymos, lutpin, satoshi...) Everything is said.

You can see the sample of distribution of merits here, it is based on the top merit giver at the time my statistic made : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2947171.msg30272338#msg30272338
And come on, whats the relation between a forum that owned by someone to the spirit of decentralization? This forum is owned by someone and you can see it as a company, it is a property that is owned by someone, do you really think this forum is made out of nothing? Bitcoin is decentralization because everyone contribute to bitcoin by buying it, holding it, mining it, people gave something to bitcoin, while this forum is made by someone and use their own money to host it, pay for moderator to works, pay other services to make it run perfectly, and you dont pay anything and only receive money from this forum, yet you claimed it is a mock to the decentralization thing? I only see a whining spoiled kid who cant strive for something.

And what about locals sections? I imagine that only anglophones users will receive these new merit points each month and that they will benefit only part of the forum?

I'm also afraid that a real arranged traffic will develop around these points. "I'll give you 10 points, so you owe me 10." That people dont give points to quality posts, but to people who are likely to give them back.

I am also afraid, as we have already noticed, that a system of begging is being set up : "I'm willing to answer your question, if you give me merit points."...

The function of the red trusts was absolutely perfect and made it possible to know who we were dealing with, so why did you add this?

You're only going to explode account traffic...

In short, I think this system is a very bad idea and could seriously harm the good health of bitcointalk. And if it is maintained, I invite all users to spend their merit points honestly and intelligently (the legendaries don't need it for example)...

Signed: a full member who will probably never pass senior...

Well i dont want to talk anymore. You are the one who limits yourself, dont make a system as an excuse for not getting something, you pessimistic kid.

[ruletheworld]

The merit system will not provide the expected return of good quality post just because the newbies won't help anyone as they are newbies and not very knowledgeable, and the old-school guys with higher ranks doesn't need the merit points to rank up anymore (Legendary ranks) or they don't need too (Full Members, Sr.Members or Hero Members), because they don't participate in the signatures campaigns as they have made some money from crypto since they are higher ranks. I'm speaking here about the majority as there are exceptions, of course. In my opinion the merit system is kind of useless for the forum quality posts, but it is what it is. My 2 cents!

Instead of half-assed justifications of why this wouldn't work, I'd rather see some data that proves it won't work. My hunch is that it greatly helps reduce useless posts. As Bitcoin taught us, it is all about incentives. I am happy to be proven wrong, but with a strong argument or something backed by real data, not musings.

[Jet Cash]

I think the issue is that there are a number of threads (mainly alt-coins/token threads) where if you do not blindly love the project then you wont pick up merit. I've seen numerous articles where there has been a very well crafted and thought out post which does not blow smoke up a projects ass and it doesn't get the recognition it deserves. While i can get behind the increasing of the height of the bar, merit should be given where merit is deserved (i understand that there are people who will be demanding merit because they put in a post of more than 10 words but hopefully they are in the minority).

I don't think that any posts on the alt/token boards should be allowed to receive merit. They are feeding off the posters on the better boards, and they are dragging down the reputation of Bitcoin Talk - where is the merit in that?

[gawlea]

The merit system will not provide the expected return of good quality post just because the newbies won't help anyone as they are newbies and not very knowledgeable, and the old-school guys with higher ranks doesn't need the merit points to rank up anymore (Legendary ranks) or they don't need too (Full Members, Sr.Members or Hero Members), because they don't participate in the signatures campaigns as they have made some money from crypto since they are higher ranks. I'm speaking here about the majority as there are exceptions, of course. In my opinion the merit system is kind of useless for the forum quality posts, but it is what it is. My 2 cents!

Instead of half-assed justifications of why this wouldn't work, I'd rather see some data that proves it won't work. My hunch is that it greatly helps reduce useless posts. As Bitcoin taught us, it is all about incentives. I am happy to be proven wrong, but with a strong argument or something backed by real data, not musings.

I agree, the system is implemented to increase the quality of the posts, but the Merit reward for the quality of the posts and the amount of them is not the one that it should be, just because people are too lazy or greedy to make an effort for others unless is something to gain from it. For example take a look at this user: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=560058 i know him/her for the good posts he/she makes over some threads i follow too, if you take a look on his last posts since the implementation of the Merit system, he/she made 250+ good posts (in my opinion) and got only 15 merit. So at this rate, for him/her to reach 1000 from 515 will need to make another 8000 good posts, which is huge. Please note that I'm not related in any kind of this account or user, was just an example.

[Jet Cash]

For example take a look at this user: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=560058 i know him/her for the good posts he/she makes over some threads i follow too, if you take a look on his last posts since the implementation of the Merit system, he/she made 250+ good posts (in my opinion) and got only 15 merit. So at this rate, for him/her to reach 1000 from 515 will need to make another 8000 good posts, which is huge. Please note that I'm not related in any kind of this account or user, was just an example.

I had a quick look at his latest posting history, and all his posts seemed to be in the alt announcements and gambling sections. Some of us believe that no posts in these sections should be given merit.

[yojodojo21]

common man, if you just keep on whining about it, you will just be hang into that place of familiarity and complain. merit feature is not a bad idea and it will never be a bad idea, with that feature many alt account user who abuse signature camps are being busted as of this days so far and so on some of them get Tagged by Red Flags and some of them are banned. and even thou merit is not implemented legendary members will never need some of it because that is the highest rank. Think of this, how can an administrator implement something if it is not beneficial?. now if you see some illegal actions about merit then it is not your problem let the superiors do it they will investigate. and when you refer to reputation doesn't all of us need to be blame? you are also a part of this forum. not all of your post can be check as an information that can help to educated other people as well as mine also and to all of us.

[xWolfx]

The merit system was implemented to encourage quality posting and to stop shitposting which I agree is a very good idea to stop spams, multi-account farming etc but even the honest members can face a huge problem in ranking up because of the requirement of the merits. And in the previous 2 days, I just saw people giving merits to members who have already crossed legendary or the hero mark and these members are the famous and well-known members of this forum [ Like Yahoo, Lauda, The Pharmacist and etc ]. I didn't see any lower ranked member even with good posts getting as many merits as they are getting. So I guess this can be a problem for us lower ranked members.
 And correct if me If I am wrong about something above.

I totally agree with you. For a new measurement where everyone participates to be effective, everyone or the majority should also share those same ideals so we come up with the right solution.

In my case i am new in the forums, i have been researching about bitcoin for some months now. The reason why i came here was signature campaigns since i'm in Venezuela right and that would help me a lot. But i after taking a look at the forums(which i am doing right now) i find it very well made and with interesting subjects being written in the different posts.

I came for the money but i will probably stay for a long time for the pleasure.

[1C6fV5DtakfKANLJ8GUV7hCaA]

The merit system is okay. This will help filter out the shitposters out there. Bitcointalk is a place to learn and share valuable stuff about the cryptocurrency economy. The mods are doing their best to keep the forum's functionality as many have abused it just to make a living.

[Abal Abal]

This is totally unfair for those account who are below hero member ranks, and I totally agree with you that this new ranking system will surely slows the promotion for a higher rank. Hero and Legendary members are the one who will benefit as they can now join bounties hassle free.especially to those account that has the power to rule the entire FORUM.
It's unfair to those accounts who honestly giving their best to post with quality and with content, just to support their family.
I am also after with those signature campaigns but that is only my 3rd reason why I joined BCT.
I hope there will be some changes regarding this.

I thinks giving negative trust is much more than merit system.

good observation.

that is what I also feel, injustice. Merit system is a very bad solution in eradicating dishonesty and for bitcoin development.
spirit for beginners.