Why the merit system is heavily lopsided in favour of older users

[alia]

This is not a rant about why merit sucks; imo it's a good and interesting system, but the amount of bias that comes into play is insane. For example, when I joined the forum, the merit system was already implemented. It is already evident to me that it is very hard to get merit, much less get to 100 or 1000. But, had I stayed on the forum only 4-5 days before merit was implemented, and had I posted around a bit, when the merit system rolled in I would have automatically gotten 100 merit points - something that now takes weeks, if not months of quality posting.

For Members and above, it's really no biggie, since they get free merit. But for newbies like myself, getting to the next rank is exponentially higher because you really have to grind. Grinding isn't bad... but imo it's really unfair. Just a mini-rant.

[1714121075]

1714121075

[1714121075]

1714121075

[Welsh]

Higher ranked members got more merit points than newly registered accounts because they are somewhat established and were needed to kick off the system. Otherwise, it would only be sources distributing the points in the early days. Yeah a lot of the accounts that are higher ranked have reached that rank by spamming and only posting nonsense in activity periods just to rank up however, these accounts probably won't adjust to the new system well and will likely not gain much merit from now on.

For Members and above, it's really no biggie, since they get free merit. But for newbies like myself, getting to the next rank is exponentially higher because you really have to grind. Grinding isn't bad... but imo it's really unfair. Just a mini-rant.

I think it's unfair to allow people to rank up by spamming and posting in activity periods. This system might not be perfect, but it's already showing that it's effective against account farming and encouraging users to post more constructively.  

Wait a few months until more sources are added and then evaluate and make consider making improvements on the system. As long as your making good on topic posts which contribute to the discussion or bring up important points for discussion then you'll get merit points. If you feel that your posts deserve more merit than they are getting you can post in one of the dozens of review threads.

[iluvbitcoins]

For Members and above, it's really no biggie, since they get free merit. But for newbies like myself, getting to the next rank is exponentially higher because you really have to grind. Grinding isn't bad... but imo it's really unfair. Just a mini-rant.

I think it's unfair to allow people to rank up by spamming and posting in activity periods. This system might not be perfect, but it's already showing that it's effective against account farming and encouraging users to post more constructively.  

Indeed it is, but if you read what he wrote with understanding, you'd realize he was saying the system is good, but a lot of members ranked up by spamming and posting, which is true.

It really isn't fair that someone with 120 activity starts with a 100 Merits, and one with 112 activity starts with 10 Merits.

A lot of us probably wouldn't be Legendaries or Heroes if the Merit system was here from the beginning.
Theymos probably didn't want to degrade all of us back to 0, but it would probably be the most fair option if all of us started from 0 Merits.
We still have the upper-hand because we have enough activity to rank up, and some older posts someone will eventually read and perhaps spend some sMerits.
I'm getting annoyed by everyone talking to newbies like they're the scum of the earth.
First listen, then talk.
EDIT: Okay, the edit you made kind of changes the context, now that's a nice reply.
Not like much I've read here so far.

[Welsh]

Indeed it is, but if you read what he wrote with understanding, you'd realize he was saying the system is good, but a lot of members ranked up by spamming and posting, which is true.

It really isn't fair that someone with 120 activity starts with a 100 Merits, and one with 112 activity starts with 10 Merits.

A lot of us probably wouldn't be Legendaries or Heroes if the Merit system was here from the beginning.
Theymos probably didn't want to degrade all of us back to 0, but it would probably be the most fair option if all of us started from 0 Merits.
We still have the upper-hand because we have enough activity to rank up, and some older posts someone will eventually read and perhaps spend some sMerits.
I'm getting annoyed by everyone talking to newbies like they're the scum of the earth.
First listen, then talk.

There's no fair way of handling the rank system. If we were all put down to 0 Merits then the more established members who have been here from the early days would probably find this unjust. It would of probably been a little more fair if everyone was distributed merit like they have been, but their sMerit was 0 then only those selected as sources could distribute the points. This would of likely meant that a lot more posts would go unmerited because out of the hundred thousands of accounts that are active here around 30 were selected to become sources granted this has now risen to 57.

[Rocky Handsome]

Old members spent their time on the forum for a long time. So they definitely deserve those merit points. OP don't get salty for jumping on the boat late. Just get over it and post responsibly.
What theymos did is already fair for all. Old members got their merits for staying here for long. And new members none since they have no contributions here. So contribute from now on and earn merits.

[alia]

Old members spent their time on the forum for a long time. So they definitely deserve those merit points. OP don't get salty for jumping on the boat late. Just get over it and post responsibly.
What theymos did is already fair for all. Old members got their merits for staying here for long. And new members none since they have no contributions here. So contribute from now on and earn merits.

Nobody is getting salty, lmao. It's about the ratio, and the effort it takes to get where you are. To get 1000 free merit points by being an old user takes way less effort than actually grinding to get the 1000 merit points. It is a vast improvement to the previous system; it's just that in my view the distribution of merit points has been unfair/biased. Remember, it's just an opinion - I'm sure Legendary members than received a bunch of free merit will vehemently oppose my point, and all the Newbies will agree with me.

[iluvbitcoins]

Indeed it is, but if you read what he wrote with understanding, you'd realize he was saying the system is good, but a lot of members ranked up by spamming and posting, which is true.

It really isn't fair that someone with 120 activity starts with a 100 Merits, and one with 112 activity starts with 10 Merits.

A lot of us probably wouldn't be Legendaries or Heroes if the Merit system was here from the beginning.
Theymos probably didn't want to degrade all of us back to 0, but it would probably be the most fair option if all of us started from 0 Merits.
We still have the upper-hand because we have enough activity to rank up, and some older posts someone will eventually read and perhaps spend some sMerits.
I'm getting annoyed by everyone talking to newbies like they're the scum of the earth.
First listen, then talk.

There's no fair way of handling the rank system. If we were all put down to 0 Merits then the more established members who have been here from the early days would probably find this unjust. It would of probably been a little more fair if everyone was distributed merit like they have been, but their sMerit was 0 then only those selected as sources could distribute the points. This would of likely meant that a lot more posts would go unmerited because out of the hundred thousands of accounts that are active here around 30 were selected to become sources granted this has now risen to 57.

I'm not saying there is a better way of handling the rank system, but that we should be more understanding because it is a bit unfair for those caught in lower rankings. Because we have an upper hand we didn't earn, we have ranked up only because of our activity, and not because of our merit. So their reactions are understandable.
I see the basic reaction here is a rant of hatred to anything that is below Member status.
I love the merit system, probably the best thing that happened to these forums so far, but the reactions of some members to basic questions got me pissed off a bit. I might have gone too far, nvm, you got my point  

[Tyrantt]

Nobody is getting salty, lmao. It's about the ratio, and the effort it takes to get where you are. To get 1000 free merit points by being an old user takes way less effort than actually grinding to get the 1000 merit points. It is a vast improvement to the previous system; it's just that in my view the distribution of merit points has been unfair/biased. Remember, it's just an opinion - I'm sure Legendary members than received a bunch of free merit will vehemently oppose my point, and all the Newbies will agree with me.

Yes but it takes 2+ years to get to legendary rank, without the need to write quality posts or anything, just a couple of posts in two weeks period and you'll be sure to get activity points and therefore rank up.. but with merit points, even tho you're a newbie, if you have quality posts and contribute to the forum, you'll be getting merit points and you can get to sr. member or even higher in quite less time than 2 years, with far less number of posts and time, you can get to the rank that takes more than a year... So, kind of, this is better for new people as well.

EDIT: sorry about this, I completely forgot about the activity still playing a part in ranking up. When merit was implemented, I've understood that those two are separated in ranking up. @iluvbitcoins  my bad.

[iluvbitcoins]

Nobody is getting salty, lmao. It's about the ratio, and the effort it takes to get where you are. To get 1000 free merit points by being an old user takes way less effort than actually grinding to get the 1000 merit points. It is a vast improvement to the previous system; it's just that in my view the distribution of merit points has been unfair/biased. Remember, it's just an opinion - I'm sure Legendary members than received a bunch of free merit will vehemently oppose my point, and all the Newbies will agree with me.

Yes but it takes 2+ years to get to legendary rank, without the need to write quality posts or anything, just a couple of posts in two weeks period and you'll be sure to get activity points and therefore rank up.. but with merit points, even tho you're a newbie, if you have quality posts and contribute to the forum, you'll be getting merit points and you can get to sr. member or even higher in quite less time than 2 years, with far less number of posts and time, you can get to the rank that takes more than a year... So, kind of, this is better for new people as well.

This is not true.

In addition to activity, everyone now has a merit score, and you need both a certain activity level and a certain merit score in order to reach higher member ranks. The required scores are:

[theymos_away]

You wouldn't have gotten 100 merit based on a few days. If you had joined ~60 days earlier, then you might've gotten 10 merit.

I acknowledge that it is in some sense unfair when people missed out on a lot of free merit even though they were very close to rank-up. I considered several methods of progressive merit distribution that would've addressed this, but I felt that it'd always end up giving far more merit to people who didn't deserve it than people who did, so I kept the distribution to just the minimum required to avoid demotions.

[alia]

You wouldn't have gotten 100 merit based on a few days. If you had joined ~60 days earlier, then you might've gotten 10 merit.

I acknowledge that it is in some sense unfair when people missed out on a lot of free merit even though they were very close to rank-up. I considered several methods of progressive merit distribution that would've addressed this, but I felt that it'd always end up giving far more merit to people who didn't deserve it than people who did, so I kept the distribution to just the minimum required to avoid demotions.

I guess it has been done in the most efficient way possible, but that still doesn't make it perfect :') as I said, it is a good system. But it does leave the noobs like me a little bit butthurt. Welp, let's hope people like my posts!

[itsmeram]

You wouldn't have gotten 100 merit based on a few days. If you had joined ~60 days earlier, then you might've gotten 10 merit.

I acknowledge that it is in some sense unfair when people missed out on a lot of free merit even though they were very close to rank-up. I considered several methods of progressive merit distribution that would've addressed this, but I felt that it'd always end up giving far more merit to people who didn't deserve it than people who did, so I kept the distribution to just the minimum required to avoid demotions.

I guess it has been done in the most efficient way possible, but that still doesn't make it perfect :') as I said, it is a good system. But it does leave the noobs like me a little bit butthurt. Welp, let's hope people like my posts!

You're a Newbie but already have 9 Merit... This system seems working for you 

[alia]

You wouldn't have gotten 100 merit based on a few days. If you had joined ~60 days earlier, then you might've gotten 10 merit.

I acknowledge that it is in some sense unfair when people missed out on a lot of free merit even though they were very close to rank-up. I considered several methods of progressive merit distribution that would've addressed this, but I felt that it'd always end up giving far more merit to people who didn't deserve it than people who did, so I kept the distribution to just the minimum required to avoid demotions.

I guess it has been done in the most efficient way possible, but that still doesn't make it perfect :') as I said, it is a good system. But it does leave the noobs like me a little bit butthurt. Welp, let's hope people like my posts!

You're a Newbie but already have 9 Merit... This system seems working for you 

I think I'm an outlier. If I have 100 merit in 30 days, I'll eat all my words and post a vid of me masturbating to a merit infographic

[theymos_away]

If I have 100 merit in 30 days, I'll eat all my words and post a vid of me masturbating to a merit infographic

Let's see if this is too subtle for forum users to take the hint...

[alia]

If I have 100 merit in 30 days, I'll eat all my words and post a vid of me masturbating to a merit infographic

Let's see if this is too subtle for forum users to take the hint...

Being completely honest, it wasn't even an attempt to get more merit; was just my stupid sense of humour xD

But yeah I guess it works.

[Roboabhishek]

This is not a rant about why merit sucks; imo it's a good and interesting system, but the amount of bias that comes into play is insane. For example, when I joined the forum, the merit system was already implemented. It is already evident to me that it is very hard to get merit, much less get to 100 or 1000. But, had I stayed on the forum only 4-5 days before merit was implemented, and had I posted around a bit, when the merit system rolled in I would have automatically gotten 100 merit points - something that now takes weeks, if not months of quality posting.

For Members and above, it's really no biggie, since they get free merit. But for newbies like myself, getting to the next rank is exponentially higher because you really have to grind. Grinding isn't bad... but imo it's really unfair. Just a mini-rant.

You are a newbie but you have a vast exp regarding how this forum works    it will benefit you climbing the rank for sure compared to new people joining this forum.
Don't get me wrong but the merit system was launched to benefit the old loyal members of the forum rather than benefiting a newly join legit member or an alt seeking to exploit opportunities.

[alia]

This is not a rant about why merit sucks; imo it's a good and interesting system, but the amount of bias that comes into play is insane. For example, when I joined the forum, the merit system was already implemented. It is already evident to me that it is very hard to get merit, much less get to 100 or 1000. But, had I stayed on the forum only 4-5 days before merit was implemented, and had I posted around a bit, when the merit system rolled in I would have automatically gotten 100 merit points - something that now takes weeks, if not months of quality posting.

For Members and above, it's really no biggie, since they get free merit. But for newbies like myself, getting to the next rank is exponentially higher because you really have to grind. Grinding isn't bad... but imo it's really unfair. Just a mini-rant.

You are a newbie but you have a vast exp regarding how this forum works    it will benefit you climbing the rank for sure compared to new people joining this forum.
Don't get me wrong but the merit system was launched to benefit the old loyal members of the forum rather than benefiting a newly join legit member or an alt seeking to exploit opportunities.

Yeah, I didn't consider the "rewarding old members for loyalty" aspect. I guess that makes sense. I'd do the same, if I was running this forum.

[r1s2g3]

Initially I also thought the same that merit system is heavily lopsided in favour of older users but when I read the history how this forum evolved my thinking changed. Please go through the below link.

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/BitcoinTalk

We all are here because we know this the official forum of bitcoin talk.

If today Bitcoin is soaring the height because of the people who are early adopters and kept their faith in bitcoin.
They keep there faith even after Mt. Gox  tragedy.

I think most of people are ranting because it is directly affecting there profits in bounty campaign but if you think on reverse ways when this forum is created there is no bounty Campaign to participate (for these older peoples).

They were actually the Bitcoin technology enthusiast/believer , But if you see the current people majority are here because they think Crypto is easy money or it is a "Get Rich Easy" scheme.

If you read the "Airdrop/Bounties" thread , They just write good project without even understanding anything.  Somebody is asking for whitepaper in post when link of whitepaper is already available in first post.

[Testeur1450]

Very nice
Many of us have been hack and now they re newbie again with LOW merit 

[TMAN]

This is not a rant about why merit sucks; imo it's a good and interesting system, but the amount of bias that comes into play is insane. For example, when I joined the forum, the merit system was already implemented. It is already evident to me that it is very hard to get merit, much less get to 100 or 1000. But, had I stayed on the forum only 4-5 days before merit was implemented, and had I posted around a bit, when the merit system rolled in I would have automatically gotten 100 merit points - something that now takes weeks, if not months of quality posting.

For Members and above, it's really no biggie, since they get free merit. But for newbies like myself, getting to the next rank is exponentially higher because you really have to grind. Grinding isn't bad... but imo it's really unfair. Just a mini-rant.

Your English is perfect, you are a valuable member of the community. Have 10 merits, you won't struggle to get to Legendary your limitation will be activity not merits