[IDEA] Instead of Decaying Unused sMerits why not Re-Allocate It

[Theb]

Now we all know that hoarding/keeping sMerits for ourselves won't give us any benefit and it may decay in the future, why not reallocate it instead to other users who will be using it to merit Quality Posts? Now my next proposal is about who will we give the unused sMerits to? What I have in mind is to have a Depth system similar to the DefaultTrust we have, but this time its for two kinds of Merit Sources which have totally different ways of having sMerits to give.

Depth 1 Merit Sources - Users who generate sMerits out of nothing
Depth 2 Merit Sources - Users who will receive the re-allocated sMerits (Won't generate new sMerits)

Depth 2 Merit Sources will receive unused sMerits from the previous month from both Depth 1 Merit Sources and Normal Members which will be divided equally to them. With this method unused sMerits won't be wasted and there will be a 2nd line of members in which will pursue on giving merits on high quality/informative/helpful post.

[1715237105]

1715237105

[1715237105]

1715237105

[1715237105]

1715237105

[1715237105]

1715237105

[1715237105]

1715237105

[1715237105]

1715237105

[kiemnhieutien]

It's a good idea Theb but i think it's hard to be real. The process of your idea is difficult to automated, it must be done manually so you know, a large amount of members, this can't be.

[EcuaMobi]

Now we all know that hoarding/keeping sMerits for ourselves won't give us any benefit and it may decay in the future, why not reallocate it instead to other users who will be using it to merit Quality Posts? Now my next proposal is about who will we give the unused sMerits to? What I have in mind is to have a Depth system similar to the DefaultTrust we have, but this time its for two kinds of Merit Sources which have totally different ways of having sMerits to give.

Depth 1 Merit Sources - Users who generate sMerits out of nothing
Depth 2 Merit Sources - Users who will receive the re-allocated sMerits (Won't generate new sMerits)

Depth 2 Merit Sources will receive unused sMerits from the previous month from both Depth 1 Merit Sources and Normal Members which will be divided equally to them. With this method unused sMerits won't be wasted and there will be a 2nd line of members in which will pursue on giving merits on high quality/informative/helpful post.

What exactly would be the advantage of this vs. just adding more sources (users on your Depth 2 list) with fewer sMerit each?
Theymos said he will add more sources as required. Doing that, plus removing users who abuse their source or simply don't use it should be enough.

It's a good idea Theb but i think it's hard to be real. The process of your idea is difficult to automated, it must be done manually so you know, a large amount of members, this can't be.

It can be automated, just create a list of users (depth 2) and automatically remove unused sMerits from the sources and add them to those users. The real question is whether it would be helpful and worth implementing. I doubt that.

[kiemnhieutien]

Now we all know that hoarding/keeping sMerits for ourselves won't give us any benefit and it may decay in the future, why not reallocate it instead to other users who will be using it to merit Quality Posts? Now my next proposal is about who will we give the unused sMerits to? What I have in mind is to have a Depth system similar to the DefaultTrust we have, but this time its for two kinds of Merit Sources which have totally different ways of having sMerits to give.

Depth 1 Merit Sources - Users who generate sMerits out of nothing
Depth 2 Merit Sources - Users who will receive the re-allocated sMerits (Won't generate new sMerits)

Depth 2 Merit Sources will receive unused sMerits from the previous month from both Depth 1 Merit Sources and Normal Members which will be divided equally to them. With this method unused sMerits won't be wasted and there will be a 2nd line of members in which will pursue on giving merits on high quality/informative/helpful post.

What exactly would be the advantage of this vs. just adding more sources (users on your Depth 2 list) with fewer sMerit each?
Theymos said he will add more sources as required. Doing that, plus removing users who abuse their source or simply don't use it should be enough.

It's a good idea Theb but i think it's hard to be real. The process of your idea is difficult to automated, it must be done manually so you know, a large amount of members, this can't be.

It can be automated, just create a list of users (depth 2) and automatically remove unused sMerits from the sources and add them to those users. The real question is whether it would be helpful and worth implementing. I doubt that.

It's not a simple process just like pick some random users for depth 2, those users in depth 2 must worth to receive Merit, it's the problem.

[EcuaMobi]

It's not a simple process just like pick some random users for depth 2, those users in depth 2 must worth to receive Merit, it's the problem.

Of course. I don't think anyone suggested random people.

Those users must be hand picked, just as sources are chosen at the moment, so I don't understand the advantage of OP's suggestion.
And it can be fully automated once those users are chosen.

This could ensure that all issued merits are eventually distributed in a somewhat predictable volume and never lost.

Well, it's not like sMerits are some coin which shouldn't be burnt. It's just an entry on a DB, so if they're lost theymos can just create more and assign to new sources.

[suchmoon]

Now we all know that hoarding/keeping sMerits for ourselves won't give us any benefit and it may decay in the future, why not reallocate it instead to other users who will be using it to merit Quality Posts? Now my next proposal is about who will we give the unused sMerits to? What I have in mind is to have a Depth system similar to the DefaultTrust we have, but this time its for two kinds of Merit Sources which have totally different ways of having sMerits to give.

Depth 1 Merit Sources - Users who generate sMerits out of nothing
Depth 2 Merit Sources - Users who will receive the re-allocated sMerits (Won't generate new sMerits)

Depth 2 Merit Sources will receive unused sMerits from the previous month from both Depth 1 Merit Sources and Normal Members which will be divided equally to them. With this method unused sMerits won't be wasted and there will be a 2nd line of members in which will pursue on giving merits on high quality/informative/helpful post.

How exactly are you suggesting to define who belongs to Depth 2?

Maybe instead of creating Depth 2 just distribute unused sMerits to top merit-senders, except sources. "Top" could mean "most users merited" etc.

So this could be both negative and positive incentives against hoarding.

What exactly would be the advantage of this vs. just adding more sources (users on your Depth 2 list) with fewer sMerit each?
Theymos said he will add more sources as required. Doing that, plus removing users who abuse their source or simply don't use it should be enough.

This could ensure that all issued merits are eventually distributed in a somewhat predictable volume and never lost. Perhaps more fair than some users randomly letting their merits expire. My suggestion above could help a bit with decentralizing this too.

[TheQuin]

This could ensure that all issued merits are eventually distributed in a somewhat predictable volume and never lost. Perhaps more fair than some users randomly letting their merits expire. My suggestion above could help a bit with decentralizing this too.

I'd agree that centralisation is something that should be reduced rather than increased if possible. I'm also of the opinion that it's better to use an incentive than a punishment. So any system that rewards people for using all their sMerit in a particular timeframe rather than decays it when it isn't used would be my preference.

[Theb]

~snip~

What exactly would be the advantage of this vs. just adding more sources (users on your Depth 2 list) with fewer sMerit each?
Theymos said he will add more sources as required. Doing that, plus removing users who abuse their source or simply don't use it should be enough.

It is just an idea for unused sMerits not to be wasted and at the same encourage members to share their merits to deserving people. But you are right there won't be any advantage compared to adding more Merit Sources in the future as it would still be considered as a win for us. As having more Merit Sources means more people finding and giving merits to high quality posts.

[HabBear]

Depth 2 Merit Sources - Users who will receive the re-allocated sMerits (Won't generate new sMerits)

This is exactly what will already happen.

Merits aren't currency, Theymos can allocate as much as he wants to whom ever he wants. The "decaying" concept just means if you aren't going to use them you're going to lose them. Theymos can offer up more merit if the "spending" gets slow or the system starts to stall a bit and their granting of more to anyone doesn't diminish the value of those already received.

I think you're over complicating it. Creating a system of automatic reallocation would require way too much effort for the benefit.

[Stedsm]

Depth 2 Merit Sources - Users who will receive the re-allocated sMerits (Won't generate new sMerits)

This is exactly what will already happen.

Merits aren't currency, Theymos can allocate as much as he wants to whom ever he wants. The "decaying" concept just means if you aren't going to use them you're going to lose them. Theymos can offer up more merit if the "spending" gets slow or the system starts to stall a bit and their granting of more to anyone doesn't diminish the value of those already received.

I think you're over complicating it. Creating a system of automatic reallocation would require way too much effort for the benefit.

Don't you think that decaying of Merits is actually good?
It's because those who have merits, but don't have the time to use them will have their merits called as worthless to them and they deserve not to have such sMerits with them. Think of it, anyone seeing that their sMerits' number is being reduced or completely down to 0 will either make them leave that thing as it as (as they are not interested in giving it to anyone or don't have the time to check for such high quality posts) or work for it to get sMerits back through their posts to understand the value of their "lost" sMerits.

[Maum]

Demerit those, who send merits to their alts, including deranking.

[Talk merit]

If I go into a supermarket with £100 in my wallet, and I leave without buying anything, should the supermarket be able to take some of my money?

If members have sMerits because of their special interests, then they should be allowed to keep those until they feel they want to award post related to their interest. One example would be a member who just visits the legal board. He shouldn't be forced to wade through a load of posts that are of no interest to him.

[TheQuin]

If I go into a supermarket with £100 in my wallet, and I leave without buying anything, should the supermarket be able to take some of my money?

If members have sMerits because of their special interests, then they should be allowed to keep those until they feel they want to award post related to their interest. One example would be a member who just visits the legal board. He shouldn't be forced to wade through a load of posts that are of no interest to him.

I have just noticed something interesting to me about accounts without an avatar. I read that and decided to give you a Merit before I realized it was you. Normally I would have noticed the cat before I started reading.

OK, OK. That's probably not interesting to anyone else.

[Steamtyme]

If I go into a supermarket with £100 in my wallet, and I leave without buying anything, should the supermarket be able to take some of my money?

If members have sMerits because of their special interests, then they should be allowed to keep those until they feel they want to award post related to their interest. One example would be a member who just visits the legal board. He shouldn't be forced to wade through a load of posts that are of no interest to him.

As Merit is not considered currency and has no value other than the value a person or the Forum put on it... Think Beanie Babies lol.

I would use the example of Flyers being handed out to advertise a show, if someone is not handing them all out because he only stands on one corner of a street and doesn't move around. Yeah you should be able to throw away or "decay" some of those; or better yet each day they go out and not hand out a few flyers maybe some of them get damaged and they get trashed anyways, think loose papers in a school bag. Not the best example for the flyer but if your particular "corner" has someone who lives in an apartment building and wants to advertise there for you, you might give them 20 flyers. Think of that as a great post getting a heavier weight of Merit because it's in your niche and you like it.

This in no way hurts the system as there is not a finite amount of Merit available.

Now if you have someone who actively walks the streets, day or night lol. They will probably hand out all their flyers and can then apply for more. The advertiser or "Theymos" can then print more as they see fit. Now they may check to make sure they aren't pulling a Bart Simpson and dumping the Chinese take out menus in the trash, or just handing them all to their buddies to make sure the system is working as they see fit.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

I think that potentially if people are hoarding sMerit it might be a good idea if it’s taken from them & given to Merit Sources or even others who are very active in the forum & DO hand out sMerit..

Hoarding is pretty pointless, there are loads of top quality posts made deserving of Merit.  

I’m not sure what timescale we class as hoarding sMerit / never sending it etc.

[Jet Cash]

I have just noticed something interesting to me about accounts without an avatar. I read that and decided to give you a Merit before I realized it was you. Normally I would have noticed the cat before I started reading.

OK, OK. That's probably not interesting to anyone else.

Sorry about that.
I didn't expect to get any merits on that account, so it's caught me out a bit. I will be awarding the sMerits, but I'm not sure which board I should visit to award them/it. I should probably save them for new members making good posts on the beginner's board.

I nearly called myself Jet Cosh, but then I thought it was too restrictive.

Whoops! I posted this using the wrong browser.

[darklus123]

Hmm, If I am going to analyze the whole idea. I think that this is not really applicable "In my own opinion".

Theymos have given each members its freedom to use or receive such Merits and I think that we should not bother ourselves thinking how could we use it. For me It seems that you were telling everyone that SMerits should be used.

If I am not mistaken, the whole point of the merit system is to avoid spamming or rewarding those who can provide such quality posts. Whether it is being recognized or not and the only person who could say that a certain post has a good quality is the person who were reading it. Or even if the post has a good quality and it isn't that useful to a certain user that certain user will still probably not going to give a merit.

Plus it is a privilege to users who has a higher ranks to have a higher SMerit to give and I also believe that those who are on the depth 2 of the merit sources that you were talking will surely be taking advantage of it. Since you were trying to convert the merit system similar to trust system which has a lot of abuse issues.

[Jet Cash]

Interesting. I was told that there was no need for my article on the merit system, as everybody understood it. Having read this thread, itis apparent that this isn't true. Especially with regard to the re-allocation of source merits. Once you understand the merit system, you realise how well constructed and conceived it is. The only change I woud suggest is attempting to keep merits away from the Underworld here. It would also be a good idea to make selling merits a bannable offence.

[stompix]

If I go into a supermarket with £100 in my wallet, and I leave without buying anything, should the supermarket be able to take some of my money?

If members have sMerits because of their special interests, then they should be allowed to keep those until they feel they want to award post related to their interest. One example would be a member who just visits the legal board. He shouldn't be forced to wade through a load of posts that are of no interest to him.

I totally agree with this.
What is happening here, we're turning the merit system into socialism coin?
Redistributing the wealth smerit, because some people know better what to do with it?

I'm ok with merit decay after a period for everybody but why redistribution?
If there is the need for more merit and smerit Theymos can easily increase the number of merit sources or increase how much they get every month, triple or quadruple it.

If somebody is earning merit he is free to do anything he wants with it if he thinks no posts are merit worthy is his own decision, why take the smerit from him and give it to a person that maybe has a different scale of value?

And the most important thing of all...
Is there really a shortage of sMerit? Or are we trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist?

[Wheelige]

This idea is really just a push in trickling down merits that is equally solved by adding merit sources. This second layer of trust where allocations are not defined and at times could mean that the second tier get tier 1 allocation if tier 1 don't use theirs is just complicating a system unnecessarily. Sure there have been stats put out that suggest that merit is not being awarded at the rate that it once was but an easier solution to that is just adding more sources with a wider sphere of influence.