Merit summary display is off?

[Vod]

l like the way the merit system ranks merit givers by the amount of merit they have given.  

When a user ties with another in merits given, how do you sort that?  

Take a look at this post:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2833350.msg29048068#msg29048068

I left 10 points AFTER Cyrus did, yet I am shown in the list before him.   Even alphabetically that makes no sense.

Can you sort it by merit left and then by datetime left?   The first person to leave xx merits should show on the list first.  How is it sorted now?

[MadZ]

l like the way the merit system ranks merit givers by the amount of merit they have given.  

When a user ties with another in merits given, how do you sort that?  

Take a look at this post:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2833350.msg29048068#msg29048068

I left 10 points AFTER Cyrus did, yet I am shown in the list before him.   Even alphabetically that makes no sense.

Can you sort it by merit left and then by datetime left?   The first person to leave xx merits should show on the list first.  How is it sorted now?

Interesting question. It appears it is currently sorted by merit left, then by user's merit score. You can test this yourself by looking at this post. Among those who left +1 merit, those shown last have the lowest merit scores (around 10), and those shown first are those with the highest score (EFS is first among all the +1's because he has 1138 merit at the moment). I just left a +1 to see where I ended up, and I showed up between two users with 602 and 508 merit respectively (which makes sense since my score is 516).

[Vod]

Interesting question. It appears it is currently sorted by merit left, then by user's merit score. You can test this yourself by looking at this post. Among those who left +1 merit, those shown last have the lowest merit scores (around 10), and those shown first are those with the highest score (EFS is first among all the +1's because he has 1138 merit at the moment). I just left a +1 to see where I ended up, and I showed up between two users with 602 and 508 merit respectively (which makes sense since my score is 516).

Nice explanation - thank you.

I think it should be changed PER POST, to show the highest merit giver first, and then the least recent merit given in case of a tie.

As it is right now, the ranking of user can change over time, based on who has received sMerit from others.  I feel the ranking should reflect the opinions of the merit givers at the time they give the merit, not constantly rearranged based on overall merit popularity.    You don't want to lose all historic rankings, do you?   An opinion that is valid right now in 02/18 may not be valid in 02/19, but that doesn't mean you erase history and only show current stats...

[sncc]

Interesting question. It appears it is currently sorted by merit left, then by user's merit score. You can test this yourself by looking at this post. Among those who left +1 merit, those shown last have the lowest merit scores (around 10), and those shown first are those with the highest score (EFS is first among all the +1's because he has 1138 merit at the moment). I just left a +1 to see where I ended up, and I showed up between two users with 602 and 508 merit respectively (which makes sense since my score is 516).

It seems that the order is based on

1) number of Merit left, and then,
2) Activity, not user's Merit score.  

Taking the post in the OP as an example, the first five users shown there are as follows:

User        Activity   Merit  
Vod          2282     1244  
Cyrus        1862     1000  
mprep       1778     1109  
minifrij      1582     1042  
rickbig41    826      1011  

We see that Cyrus' Merit score is lower than mprep, minifrij, and rickbig41, but Cyrus is displayed before them, since the Activity is higher than them.
I also thought a possibility that the ordering is based on the Merit score when they gave Merits and Cyrus' Merit score was higher than them, but this is not the case, I checked their Merit score was already higher than 1000 when they gave Merits.

Another example from Vod's post:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2818350.msg28856765#msg28856765

The ordering of people who gave 5 Merits is

User        Activity  Merit
BitRentX   1082   1046
Astargath   630    503
Woshib       616    564

so Astargath's Merit score is lower than Woshib, but Activity makes sense with this ordering.

In addition to Activity and Merit, I checked their Rank, Posts, Position, Date Registered, but the Activity seems the one which can explain the current ordering.

[MadZ]

Interesting question. It appears it is currently sorted by merit left, then by user's merit score. You can test this yourself by looking at this post. Among those who left +1 merit, those shown last have the lowest merit scores (around 10), and those shown first are those with the highest score (EFS is first among all the +1's because he has 1138 merit at the moment). I just left a +1 to see where I ended up, and I showed up between two users with 602 and 508 merit respectively (which makes sense since my score is 516).

It seems that the order is based on

1) number of Merit left, and then,
2) Activity, not user's Merit score. 

Taking the post in the OP as an example, the first five users shown there is as follows:

User        Activity   Merit   
Vod          2282     1244   
Cyrus        1862     1000   
mprep       1778     1109 
minifrij      1582     1042   
rickbig41    826      1011 

We see that Cyrus' Merit score is lower than mprep, minifrij, and rickbig41, but Cyrus is displayed before them, since the Activity is higher than them.
I also thought a possibility that the ordering is based on the Merit score when they gave Merits and Cyrus' Merit score was higher than them, but this is not the case, I checked their Merit score was already higher than 1000 when they gave Merits.

Another example from Vod's post:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2818350.msg28856765#msg28856765

The ordering of people who gave 5 Merits is

User        Activity  Merit
BitRentX   1082   1046
Astargath   630    503
Woshib       616    564

so Astargath's Merit score is lower than Woshib, but Activity makes sense with this ordering.

In addition to Activity and Merit, I checked their Rank, Posts, Position, Date Registered, but the Activity seems the one which can explain the current ordering.

Interesting, it does appear that you are right. Funny, I looked at around 10+ users on the post I linked (since it has the most merits) and they all fit that pattern. Thank you for correcting me.

[sncc]

Interesting, it does appear that you are right. Funny, I looked at around 10+ users on the post I linked (since it has the most merits) and they all fit that pattern. Thank you for correcting me.

There should be a strong positive correlation between Merit and Activity, so it can happen for those 10+ users are sorted out in the same way by Merit and Activity.
Anyway it was interesting to decipher the hidden rule

[tbct_mt2]

Interesting idea, Vod. I think this one is useful and some users will love this new feature (if implemented).

Furthermore, as I found some days ago by chance and posted in another topic. Some one proposed drop-down list of merit points' statistics for each user.
This one might help users in the forum have better experiences, especially for cases who received so many merits. At the moment, there are little topics/ threads received extremely merits, and from many meriters, but over time it will. Drop-down list might help!

As a combination of those two ideas, why do not have a drop-down lists which have several functions inside. For example: Inside the drop-down list of meriters, users can have different options to watch merited history of each post/ topic, including Datetime of meriting (chronological history) / Merit point counts per user (both descending / ascending). I think those two are enough for screening merit abusements, sorting based on activities is unnecessary.