Is the Merit System Generating Enough Merits?

[Oulay]

First of all I wanna thank zentdex for his great analysis about how many merits each rank - on average - gains a month. I used some of the data he provided in his post: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3015036.0

Now to my point:
I took my time to do the math and see how many members can the current merit system sustain and here are the results:

SUMMARY

https://imgur.com/a/snYsn




First of all let me remind you of rank requirements:

Newbie:           1 activity                   and     0 merits
Jr. Member:      30 activity                 and     0 merits
Member:          60 activity                 and     10 merits         needs 2 months to get the activity
Full Member:    120 activity               and     100 merits       needs 4 months to get the activity
Sr. Member:      240 activity               and     250 merits      needs 8 months to get the activity
Hero Member:   480 activity               and     500 merits      who knows?    around 12 months
Legendary:       775 - 1030 activity     and     1000 merits




There are currently - at the time of this post - 57 merit sources with a total merit generation of up to 11975 sMerit per 30 days. Those are the merits generated by sources only, and given that a member can send half the merits he receives and imagining the best case scenario where every member sends all the merits he receives, the total amount of merits generated by the system would double to 23950 sMerit per 30 days. So, roughly 24k sMerit per month.

Now to the boring math:

Based on Zentdex's analysis the 24k merits are distributed between ranks in the following manner:
Legendary: 8%
Hero: 8%
Sr. Member: 14%
Full Member: 16%
Member: 19%
Jr. Member and Newbie: 23 + 11 = 34%


So...
Legendary members get 8% x 24k = 1920 merits
Hero members get the same amount 1920 which is enough for 1920/500 = 3.84 members to rank up every month. The No. of Hero members the system can sustain: 3.84 x 12 = 46.08
Sr. members get 14% x 24k = 3360 which is enough for 3360/250 = 13.44 members every month. The No. of Sr. members the system can sustain: 13.44 x 8 = 107.52
Full Members get 16% x 24k = 3840 which is enough for 3840/150 = 25.6 members every month. The No. of Full members the system can sustain: 25.6 x 4 = 102.4
Members get 19% x 24k = 4560 which is enough for 4560/90 = 50.67 members every month. The No. of Members the system can sustain:  50.67 x 2 = 101.34
Jr. Members and Newbies get 34% x 24k = 8160 which is enough for 816 members every month.

The time needed to rank up is easily acquired by dividing the amount needed to rank up by the average merits gained per month.

Conclusion (my opinion):
The amount of merits produced by the system is too very low, as we've seen that it would take an average member 3 to 5 times the time it took him to rank up in the previous system, I know that the purpose of this system is to create a better forum with better members but just imagine yourself a full member needing almost 2 years to get to senior. Is that fair? How frustrated you'd be? Well, this is the case for half of the seniors members in the forums!
Not to mention that I described the best case scenario and didn't go into calculating all the sMerits that are horded and not used and the merits that are sold on black markets.

[1715276728]

1715276728

[1715276728]

1715276728

[1715276728]

1715276728

[bitperson]

I know that the purpose of this system is to create a better forum with better members but just imagine yourself a full member needing almost 2 years to get to senior. Is that fair?

If two years is what it takes someone to receive 125 merits, then yes, that's fair for that particular person. Particularly since merit and rank do not affect users' ability to participate on the forum. Ranking up is basically eye candy.

Why are so many users complaining like it would be some kind of basic human right to become legendary by posting stuff that no one but their own mother considers useful?

[Oulay]

If two years is what it takes someone to receive 125 merits, then yes, that's fair for that particular person. Particularly since merit and rank do not affect users' ability to participate on the forum. Ranking up is basically eye candy.

Why are so many users complaining like it would be some kind of basic human right to become legendary by posting stuff that no one but their own mother considers useful?

It's not "that particular person" it's the average member which means more than half the members of this forum have this problem and even if you are a better poster how much above average you think you'd be? will you get double the amount an average user gets? triple? it would still take you much more than it did in the old system.

I'm not complaining about the merit system I'm complaining about the very low amount of merits it produces..

[cynical]

By the OP's numbers if I calculate correctly there have been almost 24,000 merits given out.

The OP's main argument is centered around Ranking Up.
This is only to earn crypto by posting a lot of meaningless posts in order to satisfy the bounty requirements,
This is why the Merit system was created to reduce or eliminate.
 
As bitperson states a persons rank does not prevent them from participating in the forum.
If people get involved in a positive and meaningful way ranking up will follow.

Ok for newbies it is difficult as presumably they are totally new to crypto but not always.
There are incentives for people to earn merit and get them on the "scoreboard" in the services section

sMerit for art - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2957836.0

Trade: merit for info - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2905371.0

sMerit post review - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2819141.0

I have sMerits to offer - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2985012.0

[bitperson]

even if you are a better poster how much above average you think you'd be? will you get double the amount an average user gets? triple? it would still take you much more than it did in the old system.

That's a Good Thing. If users would rank up as quickly as before, then the merit system would have failed. But now merit seems to work as intended: people who don't post useful stuff won't rank up (which means that they won't make it into signature campaigns, which means they no longer have any incentive to shitpost). As for those who do post useful stuff, why would the time factor be a problem? I don't mind if it'll take me 20 years to become legendary, as I can read and post just fine as member. As I hinted, it's not a human right to become legendary with close to zero effort.

[TheQuin]

By the OP's numbers if I calculate correctly there have been almost 24,000 merits given out.

There's something wrong with that calculation though: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;stats=topsendat

Most generous merit senders, all time
84187 merit has been sent in total.

[TheBeardedBaby]

There are many High ranked members not aware of the merit system yet.
They are also holding sMerit, which can be distributed and generates more sMerit.

If you calculate how many members are in each rank category, above Jr. and take into account the initial sMerit for every rank, you can pretty much add those sMerits to the actual pool we have at the moment.

I have already given 30 merits, even still a member only.

[DooMAD]

Whether the math in the OP is correct or not, I'd offer this counterpoint:

If we had reset the boards completely and started everyone from newbie status and 0 activity at the moment merit was implemented on 24th Jan, there are plenty of users who would have received sufficient merit to be Members, or even Full Members, but it actually would be the Activity preventing them from attaining that rank.  This alone makes me think we've got the balance correct.

[Oulay]

There's something wrong with that calculation though: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;stats=topsendat

Most generous merit senders, all time
84187 merit has been sent in total.

Because this is the first month in the new system and people started with sMerits to give away..
Once those merits end and we start depending only on merits generated by sources the amount of merits generated per month will be around 24k if the number of sources or the amount they generate doesn't increase.

[Oulay]

There are many High ranked members not aware of the merit system yet.
They are also holding sMerit, which can be distributed and generates more sMerit.

If you calculate how many members are in each rank category, above Jr. and take into account the initial sMerit for every rank, you can pretty much add those sMerits to the actual pool we have at the moment.

I have already given 30 merits, even still a member only.

You're right.. but calculating that would be so hard to do and I will only get the amount they started with while not knowing how much they have left. On the other hand the current pool won't last forever and soon we'll need to depend on merit sources.

Whether the math in the OP is correct or not, I'd offer this counterpoint:

If we had reset the boards completely and started everyone from newbie status and 0 activity at the moment merit was implemented on 24th Jan, there are plenty of users who would have received sufficient merit to be Members, or even Full Members, but it actually would be the Activity preventing them from attaining that rank.  This alone makes me think we've got the balance correct.

I didn't really understand what you're saying..
But if you look at the profiles of the couple of guys who replied above, each one of them posted 3 to 5 times more than his activity in order to get near the amount of merits needed to rank up.. Is that the right thing to do?

The OP's main argument is centered around Ranking Up.
This is only to earn crypto by posting a lot of meaningless posts in order to satisfy the bounty requirements,
This is why the Merit system was created to reduce or eliminate.

As bitperson states a persons rank does not prevent them from participating in the forum.
If people get involved in a positive and meaningful way ranking up will follow.

Of course my argument would be about ranking up, the merit system's point is about ranking up...
And yes ranking up will follow but after so many years of dedicating your self to this forum.

[TheQuin]

There's something wrong with that calculation though: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;stats=topsendat

Most generous merit senders, all time
84187 merit has been sent in total.

Because this is the first month in the new system and people started with sMerits to give away..
Once those merits end and we start depending only on merits generated by sources the amount of merits generated per month will be around 24k if the number of sources or the amount they generate doesn't increase.

OK, that makes a bit more sense. But taking a Sr. Member as an example you say in the OP:

"Sr. members get 14% x 24k = 3360 which is enough for 3360/250 = 13.44 members every month."

But it takes 8.5 months to get the extra 240 activity to become a Hero.

[Oulay]

OK, that makes a bit more sense. But taking a Sr. Member as an example you say in the OP:

"Sr. members get 14% x 24k = 3360 which is enough for 3360/250 = 13.44 members every month."

But it takes 8.5 months to get the extra 240 activity to become a Hero.

I calculated the number of members that rank up every month, but you're right it would have been better to calculate it your way because it gives a better understanding about the number of members the merit system can sustain. Because a Sr. member won't need those 250 merits in one month but he will need around 30 of them every month of the 8 months he need to get the activity.
Will edit the OP right away!
Thanks ^_^

[TheBeardedBaby]

OK, let me add some calculations too then.

We stated with 35 Merit Sources (MS for short) on the first day of the Merit system.

On 26th Jan. were already 49 MS. /reference/
Today they are 57 MS.
So for one month from 35 till 57 this is 22 new sources, awesome but...

14 were added for 1 day, so we exclude them to be more realistic /see the reference link above/

Then there are minimum around 8 new MS added per Month!

Since this is the first and only month till now and the data is not enough, we need to give more time to the system to actually see how it is working.
Now it's just speculations.


P.S. The image in the OP is not loading.

[Oulay]

OK, let me add some calculations too then.

We stated with 35 Merit Sources (MS for short) on the first day of the Merit system.

On 26th Jan. were already 49 MS. /reference/
Today they are 57 MS.
So for one month from 35 till 57 this is 22 new sources, awesome but...

14 were added for 1 day, so we exclude them to be more realistic /see the reference link above/

Then there are minimum around 8 new MS added per Month!

Since this is the first and only month till now and the data is not enough, we need to give more time to the system to actually see how it is working.
Now it's just speculations.


P.S. The image in the OP is not loading.

You can see the image here: https://i.imgur.com/BGE88BT.png

You're right.. I only hope that it will cope with the huge number of accounts on this forum. We'll wait and see  

Edit: sorry about the image, here you go this should work: https://imgur.com/a/snYsn

[TheBeardedBaby]

You can see the image here: https://i.imgur.com/BGE88BT.png

Looks like it's deleted. :

Code:

Zoinks! You've taken a wrong turn.

Edited>  Now it's working

[LTU_btc]

I think we need to give some time to Merit system, only one month passed. If theymos will see that there aren't enough sMerits generated, he just will add more Merit sources.
I think there is another issue that we have. Just visit Bitcoin Discussion, Altcoin Discussion, Bounties, Politics & Society or another spammy board, open several profiles of Full Members and above and you will find that mostly of them haven't sent any of their sMerit so far. It means that there are still so many users who still aren't aware about Merit system and just holding their sMerit without knowing about it.

[seoincorporation]

First of all I wanna thank zentdex for his great analysis about how many merits each rank - on average - gains a month. I used some of the data he provided in his post: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3015036.0

Now to my point:
I took my time to do the math and see how many members can the current merit system sustain and here are the results:

SUMMARY

https://imgur.com/a/snYsn




First of all let me remind you of rank requirements:

Newbie:           1 activity                   and     0 merits
Jr. Member:      30 activity                 and     0 merits
Member:          60 activity                 and     10 merits         needs 2 months to get the activity
Full Member:    120 activity               and     100 merits       needs 4 months to get the activity
Sr. Member:      240 activity               and     250 merits      needs 8 months to get the activity
Hero Member:   480 activity               and     500 merits      who knows?    around 12 months
Legendary:       775 - 1030 activity     and     1000 merits




There are currently - at the time of this post - 57 merit sources with a total merit generation of up to 11975 sMerit per 30 days. Those are the merits generated by sources only, and given that a member can send half the merits he receives and imagining the best case scenario where every member sends all the merits he receives, the total amount of merits generated by the system would double to 23950 sMerit per 30 days. So, roughly 24k sMerit per month.

Now to the boring math:

Based on Zentdex's analysis the 24k merits are distributed between ranks in the following manner:
Legendary: 8%
Hero: 8%
Sr. Member: 14%
Full Member: 16%
Member: 19%
Jr. Member and Newbie: 23 + 11 = 34%


So...
Legendary members get 8% x 24k = 1920 merits which they don't need to rank up.
Hero members get the same amount 1920 which is enough for 1920/500 = 3.84 members to rank up every month. The No. of Hero members the system can sustain: 3.84 x 12 = 46.08
Sr. members get 14% x 24k = 3360 which is enough for 3360/250 = 13.44 members every month. The No. of Sr. members the system can sustain: 13.44 x 8 = 107.52
Full Members get 16% x 24k = 3840 which is enough for 3840/150 = 25.6 members every month. The No. of Full members the system can sustain: 25.6 x 4 = 102.4
Members get 19% x 24k = 4560 which is enough for 4560/90 = 50.67 members every month. The No. of Members the system can sustain:  50.67 x 2 = 101.34
Jr. Members and Newbies get 34% x 24k = 8160 which is enough for 816 members every month.

The time needed to rank up is easily acquired by dividing the amount needed to rank up by the average merits gained per month.

Conclusion (my opinion):
The amount of merits produced by the system is too very low, as we've seen that it would take an average member 3 to 5 times the time it took him to rank up in the previous system, I know that the purpose of this system is to create a better forum with better members but just imagine yourself a full member needing almost 2 years to get to senior. Is that fair? How frustrated you'd be?
Not to mention that I described the best case scenario and didn't go into calculating all the sMerits that are horded and not used and the merits that are sold on black markets.

Good analysis. I believe the merit system is still too young and it will be needed some time to all users to get used to it. Now, everyday I read publications abput how to get merit (mostly made by newbies), but I understand even in the higher ranks now it is really difficult to rank out, for example from hero to legendary.
Due to the preocupation rising here in the forum about merits, I feel this is the right time to begin a campaign or something, a kind of contest, where people can participate and the better publications earn some merits. I think this will encourage people to write about important stuff rather of asking or begging for merits. What do you people think about?
It is time to create a kind of Merit-contest?? We can pick a topic and let the people talk about it, and see what happens...

[oaktree]

I think the issue is that on some forums lots of merits are given out - eg posting on Meta.

On other forums hardly any merits are given out (speculation, trading, altcoins and bitcoin discussion).

That means that if you want merits you need to post exclusively in Meta.

A potential solution is to get merit sources to "patrol" a specific forum to award good posts. That way, the distribution will be more even.

[AngelSky]

Since new participants cannot able to analyze the quality post. High rank members have the knowledge to understand which one is quality post. If meriting option goes to less rank members it will become another spam here.

Now Hilariousandco starting washing out the merit sellers and exchangers. You may find many people have bee tagged in this, Hope he will take this as a huge list.

[coolcoinz]

I think the issue is that on some forums lots of merits are given out - eg posting on Meta.

On other forums hardly any merits are given out (speculation, trading, altcoins and bitcoin discussion).

That means that if you want merits you need to post exclusively in Meta.

A potential solution is to get merit sources to "patrol" a specific forum to award good posts. That way, the distribution will be more even.

Unfortunately, I've noticed that there are some sections that get much more attention from users who have a lot of merit and who are willing to give their merit away.
If you help newbies in beginners and help your chances of being merited are much lower than if you do the same thing in technical discussion usually because those newbies will have no merit to share. As for meta, I can agree with you because most if not all of my merit was earned here.