Let Decay Default Merits

[DdmrDdmr]

I'd be intereted to know how many individual members I have awarded with merit, and how that compares with the other merit awarders. Is that info fairly easy to discover?

I think that could be more interesting than the total amount awarded.

Well, really the total amount above is proof that, on average, substracting 4 sMerit per week would render the system useless as basically only a selected few would maintain rank over time.



I checked what you asked for in the latest sMerit.txt raw data file (data included for sMerit given between the 24/01/2018 and the 23/03/2018). Your stats:

- Number of times sMerit is given:                 193
- Number of distinct users you gave it to:       156
- Total sMerit awarded:                                 209
- Average awarded per user:                         1,34 sMerits
- Position when compared to other sMerit awarders (ordered by sMerit average descending): 5.333 (there are 47,20% sMerit awarders who award more per user than you, but you distribute well amongst multiple users).

You can see the complete file per user here (your data is on row 5334): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1d6M7ULKoefxF-VnYriIZ_if1gXjmT4PM3UuOMMbL530/edit?usp=sharing

Enjoy..

[1714144860]

1714144860

[1714144860]

1714144860

[1714144860]

1714144860

[jackg]

In reference to the OP, why not just make a new rank at 10000 merit that no one yet has and see if anyone will reach it? Rather than demoting everyone that has already worked hard to get to their level on the forum (and also, the people who have bought accounts who our admins don't actually condemn in any way).

Also:

There are 80 merit sources with a total merit generation of up to 17800 sMerit per 30 days

Imagine how long it'll take for everyone to get up to the ranks the were originally at.
I don't get merited very often, I wouldn't say I have a low amount of merit, but I don't get merited that often or with very much. This, to get back up to legendary at this rate would take a few years (although, if everyone was of a lower rank then people might be more favourable to merit my posts as currently meriting them is more of a +1 rather than anything as there isn't really a point for legendaries to get merit rather than the dopamine rush when you spot you've got a merit - I know I do need to get out more sometimes).
Also what would the companies advertising for signature campaigns do? Since I have bought my copper membership there'd still be a lot of advanced space in my signature, but I'd already be outranked by lower users who have their merit earning up because they're looked at more favourable to give merit to because they have actually needed it in order to rank up - and no one would be above sr member so services would be limited on what they are actually able to advertise.

I'd be intereted to know how many individual members I have awarded with merit, and how that compares with the other merit awarders. Is that info fairly easy to discover?

I think that could be more interesting than the total amount awarded.

Well, really the total amount above is proof that, on average, substracting 4 sMerit per week would render the system useless as basically only a selected few would maintain rank over time.



I checked what you asked for in the latest sMerit.txt raw data file (data included for sMerit given between the 24/01/2018 and the 23/03/2018). Your stats:

- Number of times sMerit is given:                 193
- Number of distinct users you gave it to:       156
- Total sMerit awarded:                                 209
- Average awarded per user:                         1,34 sMerits
- Position when compared to other sMerit awarders (ordered by sMerit average descending): 5.333 (there are 47,20% sMerit awarders who award more per user than you, but you distribute well amongst multiple users).

You can see the complete file per user here (your data is on row 5334): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1d6M7ULKoefxF-VnYriIZ_if1gXjmT4PM3UuOMMbL530/edit?usp=sharing

Enjoy..

That's a nice collection of information. Well done Jet Cash also for decentralising your merit awards between multiple users (as I think the system should be).

According to that sheet, I'm at 7,7,8,1.14 (or was when the data was scraped anyway).

[LoyceV]

why not just make a new rank at 10000 merit that no one yet has and see if anyone will reach it?

Merit was introduced to stop spammers from ranking up. Introducing new ranks has been suggested before, but has nothing to do with the reason Merit was created.

I'd be intereted to know how many individual members I have awarded with merit, and how that compares with the other merit awarders. Is that info fairly easy to discover?

I checked what you asked for in the latest sMerit.txt raw data file (data included for sMerit given between the 24/01/2018 and the 23/03/2018).

Nice data collection! I was still working on an answer to this question, but you beat me to it. I'll post mine in my own merit analysis once it's done. Update: here.

[DdmrDdmr]

Nice data collection! I was still working on an answer to this question, but you beat me to it. I'll post mine in my own merit analysis once it's done.

Yes. I’ve posted a few myself. There’s quite a bit that can be done with what’s currently available, although rank should be in the raw data as that is an essential dimension to interesting data break-down. I’ve seem some user’s manage to get hold of this info but it’s probably by querying forum externally with the inherent risk of being banned..

[r1s2g3]

I think we should start decaying Default Merits in constant rate, let say decay of 4 Default Merits every week.

In short, taking away 4 Merit per week is too much.

If taking away 4 Default/free Merit per week from an experienced user is too much than how we able to justify for newbie to gain approx. 7 merits per week to get upto rank of Sr. Member

Not a bad idea OP. This will really help purge the shitposters, how would you deal with member ranks? Would a legendary move down if he didn't maintain the required merits?

This would be a decent way of purging the shitposters from every level

I think so it will motivate everybody to write sensibly. Might be  we should increase Merit requirement to 50-60 for member and 25 for Jr.Member . Legendary will also lose status then if  "Default+ Earned" Merits < 1000.

I'd find it insulting if my rank was dropped, and I would seriously consider restricting my board presence to lurker/reader.

You are constructive poster so I do not think it will affect you. But that is the whole point of this system,fear of rank drop will never give you liberty to gain activity via shit posting.

[tuanytcc]

To be honest, I don't really think that merits will be decayed somehow. It is unrealistic. In the ANN about merit system (published by Theymos), merit scores will be attached with each user forever, they won't lose them in any situation.
Instead, I think that sMerits might be decayed in the future if users won't actively use their sMerits. In fact, users will earn nothing by hoarding their sMerit as Theymos, forum admin stated. sMerits has been here to send constructive users as small rewards to give them motivation to keep contributing to the forum. And users should comprehensively understand about the original objective of sMerits.

[mobilazy]

Pretty bad idea, people deserve rights not to participate in merit system if they willing to do so. If one is happy with his rank, why can't he stay at it forever? Just leave this merit system alone without this constant "improvements" suggestion. Need at least 1 year timeframe to evaluate its impact on the forum.

What should really start decaying is sMerits as it was planned by Theymos. Need to encourage people to give away their sMerits.

[r1s2g3]

Bumping this today.
I saw Theymos demoted Jr. Member and increased merit Sources. (More chances of getting merit now).
I think we can take one more step for those who are still spamming and got rank earlier before start of the Merit system.