[Merit] Proposition : Merit transfer option.

[InvoKing]

Aim : to get moar smerit per good quality posts by increasing "depth2 sources".

Materials and methods :
General population : bitcointalk.org users.
Specific population : bitcointalk.org trusted users.
Stats :
 - 80 merit sources = 17,800 sMerit per 30 days
 - Average posts = 8,538.39/day = 260,421/month
=> 1 merit source has to look to an average of 106 new posts/day or 3,255 new posts/month in order to make the system works as intended.
=> 1 source has to send an average of 7.5 smerit per day in order to make the system works as intended.

Since sources are humans obviously i doubt they can (not all of them maybe) give rewards properly to everyone deserving it. Results will be : accumulated smerit at the end of the month, more smerit for posts that deserve less and less smerit for the rest of the posts. ~fats are accumulated in the abdomen which aren't healthy.

Proposition :
Source-D1 (depth 1?) could select membres that he trusts (source-D2) and transfer smerit to them (approval of the selected users by admins may be required for the first time and may be restricted later).
Example :
Source-D1 has 320 smerit, he will be inactive for 7 days, he could transfer 50 smerit (max) to source-D2-user1 and 30 smerit to source-D2-user2 so they can complete the task avoiding fats accumulation.
Transfers shouldn't be seen by public obviously.
Forgot to add that transfer doesn't count as received smerit so merit points of the depth2 remains unchanged, just like actual sources when they receive the smerit crates.
Forgot also to add that I do not have any conflits of interest nor I intend to be part of the depth2 since this job requires too much time which I haven't for obvious reason.

[atrocityx]

I really like it, the way you presented the problem makes a lot of sense. 

[shahzadafzal]

Source-D1 (depth 1?) could select membres that he trusts (source-D2) and transfer smerit to them (approval of the selected users by admins may be required for the first time and may be restricted later).

Finding that member again will be not simple task, and approval process might take time too.

Why can't we make sMerit to votes?

All member can vote and value of vote can be determined by the member's Rank. For example

Rank                       sMerit (Vote Value)
Legendary                        5
Hero                                4
Sr. Member                      3
Full Member                     2
Member                           1
Jr. Member                       1
 
Newbie                            0.1

For example each single vote from a Legendary will have value of 5. Similarly we can either exclude Newbie or give a small vote value like 0.1

Yes it is complicated and may need some technical changes in the backend or just keep it for the future enhancements.

[athanz88]

Why not just add that depth 2 sources ( if your system happened) as merit sources? why do we need to differ them? in my opinion it is better if there are more merit sources rather than making this system more complex.

[Welsh]

I would think one of the criteria of merit sources is that they have to all cover different areas of the forum, be good at spotting quality posts, and be active.Eventually, as hinted by theymos there will be hundreds of merit sources so it won't be so much of an issue in the future that quality posts are getting missed.

Although, I do like the idea of normal users being able to transfer their sMerit to others. For example, Lauda recently said this:

This is not a problem with the merit system, this is a problem with the quality of the content and the sockpuppets. For reference: I have around 300 sMerit right now and nobody to give them to, nor do I plan to look through garbage to find someone. I'm still waiting for a destroy merit option.

This probably wouldn't be ideal, and if users could transfer their sMerit to people that they believe would distribute it correctly and be willing to look for good quality posts then this might be a nice little feature.

[BTCforJoe]

This probably wouldn't be ideal, and if users could transfer their sMerit to people that they believe would distribute it correctly and be willing to look for good quality posts then this might be a nice little feature.

It would be ideal if the sMerit (by non-sources) was transferred to a Merit pool that was distributed by MS-1 (Merit Source Depth 1) members to MS-2+ automatically. Otherwise, the transfer of sMerits could end up being abused if the user was allowed to send it to whoever they desire.

The pool would only work if the sMerit donated to it were dispersed whenever there is an amount that is divisible by the amount of MS-1 members (eg. If there are 100 MS-1 members, the pool wouldn't disperse the donated merit until 100 Merits were collected in the pool).

@InvoKing, I think this is a very valid start to what could become a sustainable merit source system. Great job!

[Theb]

Suggested the same Depth-2 Idea, a couple of months ago. With the idea of unused sMerits not putting into waste, I suggested that this sMerits would be given to non-generating Depth 2 Merit Sources. But with the replies I got from other members, I see that my idea is not as good as what EcuaMobi has suggested which is including more merit sources. Even if the unused sMerits won't be solved having more Merit Sources that regenerate sMerits is still a favorable thing for us members. The system is still new for us to decide if we need a change in the system or not but the admins are constantly adding new merit sources, which means in the future receiving merits from our post won't be rare as to what we are seeing now.

[LoyceV]

=> 1 merit source has to look to an average of 106 new posts/day or 3,255 new posts/month in order to make the system works as intended.

This assumption is wrong. At least half the posts aren't worth reading at all (check recent unread posts and see how often the word "bounty" is in the title).
That leaves less than 53 posts per day to read by your math. That's not much at all for an active member.
Update: I forgot the overlap in sources reading the same posts as other sources.  Let me rephrase it: I think 90% of all new posts isn't worth reading, and I'll prove it provide empirical evidence by showing the 10 newest (English) posts from the unread posts link:
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10

Since sources are humans obviously i doubt they can (not all of them maybe) give rewards properly to everyone deserving it.

I don't think this is a problem. Suppose someone who makes 100 good posts only receives merit on 10 of them. On average, that will be the same for everyone.

Proposition :

It's much easier to add more merit sources (hint hint).

Why not just add that depth 2 sources ( if your system happened) as merit sources? why do we need to differ them? in my opinion it is better if there are more merit sources rather than making this system more complex.

Exactly! Theymos said this:

By no means is the set of merit sources or their sMerit/month static. I will be adjusting it a lot as needed, especially in the beginning. I wouldn't be surprised if there are 100-200 sources in a year from now.

[Talk merit]

I haven't read this thread in depth, but I don't understand how the proposal differs from the existing system. Let us call a merit source an M1, and a person with sMerit to award an M2. I think these equate to the D1 and D2 in the proposal. When an M1 awards merit, he gives 150% of the stated number. !00% of those are permanent, and secured in the members merit wallet, the other 50% is transferable to the community,

This system is simpler to operate, and it allows the community to award almost half of the merits to be awarded ( sMerits), and the other half ( well slightly more ) are generated from the source merits awarded by the M1 members ( which are refreshed 30 days after being awarded). In both cases the quantity of merits generated are dependent on the awarding activity of the donors. This makes the system self-regulating.

[InvoKing]

-snip-

Although, I am active on meta but I always discover something that I am not aware of. Good.
Ok I read all comments, and here is my response :

- Depth2 are temporary sources that could help depth1 whenever needed. They will not receive automatically smerit monthly, they could receive it at any time from any depth1 source. This system will allow to have a list of active users that could help covering large parts of the forums.

- Why not just add them to sources? My answer why they aren't already on sources? How many trusted members on bitcointalk.org comparing to sources number? Do all trusted members will be add to sources?
LoyceV i am assuming that you aren't a source member yet, so why can't you receive a part from Lauda's smerit (or anyone else who cannot spend his smerit). This could be the first step to join sources if you get endorsed by many sources after seeing your work.

- Voting is good but in bitcointalk it will be abused.

- Stats are stats, it is objective, I agree many posts doesn't deserve to be read but picking only some posts to look on it may restrict some genuine replies.

[Talk merit]

- Depth2 are temporary sources that could help depth1 whenever needed. They will not receive automatically smerit monthly, they could receive it at any time from any depth1 source. This system will allow to have a list of active users that could help covering large parts of the forums.

Why should they be given merits to award, if they are not able to create meritable posts? If they can create such posts, then they are able to award sMerits they have generated themselves.

Once again - sMerits held by merit sources are not relevant. Any merits they award will come from their source merits first, and not from their sMerits.

[InvoKing]

- Depth2 are temporary sources that could help depth1 whenever needed. They will not receive automatically smerit monthly, they could receive it at any time from any depth1 source. This system will allow to have a list of active users that could help covering large parts of the forums.

Why should they be given merits to award, if they are not able to create meritable posts? If they can create such posts, then they are able to award sMerits they have generated themselves.

Once again - sMerits held by merit sources are not relevant. Any merits they award will come from their source merits first, and not from their sMerits.

I will try to be simple :
- Depth1 = actual sources, limited number even 200 aren't that good number imo to cover whole forums parts.
- Depth2 = good users that may collected a reasonable amount of smerit but they have actually less. They might be chosen in the future as sources but they should wait years maybe.
People are complaining about their posts aren't receiving the proper attention (i am not talking about trashy ones), sources couldn't cover all subs (local,...etc), number of users are increasing constantly...etc.
Depth2 are active users in many subs, all they need is more smerit to share with others, someone with +100 smerit doesn't deserve to be in depth2, while someone with 10 smerit (and +100 spent) may deserves to be in.

It is all about flexibility & decentralisation and at the same time keeping the Merit system cheat-free as possible.

[Welsh]

I will try to be simple :
- Depth1 = actual sources, limited number even 200 aren't that good number imo to cover whole forums parts.
- Depth2 = good users that may collected a reasonable amount of smerit but they have actually less. They might be chosen in the future as sources but they should wait years maybe.
People are complaining about their posts aren't receiving the proper attention (i am not talking about trashy ones), sources couldn't cover all subs (local,...etc), number of users are increasing constantly...etc.
Depth2 are active users in many subs, all they need is more smerit to share with others, someone with +100 smerit doesn't deserve to be in depth2, while someone with 10 smerit (and +100 spent) may deserves to be in.

It is all about flexibility & decentralisation and at the same time keeping the Merit system cheat-free as possible.

The merit system is very early doors at the moment, and merit sources will be in the hundreds. I don't think it's been limited to 200 as far as I know. Adding a depth 2 would just complicate a relatively simple system. Plus, I don't think it brings any major advantages. If a person is deemed good then he'll likely be added as a merit source. If someone has run out of their initial sMerit and doesn't generate enough on a regular basis to show they have the capabilities of picking out quality content but, has a eye for good posts then they can fill in an application and send it off to theymos. I don't think we need to over complicate by adding a depth 2.

[Jet Cash]

It seems to be that all these posts about changing the merit barrier are designed to allow signature spammers to increase their pollution of the boards. The merit system was designed to stop this, and it seems to be working imho.

[InvoKing]

It seems to be that all these posts about changing the merit barrier are designed to allow signature spammers to increase their pollution of the boards. The merit system was designed to stop this, and it seems to be working imho.

Do you think?
I am trying to avoid two possibilities : sources having more unspent smerit or sources doubling rewards to avoid the first case, which i think both aren't good choices. Sources could confirm or "deny" these facts.

The merit system is very early doors at the moment, and merit sources will be in the hundreds. I don't think it's been limited to 200 as far as I know. Adding a depth 2 would just complicate a relatively simple system. Plus, I don't think it brings any major advantages. If a person is deemed good then he'll likely be added as a merit source. If someone has run out of their initial sMerit and doesn't generate enough on a regular basis to show they have the capabilities of picking out quality content but, has a eye for good posts then they can fill in an application and send it off to theymos. I don't think we need to over complicate by adding a depth 2.

I respect your point of view, I am just giving a proposition after reviewing some sources attitude.
Personally, I am almost out of smerit, I don't want to get more/I think it is enough now and I prefer to have a useless like button to support relevant posts

[athanz88]

Why not just add that depth 2 sources ( if your system happened) as merit sources? why do we need to differ them? in my opinion it is better if there are more merit sources rather than making this system more complex.

Exactly! Theymos said this:

By no means is the set of merit sources or their sMerit/month static. I will be adjusting it a lot as needed, especially in the beginning. I wouldn't be surprised if there are 100-200 sources in a year from now.

Well, i hope i can be one of merit sources  

I agree with LoyceV. It is easier to add more sources rather than making a system like that, we just need to find a great and established member who is unbiased in to some kind of matters and willing to help the forum to become better, and i guess this is not a hard task.

[Jet Cash]

I am trying to avoid two possibilities : sources having more unspent smerit or sources doubling rewards to avoid the first case, which i think both aren't good choices. Sources could confirm or "deny" these facts.

Please could you qualify that. Do you mean merit sources with unallocated source merits, or do you mean their earned sMerits that they haven't spent.

As I have said previously, it isn't possible for them to spend sMerits until they have used up all their source merits. Source merits are replaced 30 days after they are awarded, so the system is self-moderating.

[InvoKing]

Please could you qualify that. Do you mean merit sources with unallocated source merits, or do you mean their earned sMerits that they haven't spent.

I do never talk about someone wealth. Sources are free to keep it or spend it the way they like.
I do care only about source smerits received every 30 days and how to distribute it properly.
Edit :

I didn't think that merit sources were know publicly. Obviously if source merit lists are available, then the names of merit sources would be public knowledge.

They aren't but it isn't that hard to figure some of them.

[Jet Cash]

I do care only about source smerits received every 30 days and how to distribute it properly.

I didn't think that merit sources were know publicly. Obviously if source merit lists are available, then the names of merit sources would be public knowledge.

[stompix]

=> 1 merit source has to look to an average of 106 new posts/day or 3,255 new posts/month in order to make the system works as intended.

This assumption is wrong. At least half the posts isn't worth reading at all (check recent unread posts and see how often the word "bounty" is in the title).
That leaves less than 53 posts per day to read by your math. That's not much at all for an active member.
Update: I forgot the overlap in sources reading the same posts as other sources.  Let me rephrase it: I think 90% of all new posts isn't worth reading, and I'll prove it provide empirical evidence by showing the 10 newest (English) posts from the unread posts link:
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10

I totally agree with LoyceV here, your arguments started with a bunch of numbers that are clearly not real.

You went and grabbed that average 8538.39 but you neglected this:

Top 10 Boards:

Announcements (Altcoins)      5949003
Bounties (Altcoins)              2358465
Altcoin Discussion              1825601

That's around 1/3 of the entire board and I'm guessing it's growing at a faster pace than the rest of the it and then there are the local boards and the off-topic which are Post&Go spam stations.
Also, it takes 1 to 2 seconds to read a on line or two line posts and decide that it deserves no merit.

Please could you qualify that. Do you mean merit sources with unallocated source merits, or do you mean their earned sMerits that they haven't spent.

I do never talk about someone wealth. Sources are free to keep it or spend it the way they like.
I do care only about source smerits received every 30 days and how to distribute it properly.

What are we going to do when the D-1 goes offline? We're going to have D-2? Then D-3?
Why over complicating a system that is not even 6 months old?