How someone can send merits without receiving a single merit?

[shahzadafzal]

This guy never received a single merit in last 120 days but he sent 50 merits in last three 3 days? How?
Even if he's merit source (which I doubt if he is), he's clearly not distributing it fairly.

If he's not a merit source then how is he sending these merits? Is there a backdoor?

User: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;u=795961



"Username checks out cryptoheadd"


At the same time this guy so lucky https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;u=1045138
Received 90 merits in one day and 100 needed to rank up to Full Member just in 3 days.

50 merits received from above user coincidence?

[1714912734]

1714912734

[1714912734]

1714912734

[1714912734]

1714912734

[pugman]

That's his initial merit. All the hero members received around those many merits.
Here's a reference:

The exact formula was:

Code:

yearActivity = activity in the last ~year, max 378
freeMerit = the merit (not sMerit) you started with
modifier =
  0.1 if member
  0.2 if full member
  0.25 if sr member
  0.35 if hero
  0.4 if legendary

return (yearActivity/378) * modifier * freeMerit

[Emilyp]

He's only sending what he has. I doubt he's a merit source. Is it that the posts he merited ain't worth it or what exactly caught your attention in his manner of merit gifting?

[Thirdspace]

This guy never received a single merit in last 120 days but he sent 50 merits in last three 3 days? How?
Even if he's merit source (which I doubt if he is), he's clearly not distributing it fairly.

Good catch! I'm pretty sure some DT members will read this thread and show their concerns
those three posts merited by him don't look like superb posts deserving 50 merit
and you should investigate more on the other user, chronicsky, who gave a whooping 50 merit on a single insignificant post
the problem is they, cryptoheadd and chronicsky, have accumulated quite high number green trust

Timelord2067 suspected chronicsky to have a few connected accounts, he might need to update the list
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1702409.msg17937868#msg17937868

Ban evasion and/or trust evasion.

13 Accounts Connected:

Disposition u=12833, CoinMonster u=20242, TomatoCage u=37522, mexxer u=64650, Globes u=64928, MaxPumper u=65707, Jamesmarina2 u=66599, Jamesmerina1 u=69065, Muhammed Zakir u=320943, mexxer-2 u=341982, chronicsky u=353680, Tomatocage1 u=517424, jamesmerton u=902281 and BlueCorp u=53117

Archive: http://archive.is/y2HWf#selection-6593.0-8613.104

[digaran]

This guy never received a single merit in last 120 days but he sent 50 merits in last three 3 days? How?
Even if he's merit source (which I doubt if he is), he's clearly not distributing it fairly.

Good catch! I'm pretty sure some DT members will read this thread and show their concerns
those three posts merited by him don't look like superb posts deserving 50 merit
and you should investigate more on the other user, chronicsky, who gave a whooping 50 merit on a single insignificant post
the problem is they, cryptoheadd and chronicsky, have accumulated quite high number green trust

Timelord2067 suspected chronicsky to have a few connected accounts, he might need to update the list
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1702409.msg17937868#msg17937868

Ban evasion and/or trust evasion.

13 Accounts Connected:

Disposition u=12833, CoinMonster u=20242, TomatoCage u=37522, mexxer u=64650, Globes u=64928, MaxPumper u=65707, Jamesmarina2 u=66599, Jamesmerina1 u=69065, Muhammed Zakir u=320943, mexxer-2 u=341982, chronicsky u=353680, Tomatocage1 u=517424, jamesmerton u=902281 and BlueCorp u=53117

Archive: http://archive.is/y2HWf#selection-6593.0-8613.104

Do you think they are garbage posting? how to earn the right to send 50 merits to a generic and short post? have they contributed anything before and after the merit transactions? have other members earned the same right for their contributions?

Are there similar cases where the members have received negative tag because they were garbage posters? if yes then let them to make it up, let them to contribute somehow to earn that right and then remove their tags.

[botany]

Vod has tagged sourish and Cryptoheadd for merit abuse.
Chronicsky also seems to be involved in the ring, given that he gave 50 merits to sourish for a insignificant post, to actually set things rolling.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

I think sending merit to an individual post should be limited to 5 or 10 at most. 50 leads to abuse or people being overmerited. If a post is good enough, it will get 50 merits but from different sources.

[klaaas]

I think sending merit to an individual post should be limited to 5 or 10 at most. 50 leads to abuse or people being overmerited. If a post is good enough, it will get 50 merits but from different sources.

It is up to the merrit owner how to spend it. 'merit begging' is way worse.

What is the difference between Merit and sMerit?
There are two types of Merit. You cannot send your merits, just sMerit. For every Merit you receive you will have 0.5 spendable merit to reward posts as you see fit. 

[TMAN]

Vod has tagged sourish and Cryptoheadd for merit abuse.
Chronicsky also seems to be involved in the ring, given that he gave 50 merits to sourish for a insignificant post, to actually set things rolling.

I do not see a ring here, if the merits were circulating back then I would support this statement, but they are not. I am not going to comment on the tag as I have dealt with cryptoheadd and I don't believe I would be impartial enough to comment.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

I think sending merit to an individual post should be limited to 5 or 10 at most. 50 leads to abuse or people being overmerited. If a post is good enough, it will get 50 merits but from different sources.

It is up to the merrit owner how to spend it. 'merit begging' is way worse.

What is the difference between Merit and sMerit?
There are two types of Merit. You cannot send your merits, just sMerit. For every Merit you receive you will have 0.5 spendable merit to reward posts as you see fit. 

I would be up to the merit owner how to spend it if it was limited to 5 or 10 as well.

Yes, begging merit is worse but has nothing to do with what I am saying.

Thanks for the info, but I already knew the difference between merit and spendable merit.

[chronicsky]

Me and cryptoheadd have been friends for almost 3 years and met through this forum only. We are not running any kind of merit circle. I met sourish properly in singapore during the coinsbank cruise event where i found him very inclined towards crypto in general. He is a young enthusiastic person and i felt that he would do good to the community as a higher ranked member. It's not like he is participating in a signature campaign or something. He makes good post and i read them often. I had no idea that there was something like merit farming going on. i thought that instead of finding his individual posts that i liked , i would help him by giving him few merit. Given below is a post where theymos said that we can help others to rank-up if they have decent posts. The intention of me and cryptoheadd was not merit abuse.

I agree with this approach. I considered giving merit proportional to activity, but I decided not to because doing so would probably give far more undeserved merit than deserved merit in total. But undoubtedly some people got screwed by this, and if they have decent posts, by all means, give them the 250 or 500 merit that they need to rank-up.

I also agree with the idea of (free) "reviewer" topics in general, for finding high-quality posts that went unnoticed. Barcode_ created one in the Chinese section, as well.

I would be willing to send picture of me, cryptoheadd, sourish when we met in coinsbank cruise and had a picture with Mcafee to vod to show that we personally know him and that he is a dedicated crypto-enthusiast indeed. And to confirm that sourish and me are different person, i can send ID of sourish to VOD or any trusted member which shows his name and photo(same as username). While for me, am sure many members(Minerjones, Max from Kialara, etc.) here can confirm that am not sourish after checking ID of sourish as they have met me in person.

[mdayonliner]

Well done, you made a solid ground quoting theymos's comment, seems like you were looking for that to defend yourself.

I agree with this approach. I considered giving merit proportional to activity, but I decided not to because doing so would probably give far more undeserved merit than deserved merit in total. But undoubtedly some people got screwed by this, and if they have decent posts, by all means, give them the 250 or 500 merit that they need to rank-up.

Ok, I understand that you said...

....i felt that he would do good to the community as a higher ranked member. It's not like he is participating in a signature campaign or something. He makes good post and i read them often.

You felt? Just because you felt?? Did you ever consider seeing his post history? (archive). Altcoin Discussion is his home and hard to find a comment that talks constructive. And you felt he makes good post, he would do good to the community when he become a higher rank member?!?? He is waiting to become a higher rank member so that he can earn more from the signature spamming and possibly some other spammy way.

Since you were wise to find a reference from theymos, here is another one from theymos which I think you missed(!!!)

While we will not be directly moderating this, I encourage people to give merit to posts that are objectively high-quality, not just posts that you agree with.

I highlighted with green and bold.

PS: Feel free to read my Merit translation parody when you have some spare time.

update:
Did anyone yet noticed this...

Click here if unable to see image
All these merit giving tags has been removed  I guess theymos wrote a script to remove the tags when it's too many. It looks better now.

[TMAN]

Well done, you made a solid ground quoting theymos's comment, seems like you were looking for that to defend yourself.

I agree with this approach. I considered giving merit proportional to activity, but I decided not to because doing so would probably give far more undeserved merit than deserved merit in total. But undoubtedly some people got screwed by this, and if they have decent posts, by all means, give them the 250 or 500 merit that they need to rank-up.

Ok, I understand that you said...

....i felt that he would do good to the community as a higher ranked member. It's not like he is participating in a signature campaign or something. He makes good post and i read them often.

You felt? Just because you felt?? Did you ever consider seeing his post history? (archive). Altcoin Discussion is his home and hard to find a comment that talks constructive. And you felt he makes good post, he would do good to the community when he become a higher rank member?!?? He is waiting to become a higher rank member so that he can earn more from the signature spamming and possibly some other spammy way.

Since you were wise to find a reference from theymos, here is another one from theymos which I think you missed(!!!)

While we will not be directly moderating this, I encourage people to give merit to posts that are objectively high-quality, not just posts that you agree with.

I highlighted with green and bold.

PS: Feel free to read my Merit translation parody when you have some spare time.

update:
Did anyone yet noticed this...

Click here if unable to see image
All these merit giving tags has been removed   I guess theymos wrote a script to remove the tags when it's too many. It looks better now.

So after posting the quote that you referenced 24th Jan Theymos said that if you feel someone should rank up then give them the 250/500 merits needed 26th Jan..  As far as I am aware none of these guys are sources and there was definitely no farming/circling of merits..

Taking the above into account I do not see anything wrong here, but personally I wouldn't of handled it in this way (I am helping newbies with challenges)

[TheQuin]

You felt? Just because you felt??

Everyone is free to give Merit as they feel fit. If it's not an alt account abusing campaigns or bounties, which looks to be the case, then it is up to him who he gives it to and for whatever reason.

update:
Did anyone yet noticed this...

Click here if unable to see image
All these merit giving tags has been removed  I guess theymos wrote a script to remove the tags when it's too many. It looks better now.

I think you find that just an intermittent stack overflow error as that display been flipping on and off for months.

[cashberycoin.com]

This guy never received a single merit in last 120 days but he sent 50 merits in last three 3 days? How?
Even if he's merit source (which I doubt if he is), he's clearly not distributing it fairly.

If he's not a merit source then how is he sending these merits? Is there a backdoor?

User: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;u=795961

"Username checks out cryptoheadd"


At the same time this guy so lucky https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;u=1045138
Received 90 merits in one day and 100 needed to rank up to Full Member just in 3 days.

50 merits received from above user coincidence?

Maybe, you can send information to moderator?

[cryptoheadd]

Wow, just saw this thread.

First of all, I'm not very active on Bitcointalk anymore, so I'm not that aware of how these merits work.
Second, there is no merit farming going on here. (I didn't even know that was a thing.)

I know Sourish personally, and we've been friends for quite some time. He just got into crypto, and is now an avid trader.
He attended a lot of Blockchain conferences with me and Sky.

Because of his curiosity, I told him about Bitcointalk and how he can use this to learn about everything crypto here.

Later, He asked me to check out his posts on Bitcointalk, (as he had been very active) and I did.

I liked them and gave him some merits.


I understand now, that people may have been buying merits on Bitcointalk, like they were buying trust before. That was not my intention, at all.

No transaction happened, when I sent the merits to Sourish. Just did that to support him.

I would be willing to send picture of me, cryptoheadd, sourish when we met in coinsbank cruise and had a picture with Mcafee to vod to show that we personally know him and that he is a dedicated crypto-enthusiast indeed. And to confirm that sourish and me are different person, i can send ID of sourish to VOD or any trusted member which shows his name and photo(same as username).

I wouldn't mind doing this, either.


I apologize for the confusion, and am willing to provide any proof necessary. (Or answer any questions that you might have.)

Regards
Cryptoheadd

[shahzadafzal]

Clearly this is a case where two friends helping out another friend to rank up, may be its not a merit abuse.

Yes we all agree if somebody deserves and is short of some merits, other members can help. But in this case sourish was well short of 86 merits and he received 90 mertis on the same day. Helping in such a way and awarding maximum possible merits to not "objectively high-quality" post, definitely creates confusion.

Trust me I did not search for your profile, I was just playing around with merit stats (inspired from DdmrDdmr), and when I sorted maximum merits received by a person on a single day, on 24th April sourish was among the top. If you think sourish's posts deserve merits you can follow the most generous member of the bitcointalk community QuestionAuthority, Even I did not see him awarding 50 merits to any one in last 120 days. He plays with 10 and 20, and that's also with explanation about why someone is receiving 10 or 20 merits.

I apologize for the confusion, and am willing to provide any proof necessary.

Well I will request Vod that if he agrees to the clarification provided, then please clear the only negative trust from both members sourish & cryptoheadd received. (Their profiles were clean before this incident). I hope they will be more careful and will prove to be an asset to bitcointalk community.

That's his initial merit. All the hero members received around those many merits.

Thank you for pointing out, yes I did not know this before.
(I was wondering where did he get these smerits, did he cheat? that was the main reason behind this thread)

[mobilazy]

Giving so many initial merits was quite a bad idea, plenty of merit abuses came out of this. But it should be better soon, once all merit sellers and exchangers will be out of given merits. Merit decay for initial merits would certainly help to speed up this process, if implemented. As for helping a friend, one should earn merits first then show his\her generosity to a friend.

[cryptoheadd]

Clearly this is a case where two friends helping out another friend to rank up, may be its not a merit abuse.

Well I will request Vod that if he agrees to the clarification provided, then please clear the only negative trust from both members sourish & cryptoheadd received. (Their profiles were clean before this incident). I hope they will be more careful and will prove to be an asset to bitcointalk community.

I'll be more careful in the future.

Thanks, @shahzadafzal

[sourish]

I am really sorry for creating so much trouble for two people whom i respect and who are looking out for me as a noob.
I've been reading up on the trust and merit system, and will be careful in the future.