Is the merit system flawed?

[TheUltraElite]

I personally am not a big fan of the merit system for ranks on here, I think it pushes for people to simply beg for merit, account farm, or pay people to give them merit.

Doing such things is useless. Once you get caught you will marked with red. The reason why people want to rank up quick and easy is signature campaigns. But then if they are being tagged then they would stop such practices.

As there is no incentive at all, for people to give away their smerit to others -- which doesn't make sense to me as people don't want to hand them out.

There have been guidelines to the merit sources for giving out merits. Basically it is the acceptance of this new system by merit sources that will help reduce the spam and shitposting - that is the incentive because older people here are pissed off at the spam and they also want to improve the conditions. I am not a merit source so I cant comment more on this but I am sure some other merit sources here might be able to throw some light into this.

What do others see in regard to the flaws for the merit system? I'd love to see what some others think.

The only problem (not flaw) is that the number of merit sources it still low.

The merit system flaw is only that of issuance. The responsibility of the rewarding of merit is left in the hands of forum members who have vested interest in the merit system itself. This is the reason for the abuse. The merit reward should come from independent accessors and all abuse will vanish.

What do you mean by the bolded part? I would like to know what you have in mind and what you actually mean to say by that term and how it will help the abuse to "vanish"
Any system is vulnerable to abuse. Any system.

[mu_enrico]

I'm more interested in the last April Mop system
There should be more than just two factors (i.e. merit and post) to level up
But other factors should not rely on human judgment like merit does

Just my two cents, i have 999 merits anyway

[Vod]

But other factors should not rely on human judgment like merit does

We don't have AI yet, so removing human judgment allows the bots to win.  :/

[WaffleMaster]

I've had an incredibly hard time getting merit. This doesn't effect me very much since my account is already hero rank, though. I think the real problem is that sMerit doesn't have an incentive for people to send it. This whole system is very incomplete, and while it may cut down on spam in a small way, there's a HUGE barrier to entry into the forum now.

Why make getting a decent account so grindy with no payoff? It's like a video game where you'll spend 100 hours to get .0001% stronger. We need some game theory to make a new system that's rewarding and also fair to all users. This current system is heavily flawed.

[actmyname]

I think the real problem is that sMerit doesn't have an incentive for people to send it.

There's no incentive for people to send trust. There's no incentive to enter serious discussion topics.Getting a "decent account"? Is the purpose of BCT to facilitate signature-based payments? I don't think so.

However, if we want to take that stance, then we can argue this: only the best posters should be given the privilege of getting payments for their posts. I do understand that there exist many "high-rank" accounts that are spammers. They'll eventually be funneled out, either through moderation of the forum directly or of the campaigns. Though, in the case of bounties, the latter is unlikely to happen.

It's not easy to create something where you are rewarded for sending sMerit. That brings an undesirable advantage to people with alts and account farmers.

[Thirio]

I think they just want to make sure that members will only make quality posts. I do not have any problem with that. But gaining merit is really a problem for me. I don't want to beg for merits, but I also haven't received any merit. So I really have no chance to be a Sr Member.
I think some members won't waste their time giving others merit coz it won't affect theirs.

Of course. That's the goal of the merit system, to shut off shitposters and let those quality posters prosper. Gaining merit is indeed a problem, specially nowadays but merit supply is not the problem but the circulation itself is. That's why i think members that are not trying to circulate the merit is indeed one of the flaws.

[pugman]

I've had an incredibly hard time getting merit. This doesn't effect me very much since my account is already hero rank, though. I think the real problem is that sMerit doesn't have an incentive for people to send it. This whole system is very incomplete, and while it may cut down on spam in a small way, there's a HUGE barrier to entry into the forum now.

Why make getting a decent account so grindy with no payoff? It's like a video game where you'll spend 100 hours to get .0001% stronger. We need some game theory to make a new system that's rewarding and also fair to all users. This current system is heavily flawed.

Why are you in a hurry? And seriously how can you even compare this forum to a video game? Totally unrelated context. And for those who all are finding it hard to get merits,you're thinking in the short run. Merit system is not exactly flawed. The users are. Just post some shit that has some thought into it and you shall be just fine.

[TheUltraElite]

Of course. That's the goal of the merit system, to shut off shitposters and let those quality posters prosper. Gaining merit is indeed a problem, specially nowadays but merit supply is not the problem but the circulation itself is.

Gaining merit should not be a problem for those who actually make quality posts and add to the discussion. Moreover even if you make a good quality post you are still in the shadow of not getting merited simply because merit sources may have ignored you altogether or they have already run out of merits. But there is no need to lament about this rather make sure to continue to post well written quality posts that add to the discussion.

That's why i think members that are not trying to circulate the merit is indeed one of the flaws.

What advantage would they get if they dont circulate the merit? There is no point in hoarding merit. They are willing to "use" the new in order to adapt to it and only those who are shitposters are complaining.

[btcprospecter]

The problem more come from people who don't give merit we all see there are some of the well known members of this forum who will more than likely receive merit over someone with relatively no notoriety.
We can all see that since implementing the merit system the forums are not as full of shit posts and people trying to contribute positively however some of these do slip thru without merit being given.

[Duallimit]

Shitposting turned into shittopic creation, that's only result of merit system. Thought with merites is not bad, but very far from perfect. Not to mention the fact that the system has protected those multiacc users, because of whom it was created. Because they managed to pump their accounts. It was necessary to nullify the ranks, and then create merit system. Or make a KYC for oldschool guys, who want to keep the rank. I would suggest a downgrade of activiti ​​and, accordingly, the title, as a solution to the problem of spam. Or\and, if it is possible, that activity was counted not on the account, but on the ip, evenly distributed between the accounts which are enter from this ip. If someone comes through the proxy just do not count the activity. I do not know if this is possible.

[Bezuprechnyj]

Old-timers, tell us how it was before the introduction of merit? Wasn't it created lots of useful posts and topics, serious and detailed discussions? I do not think that before the introduction of the merit system you were fooling around and did not help each other in solving complex issues. In any case, the merit system has become an incentive for writing quality posts and comments. But as a means to combat spam, it is useless. After looking at the high minimum threshold for a new rank, most spammers will continue to write low-quality comments, because in their minds such thresholds are simply unattainable. Hence the purchase of merit points (which is kind of like forbidden or at least condemn) and accounts (which, paradoxically, is not prohibited).

[d5000]

Old-timers, tell us how it was before the introduction of merit? Wasn't it created lots of useful posts and topics, serious and detailed discussions?

You can distinguish three periods:
1.) the "serious discussion" period which lasted until 2013 approximately, where most thread were "serious" and on-topic, even the altcoin section was interesting as experimental concepts were discussed. Spam was very limited (mostly related to the first altcoin announcements and giveaways).
2.) a transition period, where the first signature campaigns emerged (2013-2016). Spam was growing, but a good part of the threads were still on-topic and valuable information. Most spam was found in the altcoin section, which evolved into a kind of "trashcan".
3.) the spam period - which begun approximately with the upswing in late 2016 and got worse during 2017. Entire sub-forums like "Bitcoin Discussion" and "Altcoin Discussion" were dominated (at least 90%) by spam.

The third period is where it became dangerous for the forum's existence and status in the community, as many veterans left the board or only posted in relatively "clean" local subforums like German and Spanish. It became really hard to find interesting topics. Merit is an attempt to revert this situation.

But as a means to combat spam, it is useless. After looking at the high minimum threshold for a new rank, most spammers will continue to write low-quality comments, because in their minds such thresholds are simply unattainable. Hence the purchase of merit points (which is kind of like forbidden or at least condemn) and accounts (which, paradoxically, is not prohibited).

These abusers can be simply banned, or can get red trust by DT members, so they'll not be accepted anymore in campaigns. Merit doesn't directly combat spam, but it does making account farming much more difficult. Without merit we would see a growing hoard of Heroes and Legendaries without any serious contribution. With merit, at least the "army of Heroes/Legendaries" has stabilized, with mostly those who write good content getting rewarded with a high rank.

[tbct_mt2]

You can distinguish three periods:
1.) the "serious discussion" period which lasted until 2013 approximately, where most thread were "serious" and on-topic, even the altcoin section was interesting as experimental concepts were discussed. Spam was very limited (mostly related to the first altcoin announcements and giveaways).
2.) a transition period, where the first signature campaigns emerged (2013-2016). Spam was growing, but a good part of the threads were still on-topic and valuable information. Most spam was found in the altcoin section, which evolved into a kind of "trashcan".
3.) the spam period - which begun approximately with the upswing in late 2016 and got worse during 2017. Entire sub-forums like "Bitcoin Discussion" and "Altcoin Discussion" were dominated (at least 90%) by spam.

The third period is where it became dangerous for the forum's existence and status in the community, as many veterans left the board or only posted in relatively "clean" local subforums like German and Spanish. It became really hard to find interesting topics. Merit is an attempt to revert this situation.

Thank you very much for the informative thread, d5000.
I have not joined the forum too long to have personal experience of the all three period of the forum. Honestly, the first day I joined the forum, the only reason I did it is for joining campaigns. I don't feel ashamed of this!  
Over time, I realised that the forum can bring lots of more interesting things for me, including knowledge, experience, and more free opportunity (which I have to find them myself during my time spent in the forum).
There are lots of members (higher-ranked ones) reveal great tips by chances (of course, for free). If users are experienced enough to understand such free, valuable tips, they can earn money by themselves.
That's the way the forum works (and should be like this, just my hope, lol). The forum should be for serious discussions, and a place for sharing knowledge, experience, skills, not for continuously (and most terrible by bots) spamming to earn money from campaigns.

[mobilazy]

It is flawed, same as the democracy. But as the humanity haven't yet come up with a better system, as forum administration and members don't have a better alternative. I was lurking Meta for a while and most of the proposals imo doing the system worse, not better. I only wish all merit exchangers (including so-called "friends") are banned and initial merits decayed.

[MainIbem]

I personally am not a big fan of the merit system for ranks on here, I think it pushes for people to simply beg for merit, account farm, or pay people to give them merit.

Doing such things is useless. Once you get caught you will marked with red. The reason why people want to rank up quick and easy is signature campaigns. But then if they are being tagged then they would stop such practices.

As there is no incentive at all, for people to give away their smerit to others -- which doesn't make sense to me as people don't want to hand them out.

There have been guidelines to the merit sources for giving out merits. Basically it is the acceptance of this new system by merit sources that will help reduce the spam and shitposting - that is the incentive because older people here are pissed off at the spam and they also want to improve the conditions. I am not a merit source so I cant comment more on this but I am sure some other merit sources here might be able to throw some light into this.

What do others see in regard to the flaws for the merit system? I'd love to see what some others think.

The only problem (not flaw) is that the number of merit sources it still low.

The merit system flaw is only that of issuance. The responsibility of the rewarding of merit is left in the hands of forum members who have vested interest in the merit system itself. This is the reason for the abuse. The merit reward should come from independent accessors and all abuse will vanish.

What do you mean by the bolded part? I would like to know what you have in mind and what you actually mean to say by that term and how it will help the abuse to "vanish"
Any system is vulnerable to abuse. Any system.

By independent accessors I mean all merits should be withdrawn from members and given to a selected group who's duty it is to award merits based on laid down parameters.

This will eliminate the abuse of the merit system by members. Because those selected will not have vested interest therefore they will not favor anyone neither will anyone bribe them for merit points. It will be very easy to identify any of them who is abusing the trust giving.

This is what I have in mind.

[tbct_mt2]

It's not true. Merit system changed the forum to be a better one. It's simple fact everyone can see, including spammers, but unfortunately they tend to feel hard to accept the fact.

I was lurking Meta for a while and most of the proposals imo doing the system worse, not better.

Some of them were banned and will be banned (you can search for yourself, there are topics on reporting merit abusers and a massive merit farmer (more than 200 accounts banned several months ago, I remembered I read it somewhere in the Meta section).

I only wish all merit exchangers (including so-called "friends") are banned

Why did you ask for decaying all ranks of all members in the forum to Newbie and start from zero for all to make the forum as a perfect fair place.
However, in the case it happen, you know what? There will be other people join the forum later than that point, and will keep asking for such non-sense, unreasonable decaying change like you.

and initial merits decayed.

[Flame Dragon King]

Merit is a good idea, its just like a reward system like a child. Giving a child what he/she wants in return for his/her good manners and right conduct. Just like in forum, the more your post is helping others and have a good quality the more merits you gets. Just simply as that.

[TheUltraElite]

By independent accessors I mean all merits should be withdrawn from members and given to a selected group who's duty it is to award merits based on laid down parameters.

How would merits be "withdrawn"? The ones who have been awarded some merit would always retain the merit - otherwise they will lose their rank and that is bad for the forum.

This will eliminate the abuse of the merit system by members.

It will never reduce the abuse. Like I have said - no system is immune to abuse.

Because those selected will not have vested interest therefore they will not favor anyone neither will anyone bribe them for merit points. It will be very easy to identify any of them who is abusing the trust giving.

Then again the same thing is happening for merit system here. Favouring someone is subjective and that creates a friendly atmosphere in the fourm - something that is lacking since the storm of shitposters that appeared in the last year.

This is what I have in mind.

Sorry to say but its a dumb idea.

[coolcoinz]

It is flawed, same as the democracy. But as the humanity haven't yet come up with a better system, as forum administration and members don't have a better alternative. I was lurking Meta for a while and most of the proposals imo doing the system worse, not better. I only wish all merit exchangers (including so-called "friends") are banned and initial merits decayed.

And I wish all spammers were banned, all scammers, all trust abusers... I could go on and on.
What can you do? It's only a system and people have to actively monitor it. Every now and then somebody slips through the cracks, just like people who were farming campaigns with alts. No system is perfect, especially the one that is managed by people. The human factor

IMO the system is good and should stay. It reduces spam and account farming.

[wh1rlw1nd]

Yes, it's obviously flawed. For example, there is a huge gap between member and full member, from 10 to 100 merits. C'mon! After full member it's even more. I've earned myself 13 by doing fantastic (he-he, i'm joking, but still) translation form eng to native language of joint economic report of USA 2018. Ten great translations more? Dunno...  
The other thing is - there is a little amount of sMerig generated, and usually highest ranks don't seem to give away their sMerits to newbies...
The final thing is - newbies are newbies, usually they don't know much about cryptonomics and unable to do deep analysis, researches, articles on these topics, etc - what potentially can bring them wanted merits.