Do you think it is fair to save merits for high-quality, low-ranked members?

[malekcap]

i think is fair and so nobly! but if and only if these post really deserve a merits! we dont want merits for shitty or spammy posts so we want keep the form cleam from those kind of people so we dont should to encourage them by giving them a merits but we must to help people who deserve help 

[_Miracle]

I gave mine to those who had helped me (or made me laugh) in the past. I gave one away to someone who has passed soooooo while that person didn't need it he absolutely deserved it.
"Fair" is a tricky and practically pointless word when asking what someone should do with their own belongings, votes, merit or whatever else.

I'm personally fine knowing I will not likely ever make legendary status (Hero is enough pressure as it is ;-).
Not sure how the merit system will shake out but it IS an improvement, I hope it will discourage the multiple accounts trying to "level up" to make money by spamming here.

Whatever happened to having a forum where people with the same interest exchange ideas...for enjoyment?

[Jet Cash]

Whatever happened to having a forum where people with the same interest exchange ideas...for enjoyment?

It's this one - there are loads of people exchanging ideas about bounties, and they must gain enjoyment from the self-flagellation of not receiving those bounties.

[Bitminer1224]

I don’t  get enough smerits to spend as often as I would like to. This has made me decide that I am only going to give merits to high quality posters, lower ranked members; I won’t give any for Legendary members and maybe not to Hero members either.

I think it is better due to scarcity to save them for people who have a long way to rank up rather than for those who are at the top already and get merits easily.

What do you think about? Do you do the same? Do you think it is fair?

It can be theorized that its better to save up sMerit for lower rank users that "need" it but that's really only one side to it. Its all based on the person who owns the sMerit and what they deem as a good post. As I've read many people on this topic agree that merit should be awarded to posts regardless of rank but by the value of the post. The two values I've noticed are posts that are useful, or posts that give a laugh. Both contain values which are based by the opinion of the owner of the sMerit. I personally think it is fair but it can be hard to be noticed. I say that but I'm sure if a user consistently posts quality then they will get atleast some merit from someone. If that someone has any to send. I usually find myself wanting to send a merit for a post but then realize "I only have one to send. Maybe I should save it for another post."

[Viarahine]

we consider it as a form of charity.

Merit is not charity. If you want it, you'll have to earn it.

Now it's turning into a business. I've seen posts about sMerit buying/selling more than once. After all, there are high-quality posts that are not awarded smerit, because it is easier to sell than to put just like that.

[vapourminer]

i have found my criteria for meriting posts changes when i am almost out of smerits. and it does tend to lean towards giving to lower ranks at that time. which is unfair on my part.

legendaries obviously dont need smerits for ranking up, but i figure (generally) legendaries will give out merit with greater "accuracy" than lower ranks simply because they know more about the subject matter and what benefits the forum than lower ranks. so they definitely need merits sent to them.

OTOH for lower ranks it can be discouraging for them to have good posts skipped, where legendaries probably wont care as much (at least i dont). i like to encourage them.

when i only have one or two smerits left i find myself withholding smerits on the off chance i might find a better post later, and thats kinda a pain. i wound up with a bookmark folder named "merit these posts" for when i have smerits to send lol. when i go through that folder, lower ranks do get preference all else being equal.

is that unfair toward legendaries on my part. well, yes.  on average, legendary posts do tend to be better quality and thus deserve merit like any other quality. but since smerits are intended to reward good posting habits, and (generally) legendaries already have that, the merit goes toward the lower ranks to "point the way" so to speak.

[coinlocket$]

Generally I tend to use my sMerit to reward people without legendary rank even if they deserve it, they do not need it.
Very often they are not interested in merit and therefore I prefer to use it for helping people with a minor rank.

[ckcharlie]

I, unsurprisingly, think this is a great idea. The higher ranked members have a lot of excess merit and do not need more. Can someone tell me where the merit came from originally and what the criteria was for it's original distribution? Was it a reward for higher ranked members at the outset? I've been here since December last year and granted am not on here all the time, didn't hear about how to receive merits when they were introduced.

I think encouraging newer members is a good policy to decide on gifting your merit.

[JungleBadman]

To be honest, there are plenty of members dishing out merit regardless of rank, so if you want to focus on lower ranked members then that's great. There are a tonne of junior members like me that are finding it hard to get off the ground regardless of how active I am on here and I think its probably just a case of many good posts and the relative rarity of merit.

[mirzamuneeeb]

Hello as a low-ranked member I believe this merit system is good and your idea of saving is not bad as long you really give it to people who deserve it. I believe you will be often seeing yourself giving merit to older people because they are more used and better on finding and posting interesting content. However, I really would like a system where anyone can highlight a good post (tho I fear the spamming), so it's easier for veterans to see it and give it more merit chances, I often see really fruitful topics without any merit and I wonder if it's not because enough veterans has seen it.

[LTU_btc]

OP, iI support your attitude. Unfortunately, in recent weeks I don't have enough time to browse forum and give Merits to users who deserves it. Or I just become too lazy. So, I still have plenty of my sMerit to give.

It's not fair. Higher-ranked users still need sMerits to reward other users. You should merit posts that deserve it, regardless of rank.

I understand your point, but I think it's some kind of waste of Merit to give it to Legendaries. Ok, I give 2 Merits to Legendary member and he get only 1 sMerit which he can send to low-ranked member. So, I would better to give my 2 Merits directly to low ranked users. But I'm not saying that we shouldn't give Merits to high ranked members. When I see Legendary with high number of Merits, it's like an indicator that he is great poster and it's worth to read what he wrote.

[Gastonic]

I believe it is very fair. We, the newbies are trying to rank up as much as we can. but if we dont get merit, we are until jr. member. Any kind hearted person can can help us with this. But in the end, its up to the user ti share its merits.

[Squishy01]

I may not be in the position to speak as I have no smerits to give myself, but I believe that is only fair. Honestly speaking, I believe the rank of the author should be disregarded and just base on the quality of the post if you're planning to give out smerits sir. I may be new here, but I've seen low-rank members post interesting and helpful posts that I think deserve merits. Just my two-cents sir!

[greeklogos]

I think it's fair. Legendary ranked members just have nowhere else to growth, so they do not need to be in merit system at all.

[vapourminer]

I think it's fair. Legendary ranked members just have nowhere else to growth, so they do not need to be in merit system at all.

they still need to receive Merits in order to get sMerits to send, just like any other rank.

[Jet Cash]

I think it is sad that people still don't understand the concept of merit. It's purpose is to improve the overall quality of the forum, and merits should be awarded to encourage posting to achieve this end. They aren't there to help beggars to get their next packet of cigraettes, or to enhance their wedding tackle. It's very discouraging to put some effort into a project, and to feel that it is wasted or ignored. Awarding merits is one way for the community to say thank you. Even better is to make encouraging comments. Without these, one doesn't know if one misunderstands the community needs or interests.

Are merits wasted if they are given to legendary merit sources? If you think of them as a form of currency, then the answer is yes. If you think of them as a form of feedback, then they aren't. Obviously I'm including myself in that category, so let me say that constructive, helpful comments are more useful than merits, and enable me to build or drop an idea. However, many heroes and legendaries are helpful in the tech sections, and I think it is important to show them appreciation. Don't forget that a merited post is an example to a new member, and the posters rank doesn't matter.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

I think it's fair. Legendary ranked members just have nowhere else to growth, so they do not need to be in merit system at all.

they still need to receive Merits in order to get sMerits to send, just like any other rank.

Yes but most, if not all, merit sources are Legendary and Hero members. They also had more merits to send when the system was implemented. Finally, they get merits easily, as merit sources and people with more smerits don’t care about ranks and obviously higher ranked people have more knowledge so their make quality posts.

I think it is sad that people still don't understand the concept of merit. It's purpose is to improve the overall quality of the forum, and merits should be awarded to encourage posting to achieve this end. They aren't there to help beggars to get their next packet of cigraettes, or to enhance their wedding tackle.

Well, I wasn’t talking about giving merit to shitposters, as I think it is obvious. I don’t think merits given to Legendaries help improve the quality of the forum. Higher ranked members post with more or less the same quality as before the merit system was introduced. I don’t think they are writing better because people give them merits.

On the contrary, giving merits to lower ranked members can motivate them make efforts to improve.

Are merits wasted if they are given to legendary merit sources? If you think of them as a form of currency, then the answer is yes.

Yes, I think of it like I’m a low-wages worked who can barely make it from paycheck to paycheck, so I can’t spend my money with the first thing I see that I like.

You don’t have that problem as you are a merit source, or a rich man, in my example.

[Dadaro]

simply give it to the author who really deserves it, you find informative, and helpful regardless of their rank.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

After all the replies, I come to the conclusion that, in general, lower ranked members think it is fair because they want to rank up, and higher ranked members think it is unfair because although they don’t need the merits to rank up, they want to see their contribution to the forum recognized.

If this post was on the Bitcoin Discussion section I would lock it, but I will leave it open for a while.

[redtag070]

The merit system felt like a disadvantage for some new entrants, but I think that it is worth just knowing that the top owner thinks like this.

Is it fair? As for the point of view, I think that it is NO because it means to see people with little merit advantageously.

However, I think that there is a way of holding the value of the forum and expanding the possibility of creating new motivation. I want to support.