Merit System - Looking for Goals

[Forward_Thinking]

Hi,

I'm interested in researching and learning more about the Merit/sMerit system that was rolled out here in BitcoinTalk earlier this year. I have read the OP (original post). But there are over 250 pages of replies to the original post announcing this change and I have not been able to find a particular piece of information, and I'm hoping someone can help.

I'm searching for any information on the stated goals/objectives of the Merit system. In particular, I'm looking for anything close to what would be considered "S.M.A.R.T. goals" for the Merit/sMerit system from authoritative sources.

If you are not familiar with S.M.A.R.T. goals here is a post form MIT about them (http://hrweb.mit.edu/performance-development/goal-setting-developmental-planning/smart-goals).

S.M.A.R.T. goals are:

Specific
Measurable
Achievable
Relevant
Time-bound

Here is my question and I would greatly appreciate your assistance, if you would like to offer it:

Does anyone have any references to any stated S.M.A.R.T. goals or some metric based goals of the Merit/sMerit system that they can kindly post links to? I've asked some people about these who seemed knowledgeable and they could not produce them. I can't find these goals myself. If they exist, I would very much enjoy reading them.  I'm simply asking if anyone knows of written, metric based goals the Merit/sMerit system was intended to achieve that they can help me find and read myself.

Some examples might look like this...

-The Merit system will reduce spam by 10% within the first 6 months.
-The Merit system will increase the length of posts by 20% within the first 6 months.
-The Merit system will decrease the quantity of new user accounts by 30% within the first 6 months.

I have seen the vague descriptions that the Merit system's goals was to reduce spam and increase quality. Did anyone produce/set/post more specific goals (again, as described above)?

If anyone has seen any of these from an authoritative source, I would love to read more about them and read that post more thoroughly.

Thanks very much for reading this my fellow crypto community! Have a great day! 

[1714038628]

1714038628

[1714038628]

1714038628

[1714038628]

1714038628

[1714038628]

1714038628

[1714038628]

1714038628

[AverageGlabella]

I'm not that familiar with the "smart" goal system but I'll try and give it a go if it makes you understand it easier. There has been no percentage of posts that have been posted that was expected to be curbed. Specific goals can only be measured after a few months and not really foreseen before. It would be nice to have these statistics released at the time of reviewing the system though.

Normally the amount of new registrations would be accessible here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=statsbut  I think this is currently disabled until further notice so it might be best to keep on checking that.

Some interesting data since the introduction of the merit system can be found here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4428616.msg39521119#msg39521119

That has some pretty indepth statistics on a few things that you might find interesting

Specific:
The merit system was introduced to specifically target those that are ranking up without contributing much to the forum in terms of posts. Therefore encouraging members to make more constructive posts. It specifically rewards those that make quality posts by allowing them to gain merit points and rank up. If a member does not make quality posts then they will not rank up. The idea behind this is to reduce the amount of users posting useless content and start actiely looking to make quality posts in order to rank up to access certain benefits of the forum like the bounties and signature campaigns which require you to be a certain rank but also the benefits that come with higher ranks such as avatars.

Measurable?
It's measurable by the amount of merits that a user receives and the amount of signal to noise ratio. A great way that this is measurable is by looking at a specific members merit received. If they have not received any merit at all or very little this normally shows that this user is not making quality posts. Moderators would be able to measure this too by looking at the amount of reports that they have received since the introduction of the merit system and comparing from before.

Achievable?
Well the goal has already been achieved. Its reduced the amount of people that are ranking up. However it hasn't reduced the amount of spam enough. It may have an impact of the amount of spam thats being posted but it certainly was not a complete solution to it. Especially since most bounties dont restrict who can join them.

Relevant?
Of course its relevant to the forum. The community including myself are getting sick and tired of the spam that Bitcointalk is covered in right now. So it was in everyone's interest to introduce a system like the merit system which is relevant to the spam issues right now.

Time bound?
The merit system is permanent and will not be removed so it is not time bound. However when reviewing the merit system it is probably wise to allow sufficient time for new merit sources to be added and a cooling down period after the initial panic of the merit system being introduced.

I would say a review 6 months in and a year later would be the best time to review the system and whether its doing what it was suppose to do and make any changes to it if necessary.

[Steamtyme]

Your answers are pretty much covered in the OP of that thread, to the extent that they exist.

Specifically Merit is intended to increase post quality.

As far as measurable, this will be an opinion or an overall feel of the forum as you explore. Well mostly Users who have been here for a while will notice this.

It is acheivable, because not everyone will be able to wear SIGS immediately and cash in at a higher rank without being a decent poster

Relevant - to what? The system is relevant to trying to curb the problem

Time-Bound, no there is no timeline, and that is why there is no rush to make changes or tweaks until there is a decent baseline to review the system. I've heard some people talk 6 months to a year before making any judgement, and that's just Legendary members reserving judgment.


I get that you are looking for hard and fast numbers but there aren't any. I guess you could say ideally Spam reduction will be 100%. Other than that it is more about the experience and that's not always quantifiable.

[AverageGlabella]

I get that you are looking for hard and fast numbers but there aren't any. I guess you could say ideally Spam reduction will be 100%. Other than that it is more about the experience and that's not always quantifiable.

Merit system was not introduced to stop spam and it certainly is not even close to 100% reduction. What it was introduced for was to prevent those that offer poor quality posts from ranking up and those who do post quality posts be rewarded through merit and eventually be able to rank up.

This only acts as a reduction of spam there will still be many people who dont care about it especially because the majority of new members are looking to earn money through a bounty campaign which are accepting any rank.

[Forward_Thinking]

I'm not that familiar with the "smart" goal system but I'll try and give it a go if it makes you understand it easier. There has been no percentage of posts that have been posted that was expected to be curbed. Specific goals can only be measured after a few months and not really foreseen before. It would be nice to have these statistics released at the time of reviewing the system though.

That's awesome. Thank you. I think that's a great post, but that's not what I meant  

I'm literally looking for something that would look like this:

The Merit system will decrease spam by XX% within XX months after being launched.

That is a SMART goal because it is:

Specific. It says what the system will do, specifically, it does not say "help the community" which would be too vague to be considered a SMART goal.
Measurable. The percentage set becomes the standard by which success is achieved.
Achievable. A XX% reduction in spam is more achievable able than say the elimination of spam which is unrealistic.
Relevant. Reducing spam as you pointed out is relevant to the community and a tangible reduction would be helpful.
Time-bound. The number of months sets a countdown. If the XX% reduction is achieved, but it takes twice as long as the time amount set, that's not success.

The point of SMART goals is to help ensure success. For example, you can check in on your progress each month and see if you are on track. So if the goal was something like a 10% reduction in spam within the first 6 months, you would expect to have more than a 5% reduction in spam by say month 4 and if not, something is wrong and you might not achieve your goal unless you make some changes.

But again, I love how your wrote that out. Thanks very much!  

[Steamtyme]

I get that you are looking for hard and fast numbers but there aren't any. I guess you could say ideally Spam reduction will be 100%. Other than that it is more about the experience and that's not always quantifiable.

Merit system was not introduced to stop spam and it certainly is not even close to 100% reduction. What it was introduced for was to prevent those that offer poor quality posts from ranking up and those who do post quality posts be rewarded through merit and eventually be able to rank up.

This only acts as a reduction of spam there will still be many people who dont care about it especially because the majority of new members are looking to earn money through a bounty campaign which are accepting any rank.

Please note I did not say it has been reduced 100%. That was a best case scenario of what  any system could bring, as OP was clearly looking for fixed numbers.

I'm hoping that this system will increase post quality by:
 - Forcing people to post high-quality stuff in order to rank up. If you just post garbage, you will never get even 1 merit point, and you will therefore never be able to put links in your signature, etc.
 - Highlighting good posts with the "Merited by" line.

I personally take this as an attempt to reduce spam, worded differently. I can't remember where but in the beginning this had been described as a way to reduce the spamming of this forum. Your right about the Bounties as opposed to the SIGS and if I'm not mistaken those Bounty hunters only post in their bounty threads and spew garbage over other social media platforms.

Whereas SIG campaigns pay to post in most sections of this forum. This can cause spamming so any barrier placed in the way of a larger payday IMO helps in reducing the spam issue

[seoincorporation]

<...>

You can check out a lot of stats in here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4428616.0  This is a post created by @DdmrDdmr in wich how many people have ranked is detailed.
Also check this, from the same author: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3395255.0
In there, you will be able to see your own and other's merit networks.

Regarding the spam problem, no, there isn't, for the moment, any stats, but you just have to check out Meta or Reputation to make yourself an idea of how big the problem is. In fact, there is in crescendo, but, at least, most of the spammers become now "Forever Juniors", I mean, members with a lot of activity and zero merits.
The merit system is actually working, but just in the sense of the ranking-up problem.

[Forward_Thinking]

Thanks everyone. But it looks like there have not been any publicly released SMART goals that the Merit system was intended to achieve.

If you are not familiar with S.M.A.R.T. goals here is a post form MIT about them (http://hrweb.mit.edu/performance-development/goal-setting-developmental-planning/smart-goals).

S.M.A.R.T. goals are:

Specific
Measurable
Achievable
Relevant
Time-bound

If anyone runs across any, I would love to read them. Thanks again 

[seoincorporation]

Thanks everyone. But it looks like there have not been any publicly released SMART goals that the Merit system was intended to achieve.

I have always thought that the most you try to put a thought into a cage, the far you get from reality. Maybe I am an anarchist, but to confine ideas into a previous-designed mindset seems to me to lose all of the nuances a mere idea can have.
That's me, so far I can't see the point in creating such kind of mental-pre-schemes.

But maybe, since you are interested in doing so, you can look into the data and create your own SMART-based scheme and share with us. Probably it will take you time, but, the data is out there, you only need to organize it as you need. 

[xtraelv]

Hi,

I'm interested in researching and learning more about the Merit/sMerit system that was rolled out here in BitcoinTalk earlier this year. I have read the OP (original post). But there are over 250 pages of replies to the original post announcing this change and I have not been able to find a particular piece of information, and I'm hoping someone can help.

I'm searching for any information on the stated goals/objectives of the Merit system. In particular, I'm looking for anything close to what would be considered "S.M.A.R.T. goals" for the Merit/sMerit system from authoritative sources.

If you are not familiar with S.M.A.R.T. goals here is a post form MIT about them (http://hrweb.mit.edu/performance-development/goal-setting-developmental-planning/smart-goals).

S.M.A.R.T. goals are:

Specific
Measurable
Achievable
Relevant
Time-bound

Here is my question and I would greatly appreciate your assistance, if you would like to offer it:

Does anyone have any references to any stated S.M.A.R.T. goals or some metric based goals of the Merit/sMerit system that they can kindly post links to? I've asked some people about these who seemed knowledgeable and they could not produce them. I can't find these goals myself. If they exist, I would very much enjoy reading them.  I'm simply asking if anyone knows of written, metric based goals the Merit/sMerit system was intended to achieve that they can help me find and read myself.

Some examples might look like this...

-The Merit system will reduce spam by 10% within the first 6 months.
-The Merit system will increase the length of posts by 20% within the first 6 months.
-The Merit system will decrease the quantity of new user accounts by 30% within the first 6 months.

I have seen the vague descriptions that the Merit system's goals was to reduce spam and increase quality. Did anyone produce/set/post more specific goals (again, as described above)?

If anyone has seen any of these from an authoritative source, I would love to read more about them and read that post more thoroughly.

Thanks very much for reading this my fellow crypto community! Have a great day!  

I believe that rather than the S.M.A.R.T. goals (which is a planning technique and management jargon) they use the basic A.R.S.E implementation technique.

Activate - the merit system
Regulate - by punishing the worst abusers using T.R.U.S.T.
Stimulate - by providing M.E.R.I.T to those that deserve it.
Evaluate - with statistics.

[VeteranCoin]

Hi,

I'm interested in researching and learning more about the Merit/sMerit system that was rolled out here in BitcoinTalk earlier this year. I have read the OP (original post). But there are over 250 pages of replies to the original post announcing this change and I have not been able to find a particular piece of information, and I'm hoping someone can help.

I'm searching for any information on the stated goals/objectives of the Merit system. In particular, I'm looking for anything close to what would be considered "S.M.A.R.T. goals" for the Merit/sMerit system from authoritative sources.

If you are not familiar with S.M.A.R.T. goals here is a post form MIT about them (http://hrweb.mit.edu/performance-development/goal-setting-developmental-planning/smart-goals).

S.M.A.R.T. goals are:

Specific
Measurable
Achievable
Relevant
Time-bound

Here is my question and I would greatly appreciate your assistance, if you would like to offer it:

Does anyone have any references to any stated S.M.A.R.T. goals or some metric based goals of the Merit/sMerit system that they can kindly post links to? I've asked some people about these who seemed knowledgeable and they could not produce them. I can't find these goals myself. If they exist, I would very much enjoy reading them.  I'm simply asking if anyone knows of written, metric based goals the Merit/sMerit system was intended to achieve that they can help me find and read myself.

Some examples might look like this...

-The Merit system will reduce spam by 10% within the first 6 months.
-The Merit system will increase the length of posts by 20% within the first 6 months.
-The Merit system will decrease the quantity of new user accounts by 30% within the first 6 months.

I have seen the vague descriptions that the Merit system's goals was to reduce spam and increase quality. Did anyone produce/set/post more specific goals (again, as described above)?

If anyone has seen any of these from an authoritative source, I would love to read more about them and read that post more thoroughly.

Thanks very much for reading this my fellow crypto community! Have a great day!  

I believe that rather than the S.M.A.R.T. goals (which is a planning technique and management jargon) they use the basic A.R.S.E implementation technique.

Activate - the merit system
Regulate - by punishing the worst abusers using T.R.U.S.T.
Stimulate - by providing M.E.R.I.T to those that deserve it.
Evaluate - with statistics.

The OP seemed to be asking if anyone made any objectives for this mission before going to war or if they just launched a few nukes and said 'let God sort it all out.' Mission planning is a key to victory for those who actually win. Poor mission planning is what the losing side does -- so teaches history.

“Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win”
― Sun Tzu, The Art of War

[xtraelv]

The OP seemed to be asking if anyone made any objectives for this mission before going to war or if they just launched a few nukes and said 'let God sort it all out.' Mission planning is a key to victory for those who actually win. Poor mission planning is what the losing side does -- so teaches history.

“Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win”
― Sun Tzu, The Art of War

It is no war. It is an incentive.

Analytical tools are still being developed for it.

Ddmrddmr has developed some here:
https://public.tableau.com/profile/ddmrddmr#!/vizhome/BitcointalkMeritDashboard/GlobalSummary
https://fusiontables.google.com/DataSource?docid=1wM2Op6_ol8_0iP0sDEemIGr9weKvIeLPvKsKMpFy#rows:id=1

[VeteranCoin]

The OP seemed to be asking if anyone made any objectives for this mission before going to war or if they just launched a few nukes and said 'let God sort it all out.' Mission planning is a key to victory for those who actually win. Poor mission planning is what the losing side does -- so teaches history.

“Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win”
― Sun Tzu, The Art of War

It is no war. It is an incentive.

Analytical tools are still being developed for it.

Ddmrddmr has developed some here:
https://public.tableau.com/profile/ddmrddmr#!/vizhome/BitcointalkMeritDashboard/GlobalSummary
https://fusiontables.google.com/DataSource?docid=1wM2Op6_ol8_0iP0sDEemIGr9weKvIeLPvKsKMpFy#rows:id=1

War can easily include incentives. Yes the merit system may look like an incentive. That does not mean it is not part of a plan. War is when one people-group is attempting to impose their will on another people-group by force. The merit system, make no mistake, is part of the war on spam here. That war will never end. The goal of the incentive system is the "what" you want the people to do. An incentive is just one tool people use to get other to do actions. Incentives are absolutely viable tools of war. I will not into great detail here -- but bad people get paid off all the time in war because some bad people are better than other bad people -- Yeah, incentives, yep, those are used in war.

[Forward_Thinking]

It is no war. It is an incentive.

Analytical tools are still being developed for it.

Ddmrddmr has developed some here:
https://public.tableau.com/profile/ddmrddmr#!/vizhome/BitcointalkMeritDashboard/GlobalSummary
https://fusiontables.google.com/DataSource?docid=1wM2Op6_ol8_0iP0sDEemIGr9weKvIeLPvKsKMpFy#rows:id=1

It's not an incentive system. There are four ways to change behavior. Positive Reinforcement and Negative Reinforcement [these both encourage the behavior], Positive Punishment and Negative Punishment [these both discourage the behavior].

The merit system falls under negative punishment. The result of negative reinforcement is the decreasing of some behavior. Negative punishment is when you take away something good that the person wants in order to stop the behavior you don't want. But it really doesn't matter what you intend, if you take away something good people will stop doing what they think led to the loss of what they liked.

Walk up to your child and tell the child 'no more TV for a week' and the child will ask why, complain, and try to figure out what the child did to deserve this and what the child can do next time to maintain access to the TV.

That's called negative punishment. It's been a documented concept since Pavlov/Skinner and is sometimes called Classical Conditioning.

You are calling it an incentive system because you think 'we give merit for good behavior' but the big picture is, BitcoinTalk took away ranking based on activity alone and has now made it harder to rank up with ambiguous rules and a liquidity problem and really really high merit requirements for ranking up. That's almost the same as freezing ranking up. It's not exactly freezing, but it close.

The merit system will be seen as punishment for anyone who wants to rank up and has been involved in this community for over 10 months. I don't know their reasons for wanting it, but anyone who wants to rank up, and has been around for a few month prior to this change, after this merit system came out has been punished. Again, using the formal term of punishment in the sense of behavioral conditioning. I know how people on here like to debate about the meaning of words https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punishment_(psychology)#Negative

 

[mu_enrico]

<...>
If you are not familiar with S.M.A.R.T. goals here is a post form MIT about them (http://hrweb.mit.edu/performance-development/goal-setting-developmental-planning/smart-goals).
<...>

S.M.A.R.T goal is only a jargon, to beautify or make some hypothesis more convincing. I propose P.E.N.I.S goal (created by me) which is more update and easier to remember:
P: Predictable
E: Easy
N: Number bound
I: Inspiring
S: Specific
Don't get me wrong. I'm not trolling here, I'm just a little bit annoyed by the overuse of a jargon, and to make it sounds more academics.

[olumyd]

<...>
If you are not familiar with S.M.A.R.T. goals here is a post form MIT about them (http://hrweb.mit.edu/performance-development/goal-setting-developmental-planning/smart-goals).
<...>

S.M.A.R.T goal is only a jargon, to beautify or make some hypothesis more convincing. I propose P.E.N.I.S goal (created by me) which is more update and easier to remember:
P: Predictable
E: Easy
N: Number bound
I: Inspiring
S: Specific
Don't get me wrong. I'm not trolling here, I'm just a little bit annoyed by the overuse of a jargon, and to make it sounds more academics.

Lol... That could have gone better as S.N.I.P.E, which sounds more like a target 'locked on' objective.

S - Your objectives have to be Specific first to gain the attention of truly able doers.
N - Then they need to be Number bound, not edited after they are set (constrained objectives should be flexible but within a set 'objective').
I - Inspiration is what drives followership, and if it moves you, doesn't mean it has the power to move others.
P - Predictable, the era of the blind leading the blind must have been over by now. When you communicate an objective, people tend to want to see the end with you before they embark on that journey.
E - Easy is the new comfortable, mankind has always sought for the most convenient ways of doing stuff. Complexity on the front end is a complete turn-off.

[criz2fer]

It's not an incentive system. There are four ways to change behavior. Positive Reinforcement and Negative Reinforcement [these both encourage the behavior], Positive Punishment and Negative Punishment [these both discourage the behavior].

The merit system falls under negative punishment. The result of negative reinforcement is the decreasing of some behavior. Negative punishment is when you take away something good that the person wants in order to stop the behavior you don't want. But it really doesn't matter what you intend, if you take away something good people will stop doing what they think led to the loss of what they liked.

Walk up to your child and tell the child 'no more TV for a week' and the child will ask why, complain, and try to figure out what the child did to deserve this and what the child can do next time to maintain access to the TV.

That's called negative punishment. It's been a documented concept since Pavlov/Skinner and is sometimes called Classical Conditioning.

You are calling it an incentive system because you think 'we give merit for good behavior' but the big picture is, BitcoinTalk took away ranking based on activity alone and has now made it harder to rank up with ambiguous rules and a liquidity problem and really really high merit requirements for ranking up. That's almost the same as freezing ranking up. It's not exactly freezing, but it close.

The merit system will be seen as punishment for anyone who wants to rank up and has been involved in this community for over 10 months. I don't know their reasons for wanting it, but anyone who wants to rank up, and has been around for a few month prior to this change, after this merit system came out has been punished. Again, using the formal term of punishment in the sense of behavioral conditioning. I know how people on here like to debate about the meaning of words https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punishment_(psychology)#Negative

Good at comparing it to psychological behavior. I think your a master of degree on it.

Merit system is a punishment for those members that don't want to interact in the forum and only want is to profit by signature campaigns and bounties. The goal you are looking for are still on the run because admins already have stats, its for them to take actions without missing the intent of the forum.

Limiting newbie participation is very harmful for a community. Newbie jail will never return: I consider the newbie-jail period to have been extremely damaging to the forum. When barriers to participation are too high, then the best people often just won't go to the trouble of joining, and the people who are willing to jump through the hoops are often people who aren't good for the community: people with nothing better to do, scammers, get-rick-quickers, etc. Having a permanent newbie jail policy would improve things a lot in the short-term, but would end up being a fatal poison to the community.

Different goals to different situation are needed on the later part because of new cases of spamming are popping out.

[Forward_Thinking]

<...>
If you are not familiar with S.M.A.R.T. goals here is a post form MIT about them (http://hrweb.mit.edu/performance-development/goal-setting-developmental-planning/smart-goals).
<...>

S.M.A.R.T goal is only a jargon, to beautify or make some hypothesis more convincing. I propose P.E.N.I.S goal (created by me) which is more update and easier to remember:
P: Predictable
E: Easy
N: Number bound
I: Inspiring
S: Specific
Don't get me wrong. I'm not trolling here, I'm just a little bit annoyed by the overuse of a jargon, and to make it sounds more academics.

I think we have different native languages and so I don't want to be too critical of you here, but SMART goals are not exactly jargon but I can see your point. Please allow me to explain, there is a very specific reason why I used the SMART goal system to ask my question. I was debating a highly aggressive person in another post on this same topic and he kept accusing me of assumptions, and saying I was claiming expertise but not proving my expertise, blah, blah, blah. All of those were him just deflecting my questions because I found a flaw in his arguments. He seems to be in love with the Merit system where I am concerned about its unintended outcomes.

This post was my attempt to find a professional and courteous way to obtain an answer to my question. I'm just attempting to understand how much planning went into the Merit system.

From what I have seen offline in professional settings, when someone begins a major intervention like the Merit system that person will set goals. But all goals are not equally useful and the SMART goal system is probably the most famous and is a great one, so that is why I used it here. Maybe people do not set SMART goals and the problem with skipping that step is that you get lost months later trying to figure out "did we do it?" "should we fix X?" "are the complaints right? "are the praises right?" Without an agreed upon standard you end up with what is called "scope creep" now that IS jargon. But it means that your project all of sudden is now asked to fix a lot of things you were never supposed to be working on.

In part, if you don't use SMART goals or some other similar system, it becomes very difficult to defend your intervention when you hit difficulties if you have set no goals, or vague goals. And all interventions hit difficulties. That's just called life 

To me, the Merit system is a screening system. It is a method to screen who should and should not rank up. I don't know the goals. It's clear that those goals, if set, were not publicized. Knowing what I know about how people normally implement interventions like this one, seeing the results, seeing the stats, reading the posts, I am pretty sure the Merit system did not achieve what they wanted it to. Since February, I have been warning that the Merit system would likely not achieve it's goals. But I have no way to be sure because I can't find any public goals.

Here is where I first warned of the problems I was seeing: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2818350.msg30489106#msg30489106 (2/17/2018)

Here is an example of how I don't think the Merit system is NOT working as planned: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2818350.msg41158125#msg41158125 This post shows the numbers of people who have been able to rank up during the new system starting with the Full Member level. The number of people who have ranked up is tiny!

The Merit system is a screening system and they set the standards way too high. If you are familiar at all with medical school screening process, they too set the standards way too high. And in the US we have a nursing shortage as a result. No one wins when that happens.

[patz22]

OP, are you working in a BPO/Call center? We're using it for creating an action plan lol. (I know it is being used as well for other stuffs)

With the T - time bound so you mean whenever we post something specially let's say speculation we should give a timeframe or so. And just want to ask on your example in reducing spam here. Do you have like data that will show that IF we use SMART shitpost will decrease?

[orions.belt19]

OP, are you working in a BPO/Call center? We're using it for creating an action plan lol. (I know it is being used as well for other stuffs)

With the T - time bound so you mean whenever we post something specially let's say speculation we should give a timeframe or so. And just want to ask on your example in reducing spam here. Do you have like data that will show that IF we use SMART shitpost will decrease?

No. Timebound does not mean that you put a timeframe on your post like it’s speculation.

SMART is not a criteria for posting but rather it should be your basis on making a goal. OP has given some concrete examples on this. OP has already throroughly explained and gave examples but I’ll repeat it for your sake.  Just to reiterate, i.e “The merit system will reduce 30% of the spam in the forum within 5 years”. In setting such a goal, you should first ask yourself whether it is:

Specific - the goal has specifically targeted a problem in the forum which is the “spam”
Measurable - the goal may be achieved by measuring it as “30%”
Achievable/Attainable - the goal can be achieved, unlike saying that it can eradicate spam by “100%”
Relevant - the goal is addressing a relevant issue to the forum

And lastly,
Timebound - the goal is given a measure of “6 years”

It’s funny that you say SMART is being used in your BPO/call center when you don’t actually understand how to apply it. Yes, it’s being used widely because it’s an effective way of creating goals so most orgs/companies use this. Good luck with creating your action plan.