Another nullius is rising! [Disclaimer added]

[The Sceptical Chymist]

When they justified there merit that time, how they will justify tagging of this.

I don't think anybody is going to tag that guy for merit abuse.  This was initially kind of a sarcastic thread, comparing him to nullius, but it's turned into the typical bitcointalk Babel with everyone misunderstanding each other and arguing over nothing.

I've seen tons of people leaving merits for project developers, campaign managers, and whatnot.  This guy seems to have gotten way more than most I've seen, considering he has a grand total of 8 posts, but whatever.  Maybe he'll morph into a very productive and interesting member here, but my guess is that he's not another nullius.

[xtraelv]

Ddmrddmr is more likely to be a real Nulius with
475 Merits since January and all genuinely obtained.
I like his clever web tools.

[mdayonliner]

Disclaimer

for the original topic

I was in fun mood while I was composing the OP before going to bed last night.
Merit is working just fine as it was suppose to do, this is where we should have our focus.
We all accepted that these kind of massive abuses (in these case it's more seems favoring) will exist. It's a system lose and really minor comparing with the good outcome of Merit system.

Gotcha you all!
MagicSmoker thought I missed to notice that it was an ANN thread, bitmover had this solid fact that why he is not nullius,
No doubt I got Quickseller 100% trapped

The amount of research people in this thread are willing to make before posting is ridiculous.

...and - Gotcha xtraelv too.

Cleaver ones...  
AleScamHole got the idea however misunderstood DarkStar_, Cosette spot on, I was messing around (smile), and finally  The Pharmacist solved the puzzle, the entire humor better than anyone else. I could not resist but to send you 1 merit on your way for the discovery. You took your time to nail it.  

The serious minds...
DarkStar_ had a bit serious school teacher type answer. By the way, I did not know that nessie.io is an exchange. What I assumed is, it's an ANN. Thirdspace seriously serious investigation. Silent26 another one. Chill  

Really could not read the mind of LFC_Bitcoin, bill gator, tranthidung.  

Fight, throwing facts, debates started r1s2g3, actmyname, TryNinja. In a community it happens  

I might be totally wrong in some of the mentions. May be you wanted to say something and I ended up understanding something else. Excuse in advance please in that case.  

[Jet Cash]

I think it is great example for the justification of keeping merits away from the TwitBook underworld here.

[The Cryptovator]

This is not a spammer account, and it is not anyone with any kind of exceptional post quality/knowledge. This person received all their merit for a ANN thread announcing an exchange. The majority of the merit was received by shareholders/affiliates of the business.

The amount of research people in this thread are willing to make before posting is ridiculous.

And

nessie.io is a new exchange announced by MoneyPot/BitcoinRush, and the merits come from the owner accounts/people affiliated mostly.

What dose it mean below from theymos ? Can you explain? For that reason upgrade merit system ?

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 don't think anybody is going to tag that guy for merit abuse.  This was initially kind of a sarcastic thread, comparing him to nullius, but it's turned into the typical bitcointalk Babel with everyone misunderstanding each other and arguing over nothing.

I've seen tons of people leaving merits for project developers, campaign managers, and whatnot.  This guy seems to have gotten way more than most I've seen, considering he has a grand total of 8 posts, but whatever.  Maybe he'll morph into a very productive and interesting member here, but my guess is that he's not another nullius.

It's ok if no one will tag him. But I strongly believe that is pure merit abuse. For Ann no one deserve merit. There is nothing HQ. But there I can see 50 merit given single person. I don't care they are team members.  Rule should be same for every one. I am not argue to tag them. Even no tag at least we know the abuser. Thanks OP for find merit abuser.

[athanz88]

By seeing his kind of post, i believe that he is nowhere near nullius. Nullius is an alien if it comes to posting, but this man is only just posting a thread about an exchanger and got a lot of merits from his affiliates. That is a big different you know.

And for guys who took it too far, do not bring DT's name, if someone make a mistake then dont blame their position, blame the person.

[Probinus]

By seeing his kind of post, i believe that he is nowhere near nullius. Nullius is an alien if it comes to posting, but this man is only just posting a thread about an exchanger and got a lot of merits from his affiliates. That is a big different you know.

And for guys who took it too far, do not bring DT's name, if someone make a mistake then dont blame their position, blame the person.

Comparing nessie.io and nullius isn't the main reason mdayonliner shared this. It's pretty obvious don't you think? The username already hinted that it's for a project.

I gave up investigating the merit abusers, I am done, no more. However, this is something I could not resist to share in a fashion that I am not directly accusing.

I am actually giving them the credit for such impossible achievements LOL

It's like low key exposing how much of a merit abuser this account and the affiliates is.

[Harlot]

I think he is just being sarcastic about it. I mean look at this post, he even received 10 merits just for giving an update about an upcoming blog post. This is the wrong way to distribute merit in my own opinion as I think they are just giving merits in order to show support for a certain business that they will soon be launching. Obviously Nessie.io is not another nullius in the making as he didn't even stray far away from posting in ANN threads.

[DaftAjax]

~snip~

Its not an alt account, are you even reading the situation. Clearly, its an ANN thread, for introducing a new exchange.
Probably the merits are from the people supporting the project, or so we thought it is.

~snip~

Yes there is something wrong, its called trolling. The OP is not literally saying that this is truly unfair that this guy, a new member just got a 140 merits in just a couple of days. Instead, this the OP saying this is hilarious, thus being sarcastic.

Obviously, these people have no knowledge in using the Merit System properly at all.

[Quickseller]

This is not a spammer account, and it is not anyone with any kind of exceptional post quality/knowledge. This person received all their merit for a ANN thread announcing an exchange. The majority of the merit was received by shareholders/affiliates of the business.

The amount of research people in this thread are willing to make before posting is ridiculous.

And

nessie.io is a new exchange announced by MoneyPot/BitcoinRush, and the merits come from the owner accounts/people affiliated mostly.

What dose it mean below from theymos ? Can you explain? For that reason upgrade merit system ?

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.
 

Unfortunately merit is often given to posts that the sender of merit agrees with. This is a problem system wide and the merit system is closer to “proof of agreeing with those in power” than “proof of good posts”. I have seen many posts that are actually fairly low effort (not so much that the writer hasn’t read the thread or is posting nonsense) that make a certain point or supports an argument that someone agrees with receiving merit. Here is one example of this.

[digaran]

Never tag merit receiver, only merit senders, I wonder if Quickseller wants actmyname to get tagged for giving him a merit?

[Heisenberg_Hunter]

If those 148 merits which were given to a bozo for an idiot ANN Thread were saved, it would have helped lots of Newbies, Jr Members and Members to rank up for the quality guides which they were producing all the way to earn some decent merits.

Anyway why did you compare the mighty nullius to this idiot? Merits are not the sole way to distinguish nullius and other users. nullius was one hell of brilliant cryptographer who was even praised by achow101 in the trust ratings.

Very knowledgeable about Bitcoin and cryptography related things. Frequently gives in-depth, constructive, and well though out answers on various topics.

He has excellent language skills similar to Lauda and has great knowledge in cryptography and cryptocurrency similar to satoshi,gmaxwell and other bitcoin devs which made him to earn huge volume of merits in a short span of time.

Let satoshi and nullius accounts Rest In Peace, let us stop bothering their accounts instead. Most probably both of them will never return back.  

EDIT :

...Anyway why did you compare the mighty nullius to this idiot?...

You read this? 
PS: I did not mean to insult nullius, we all know his/her expertise.

Yes I do read almost all the replies of a thread before posting my comment! But isn't it a disgrace for nullius to be compared with this account even for fun purposes?

[mdayonliner]

...Anyway why did you compare the mighty nullius to this idiot?...

You read this? 
PS: I did not mean to insult nullius, we all know his/her expertise.

[bill gator]

Unfortunately merit is often given to posts that the sender of merit agrees with. This is a problem system wide and the merit system is closer to “proof of agreeing with those in power” than “proof of good posts”.Here is one example of this.

I wholeheartedly agree with you; It very realistically may be the single biggest flaw currently manifesting within the merit system. Since we're on the topic of nullius within this thread, would you say this would be a better explanation of their meteoric rise in merit than technical expertise and careful writing? It seems, to me, those that are significantly (enough to rank up) and consistently merited are those that go beyond agreeing with those in power.

While it may be the biggest problem of the merit system, it might not be significant enough a problem to characterize the entire system as “proof of agreeing with those in power”. The trust system is victim to this problem, too, in my opinion. Additionally, with more merit sources being added regularly, merit being decentralized, it would seem this problem is already being solved, to some degree.

I like that you used one of your posts as an example, but you're not necessarily someone in power (unless I've misunderstood what definition we're operating with), so wouldn't that be a flimsy example? I've certainly seen examples of this, but I just am wondering if you do consider this an example of “proof of agreeing with those in power”.

I wonder if Quickseller wants actmyname to get tagged for giving him a merit?

Don't get too excited now!

[Quickseller]

Unfortunately merit is often given to posts that the sender of merit agrees with. This is a problem system wide and the merit system is closer to “proof of agreeing with those in power” than “proof of good posts”.Here is one example of this.

I wholeheartedly agree with you; It very realistically may be the single biggest flaw currently manifesting within the merit system. Since we're on the topic of nullius within this thread, would you say this would be a better explanation of their meteoric rise in merit than technical expertise and careful writing? It seems, to me, those that are significantly (enough to rank up) and consistently merited are those that go beyond agreeing with those in power.

While it may be the biggest problem of the merit system, it might not be significant enough a problem to characterize the entire system as “proof of agreeing with those in power”. The trust system is victim to this problem, too, in my opinion. Additionally, with more merit sources being added regularly, merit being decentralized, it would seem this problem is already being solved, to some degree.

I like that you used one of your posts as an example, but you're not necessarily someone in power (unless I've misunderstood what definition we're operating with), so wouldn't that be a flimsy example? I've certainly seen examples of this, but I just am wondering if you do consider this an example of “proof of agreeing with those in power”.

I wonder if Quickseller wants actmyname to get tagged for giving him a merit?

Don't get too excited now!

No, actmyname should not get tagged for sending that merit. That’s ridiculous.

The example I gave was in which I made a post that someone in a position of power agrees with.

If you and I were in a dispute, someone who agrees with your position might give merit to someone who makes a post that strengthens your case, regardless of the effort put into the post. 

This results in those with an abundance of sMerit, especially in groups, to have an outsized amount of power in disputes. digaran is a troll and should not be taken seriously, however he is at a disadvantage in any dispute because he has little sMerit and he often is in disputes with those with a lot of sMerit. There will be more people supporting the opposing end of his argument in the hopes of receiving merit (I am not 100% sure this is happening currently however it will happen as more people realize this behavior by those with sMerit).

On the subject of nullius he did have a lot of technical insight and as such deserved much of the merit he received. However he also aligned his positions with those in power and as such would probably would not have received much of his merit if he took opposite positions with equally well crafted arguments. One might even speculate that he might have received less merit for his technical posts if he was often making well crafted arguments against those in power.

Another point I would make is that those in power tend to be the ones who receive the most merit. Some of this may be in the hopes of staying in the good graces of those in power, and some of this may be in hopes of obtaining power themselves. A good number of those with the most merit are not especially good posters, some are very high profile so they might receive merit for every good post they make (theymos) while “normal” users might receive merit for 1% of the high effort posts of good quality.

I personally think this will ultimately lead to the exclusion of those who do not agree with those in power.

[actmyname]

The example I gave was in which I made a post that someone in a position of power agrees with.

If you and I were in a dispute, someone who agrees with your position might give merit to someone who makes a post that strengthens your case, regardless of the effort put into the post.

That's how it is though, isn't it? People will have an incorrigible bias towards those that they agree with. That's why you usually socialize with those that you get along with, rather than the opposite. It's not a case of agreeing with "people in power" but rather those that have merit agreeing with posts that coincide with their interests.

(I sent the merit since the post made me laugh.)

[bitmover]

...Anyway why did you compare the mighty nullius to this idiot?...

You read this? 
PS: I did not mean to insult nullius, we all know his/her expertise.

I think you should add your disclaimer in the OP thread, as it does not look sarcastic.

[mdayonliner]

I think you should add your disclaimer in the OP thread, as it does not look sarcastic.

I DID (later) lol but with a link only also used smaller font so that those who don't care about reading and getting the concepts - they miss  

I am quite enjoying the conversation started in between actmyname, Quickseller and bill gator. We need more of these.

digaran....should not be taken seriously.

Without no doubt.   I wonder if he realize it.

[xtraelv]

I think you should add your disclaimer in the OP thread, as it does not look sarcastic.

I don't always understand the OPs humor or sarcasm but in this case I did. I think it may have been less obvious if you hadn't read some of his other posts.
Humor and sarcasm rely very much of perception of the poster since there are no facial expressions or body language to interpret in written posts.

This results in those with an abundance of sMerit, especially in groups, to have an outsized amount of power in disputes. digaran is a troll and should not be taken seriously, however he is at a disadvantage in any dispute because he has little sMerit and he often is in disputes with those with a lot of sMerit. There will be more people supporting the opposing end of his argument in the hopes of receiving merit (I am not 100% sure this is happening currently however it will happen as more people realize this behavior by those with sMerit).

-snip-

Another point I would make is that those in power tend to be the ones who receive the most merit. Some of this may be in the hopes of staying in the good graces of those in power, and some of this may be in hopes of obtaining power themselves. A good number of those with the most merit are not especially good posters, some are very high profile so they might receive merit for every good post they make (theymos) while “normal” users might receive merit for 1% of the high effort posts of good quality.

I personally think this will ultimately lead to the exclusion of those who do not agree with those in power.

Based on the amount merit digaran has received and from whoom he has received it I believe there is little to be concerned about. He has received merit from some of  those that have tagged him. (others may have him on ignore)  Based on his current progress he is getting more merit than the vast majority of the forum. I haven't looked at his posts to see if he deserves more and that would be highly subjective anyway.

There may be a certain amount of benefit to being "on the right side of power" but there is no evidence that those that voice disagreement are excluded. The disadvantage would be as well that if you are a constant deserting voice others are less likely to be naturally following your posts.

Personally I would not exclude anyone from receiving merit from me if their post is outstanding. Sometimes a post that disagrees can be more refreshing than one that agrees completely (in which case you could just have a conversation with yourself).

I'm sure some people have found me to be annoying at times as well but I certainly don't feel penalized.

[bitmover]

Personally I would not exclude anyone from receiving merit from me if their post is outstanding. Sometimes a post that disagrees can be more refreshing than one that agrees completely (in which case you could just have a conversation with yourself).

I agree with this.
Sometimes when someone disagrees using good arguments, you are forced to improve your own points, explaining things from a different perspective, and even learning on the way.
Both could award merit this way, in a civilized discussion in which both have done some research.

However, this "agree with those in power" stuff sounds more like a newbie who is spreading misinformation and crying that he doesn't get merits.

"those in power" here means those who are using bitcoin for a longer period of time and, usually, have more knowledge.

Even though nullius was a newbie and low ranked member here, he clearly was in this business for some time already.