Signature Campaign which pays for merits?

[pkmoney]

Couple of days ago, I have seen someone sharing such kind of idea. I'm sharing it here just for having some discussion.
I'm not affiliated with this campaign.

Link to the campaign- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2159012.0
Here are some texts from the campaign.

Signature campaign

## Rules

1. This event starts from July 1, 2018 until December 23, 2018; you can joint at any time.
3. Participant requirements:
        - Your bitcointalk account must be registered before June 25, 2018;
        - Your bitcointalk account must have 10+ merits;
        - You need to follow @semuxproject on Twitter;
        - You need to make at least one new post every week on bitcointalk forum (we measure your posts point on Sunday);
        - No spam/multi-account.
4. The rewards will be distributed to participants based on their merit scores:
        - The reward allocation is 20,000 SEM per week;
        - Payments are processed on Sunday.
5. We reserve the right to modify or cancel this event at any time. We reserve the right to refuse participants for any reason.

It's true that there will be less participants as it requires having 10+ merits.
If most campaign managers follow this strategy, will it be efficient for forum or increase merit abusing in the long run?

[The Sceptical Chymist]

I have a better question:  Why did all those people give semux that many merits?  It almost seems to me like people are trying to bribe him or something.

As far as requiring a certain number of merits for a campaign, this isn't the first one to do it.  I think it's a good idea, because campaigns should generally strive for the best posters and merits are one way to judge that.  Managers should still look at an applicant's posts, IMO, but if you haven't earned at least 10 merits by this point and you've been here since January...there's probably an issue with your post quality.

Would it encourage merit abuse in the form of buying & selling it?  Maybe, but that's already going on.

Even with that 10 merit requirement, it's almost a given that that thread will be flooded with people who haven't read the requirements and are applying with less than that minimum.  It's sad.

It's true that there will be less participants as it requires having 10+ merits.

Good.  Fuck 'em.

Now I'm little confused, is it requiring to earn 10 merits after merit system was introduced or no problem with by default. If so, it make no sense, IMO.

I assume it's 10 earned merits, else that sort of requirement is stupid.

[pkmoney]

I have a better question:  Why did all those people give semux that many merits?  It almost seems to me like people are trying to bribe him or something.

May be trying to bribe, I guess some of them are affiliated or those all are bought. People who sell merit, own a lot of account, of course.

Even with that 10 merit requirement, it's almost a given that that thread will be flooded with people who haven't read the requirements and are applying with less than that minimum.  It's sad.

Now I'm little confused, is it requiring to earn 10 merits after merit system was introduced or no problem with by default. If so, it make no sense, IMO.

[athanz88]

I believe this is the future of this forum. Managers will make minimum merits as a requirement for participants to join the signature or bounty campaign and it will surely decreases the number of the participants as not all participants have the quality to get a lot of merits. Good poster will get their time paid off while bad one will be fucked up.

Like TP said, merit abusing is already going on, but i think the number is already decreased because the airdrop merits is already diminished a lot since the time merit was introduced. I remember someone is tracking the number of merits spent form month to month and it shows that the number of merits spent is decreasing over the month. So yeah, i hope the decreasing number comes from those who got no merit to abuse.

[pkmoney]

Now I'm little confused, is it requiring to earn 10 merits after merit system was introduced or no problem with by default. If so, it make no sense, IMO.

I assume it's 10 earned merits, else that sort of requirement is stupid.

Just checked the list of participants and got lots of people have been accepted in semux's list. Here is the list of participants listed by semux where people with airdropped merits accepted.

[LoyceV]

Just checked the list of participants and got lots of people have been accepted in semux's list. Here is the list of participants listed by semux where people with airdropped merits accepted.

Let me check the first 5:

Code:

  2884. 11 Merit received by liotmaan (#689832) from 1 unique users in 2 transactions
 13918. 1 Merit received by crimealone (#206556) from 1 unique users in 1 transactions
170054 received nothing
181270 received nothing
  8206. 3 Merit received by investgarant (#1108727) from 2 unique users in 3 transactions

Now let's check their Merit history in details:
liotmaan (#689832)
2 Merit for a link that redirects to a referal link > Reported to moderator.
9 Merit from the same user for saying "Where's the github".
crimealone (#206556)
1 Merit for a post in Chinese
investgarant (#1108727)
3 times 1 Merit for 3 posts in Russian.

I think it's safe to conclude requiring merit is NOT a solutation against spam, if it's an automated system that accepts anybody.

[madnessteat]

I also think that the idea about the minimum number of merit to participate in signature companies is very good. It is not clear why they wrote such rules. If they themselves violate their.

[MainIbem]

Did you take note of the date of the original post? September 17, 2017. Then, merit system has not been introduced. So were all the merits given in retrospect?

[Steamtyme]

I think it's safe to conclude requiring merit is NOT a solutation against spam, if it's an automated system that accepts anybody.

When anyone who can convince a team to hire them can become a manager the system will fail. Likely it will lead to more abuse down the road... where does the "bribe" taker drop the Merits off?

I have been in a few of Yahoo's campaigns and while not requiring merit for everyone, if you had a certain amount it netted you better payment. There are countless ways to try and improve the system but without there being any enforcement behind it they won't matter. It would be nice to require a certain amount of received Merit to carry a paid SIG, but again that would require further moderation, which genrally isn't going to happen.

[JohnUser]

Just checked the list of participants and got lots of people have been accepted in semux's list. Here is the list of participants listed by semux where people with airdropped merits accepted.

Let me check the first 5:

Code:

  2884. 11 Merit received by liotmaan (#689832) from 1 unique users in 2 transactions
 13918. 1 Merit received by crimealone (#206556) from 1 unique users in 1 transactions
170054 received nothing
181270 received nothing
  8206. 3 Merit received by investgarant (#1108727) from 2 unique users in 3 transactions

Now let's check their Merit history in details:
liotmaan (#689832)
2 Merit for a link that redirects to a referal link > Reported to moderator.
9 Merit from the same user for saying "Where's the github".
crimealone (#206556)
1 Merit for a post in Chinese
investgarant (#1108727)
3 times 1 Merit for 3 posts in Russian.

I think it's safe to conclude requiring merit is NOT a solutation against spam, if it's an automated system that accepts anybody.

Whats wrong with merit in Russian or Chinese ?

Also they ask 10+ merit, it would be easiest to say they don't accept people under Member rank, as many BMs already does...

[LoyceV]

Whats wrong with merit in Russian or Chinese ?

As far as I know, there's a lot of Merit sales in the Chinese section. But my conclusion wasn't based on the merit given to those sectors, I can't read the posts.

Also they ask 10+ merit, it would be easiest to say they don't accept people under Member rank, as many BMs already does...

A Newbie who really earned his Merit can be a valuable asset for advertising, although he'd need to buy a Copper Membership to be able to wear a bigger signature.

[Welsh]

It's better than no merits at all. However, my personal opinion would be that requiring users to earn a certain amount of merits per payment period would be better. Requiring a flat out requirement before accepting them means in the past they have made good quality posts, however that doesn't mean that they'll continue in this pattern once they have been accepted. A combination of the two would likely be the best approach. It doesn't need to be too strict due to the limited merit being distributed currently, but it's certainly something that should be considered. Perhaps not for every single payment period, but every other.

[Shamie1002]

I think the idea is nonsense. Merits will be just another reason to spam threads, make shit posts and make repeated threads just to complete a quota. I would not like merits to be wasted and it is JUST to make merits hard to earn so that less people abuse opportunities given If they prove themselves worth the merits then they will surely be noticed and efforts will be credited. Patience is also the key.

[pugman]

To be honest, merit shouldn't be a requirement for anything other than ranking up. There are good posters that haven't received a reasonable amount of merits or merits at all, and they exist, but just aren't visible to the active merit givers.

And a wise man once said, "Judge a person by his post quality and not by his merits".

I don't know who that guy is tho.

[JohnUser]

Whats wrong with merit in Russian or Chinese ?

As far as I know, there's a lot of Merit sales in the Chinese section. But my conclusion wasn't based on the merit given to those sectors, I can't read the posts.

OK I didn't know that. Apparently Chinese's and Japaneses cheat a lot.

I'm not sure to understand this point :

Code:

your_stake = Math.min(500, your_merit_points + 50)
your_reward = your_stake / total_stake * 20000 SEM

It's 500 min or merit+50 if more than 500 merit ?

[Welsh]

To be honest, merit shouldn't be a requirement for anything other than ranking up. There are good posters that haven't received a reasonable amount of merits or merits at all, and they exist, but just aren't visible to the active merit givers.

And a wise man once said, "Judge a person by his post quality and not by his merits".

I don't know who that guy is tho.

It kind of makes sense from an advertiser point of view though. Especially, if some sort of filter for only displaying posts that have been merited gets implemented. Advertisers want as much exposure as possible, and accepting someone who posts a lot of posts, but also posts good posts from time to time should[/]appeal to them. I've put that in italic just because I know that they only care about quantity rather than quality. But, we are seeing certain managers trying to fight against the quality>quality epidemic.

[Emilyearl]

I don't think merit should be a determinant to joining a bounty campaign, irrespective of how time consuming  it might be to the bounty managers, taking a good look at an applicants post history says more than judging by their merit count. There are people who got merit for saying non reasonable things and those who paid for it and those whom their friends merited their posts irrespective of its low quality. Post quality should be checked not merit count. My opinion though.

[Joel_Jantsen]

I have a better question:  Why did all those people give semux that many merits?  It almost seems to me like people are trying to bribe him or something.

I'm pretty sure they will have a group on telegram which mandatory requires their participants to give some merit to the ANN thread. This shows merit isn't a right metric to prove a good quality poster. People are stupid, meriting such services is useless as they are only here for the project and don't really care of their account's rank. Those merits could have utilised in a better way to rank some newbie up who actually puts efforts in writing something descent.

[tranthidung]

Merits are reasons to spam the forum, really? I don't think so, mate.
Spamming, and showing your shits via shitty threads will never help you earning merits, regardless of abusing the merit system by merit exchanges.
Real users will definitely not give their sMerits away for shitshows.

I think the idea is nonsense. Merits will be just another reason to spam threads, make shit posts and make repeated threads just to complete a quota.

I don't really understand what you meant, honestly.

I would not like merits to be wasted and it is JUST to make merits hard to earn so that less people abuse opportunities given If they prove themselves worth the merits then they will surely be noticed and efforts will be credited. Patience is also the key.

Personally, it should be. Signature campaigns should have pre-requisites for participants to apply, including merit points.
There are many campaigns which are managed by good, prestigious managers have such strict pre-requisite related to earned merits.

I don't think merit should be a determinant to joining a bounty campaign, irrespective of how time consuming  it might be to the bounty managers, taking a good look at an applicants post history says more than judging by their merit count.

Agree with you, mate.
As @The Pharmacist wrote in previous thread, it should be earned merits, not automatically allocated merits at the launch day of merit system.
Earned merits mostly show that accounts which got merits are constructive users, but managers of campaigns should check all cases carefully to avoid acceptance for merit abusers.
Further careful screening procedure through post history of applicants is next essential step after looking at their merit points.

There are people who got merit for saying non reasonable things and those who paid for it and those whom their friends merited their posts irrespective of its low quality. Post quality should be checked not merit count. My opinion though.

[Wasii]

The requirements is just too much, they ought to consider lower members