I've just invented dMerits.

[Jet Cash]

I've thought quite a lot about the merit system, and I think it had given Theymos some difficult decisions to make. In many ways it is a form of board moderation, but with positive rewards rather than punishments. At the moment most people use the rewards to expand their bounty hunting and sig spamming, and this contributes to the cluttering of the boards. In many ways it would be better if nobody were to rank up while sig spamming was still rife. The answer would be for the forum to provide alternative benefits for rank, but I can't think of any - flashing avatars would be an annoyance for example.

The other option is to try to avoid scams and HYIP product promotion in signatures, and encourage the promotion of more stable long term products. I don't really approve of mixers for example, but I can see that some people may have a need to use them, and long term advertising runs for such products will encourage the sponsor to ensure that his reputation is not damaged by bad posting habits.

I think the admins are aware of the importance of the merit system, and the way it has improved the boards. Merit sources will be able to help shape the forum for the future, and I hope that sources can be given some guidance on forum policies. I started my chat room to try to obtain some help with this, and I have received some advice, but I still think I'm a bit of a wild canon with my awards. This is the reason that I suggested the Source2 status. It would allow me ( and other sources) to feed merits into areas with which I have no empathy, but are essential to the maintenance of the diverse interests in the forum

[1714079083]

1714079083

[1714079083]

1714079083

[seoincorporation]

I've thought quite a lot about the merit system, and I think it had given Theymos some difficult decisions to make. In many ways it is a form of board moderation, but with positive rewards rather than punishments. At the moment most people use the rewards to expand their bounty hunting and sig spamming, and this contributes to the cluttering of the boards. In many ways it would be better if nobody were to rank up while sig spamming was still rife. The answer would be for the forum to provide alternative benefits for rank, but I can't think of any - flashing avatars would be an annoyance for example.

The other option is to try to avoid scams and HYIP product promotion in signatures, and encourage the promotion of more stable long term products. I don't really approve of mixers for example, but I can see that some people may have a need to use them, and long term advertising runs for such products will encourage the sponsor to ensure that his reputation is not damaged by bad posting habits.

I think the admins are aware of the importance of the merit system, and the way it has improved the boards. Merit sources will be able to help shape the forum for the future, and I hope that sources can be given some guidance on forum policies. I started my chat room to try to obtain some help with this, and I have received some advice, but I still think I'm a bit of a wild canon with my awards. This is the reason that I suggested the Source2 status. It would allow me ( and other sources) to feed merits into areas with which I have no empathy, but are essential to the maintenance of the diverse interests in the forum

Yep, I agree with almost all (I would be a hypocrite about signatures, for if I hadn't one, I would be unable to spend so much time in here).
Maybe the correct way to carry on with it is to create a thread on the New forum software board, with the proposal explained after this good debate. Many of us seem to agree with the point of merit sources having the ability to rely upon others in order to spread the merits in a less centralized way.

[Jet Cash]

Another possible change is to up the posting permission for the serious discussion board. The juniors seem to be the ones that create the lowest level posts ( OK so that's a generalisation). Maybe posting should be for members and above.

[seoincorporation]

Another possible change is to up the posting permission for the serious discussion board. The juniors seem to be the ones that create the lowest level posts ( OK so that's a generalisation). Maybe posting should be for members and above.

Also necessary (urgent, to be more accurate). The Serious Discussion board is starting to be another spam-fest.
I am not sure about how the official request process works. Is that on the new forum software board? Or in meta?

Anyway, recently a lot of proposals have been made in order to help the forum or to clean-up some sections, but nothing is happening. Maybe they are working on the new forum software, maybe admins like the forum the way it is. But, from my point of view, to normalize a bad situation means the beginning of decay.

So where can we just write request?
From the last week we have spoken about several and serious matters:
1.- The meta board being contaminated by banned requests and merit seekers, cryers, et al.
2.- The creation of a new kind of merit source.
3.- The serious discussion matter has been pointed before, if my memory serves me good, by AverageGlabella.
4.- The creation of a childboard to accounts issues (by Silent 26).

I've begun to see that mostly all the new suggestions are lost and quickly forgotten.
How can we avoid that?

[acidburn14]

Another possible change is to up the posting permission for the serious discussion board. The juniors seem to be the ones that create the lowest level posts ( OK so that's a generalisation). Maybe posting should be for members and above.

With due respect, I admit that there is a lot of low ranked level who are posting junk and non sense post in serious discussion board but i think its not proper to generalise us. Me as a jr. Member already learned a lot in this forum by reading post and topics of not only those high ranking members but also topics coming from newbies. As far as i know, the whole idea of this merit system is to stop spamming and replying irrelevant matters to one topic and basically it really helps a lot of forum members here to research and learn more about crypto and blockchain for them to have knowledge to rank up. Maybe you as a legendary should do your part in this forum to help low ranked level to learn and not to gain merits.

PS: im new here in bitcointalk but started trading crypto since 2014

[vphasitha01]

I am not sure about how the official request process works.

That's sad, it seems like no one here (even Legendary members ) don't know how the official requests to be made. Can we create a some kind of poll and submit the results to the admins?. I don't know that process is far  complex like rocket science

But, from my point of view, to normalize a bad situation means the beginning of decay.

That is the pathetic situation that we all are facing around every corner, every sector wether you like or not. That is what politicians do when they having so many issues to solve for their people. What they do is, first they generalize the problems and then divert the problems in to an another problem saying this will happened if we do this, then finally all the people are going to believed that it's a normal thing so we just ignore and move forward is the best thing, but it isn't. I believed this is not a political arena or admins are not like the politicians. So let's make some noise in order to get changed of some forum rules. Majority of the members( not the underworld bounty freaks or spammers) hoping to see some kind of positive moves towards the betterment of the forum like introduction of Merits, rather saying "today is not the day for a change"

"The small trees will remained even after strong storms due to it's flexibility but the regid ones which didn't want to be flexible will surely get distroyed during a storm"

So where can we just write request?
From the last week we have spoken about several and serious matters:
1.- The meta board being contaminated by banned requests and merit seekers, cryers, et al.
2.- The creation of a new kind of merit source.
3.- The serious discussion matter has been pointed before, if my memory serves me good, by AverageGlabella.
4.- The creation of a childboard to accounts issues (by Silent 26).

5.- ANN threads should not be awarded with merits
6.- The posts in the ANN threads should not count as activity
7.- System to be implemented to inquire and take actions against (at least large scale) merit abuse
8.- Merit source applicant should not award any merits for  their thread just for appreciations.
9.- English language posts should not allowed in local boards( may be this is tricky one, but we need to think about why actually admins initiate local boards at the first place)

That's only my suggestions, don't know wether other members are agreed or not.

[TheQuin]

I am not sure about how the official request process works.

That's sad, it seems like no one here (even Legendary members ) don't know how the official requests to be made.

That's because there is no official process. What you have to do is convince theymos that it is a good workable idea. I believe he pays attention to what is suggested and discussed in these sort of threads, In fact, he sometimes comments in them.

[Jet Cash]

>..<

I've just given you 2 merits, so if they do make that change, you can continue to post there.

[Theb]

Adding some kind of pseudo-merit source is entirely not a bad idea but by giving the merit source the power to delegate the sMerits to a "apprentice" could potentially lead to some abuse in the merit system overall. They don't even go through the screening process of a regular merit source in the first place.  But this can be avoided if these apprentices will go through some kind of screening process themselves where the merit source will request for approval of the delegation or transfer of sMerit to an admin.

[Jet Cash]

I think that there is fairly serious consideration before a person is approved as a merit source.  One of the considerations is their record in awarding sMerits. If they don't have any sMerrits to award, then this evaluation becomes difficult. I don't think that sources should be able to appoint secondary sources, but maybe they could suggest potential candidates, as could local communities. Removing a person as a merit source is quite a major decision, and could cause quite a bit of bad feeling, and the loss of a valuable member. Secondary sources would not need to be removed, but if they were not acting responsibly, then they wouldn't receive any merits to award.

[vphasitha01]

i dont' know

Actually we don't know why you create an Bitcointalk account I already report your post and don't ruin the thread.

[Theb]

I think that there is fairly serious consideration before a person is approved as a merit source.  One of the considerations is their record in awarding sMerits. If they don't have any sMerrits to award, then this evaluation becomes difficult. I don't think that sources should be able to appoint secondary sources, but maybe they could suggest potential candidates, as could local communities. Removing a person as a merit source is quite a major decision, and could cause quite a bit of bad feeling, and the loss of a valuable member. Secondary sources would not need to be removed, but if they were not acting responsibly, then they wouldn't receive any merits to award.

I did have a similar idea with one of my proposal in this section where the unused sMerits of merit sources would be transferred to another kind of merit source and it didn't get much approval from the other members. But with your idea where they are given the sMerits might work this secondary merit sources just need to be approved or allowed by admins.

Other alternative I see is for you to have some kind of post review where your trusted source sends you links of posts they think is worthy of merits and you yourself decide on how much if any will you give to that post.

[Jet Cash]

I think people should take responsibility for the merits they award, and I can't take responsibility for Spanish language posts. I am prepared to take responsibility for passing judgement to a member such as seoinc. and leave him to take the responsibility for the individual posts, and I would welcome such transactions being available for public scrutiny. I believe that these transactions should not result in any merit award for the intermediate member, and this helps to avoid some abuse of such a system.

I don't want to spend time reading a number of post that I may have already considered, and decided not to merit for personal reasons. The suggested poster may be on my ignore list for example.

I've brought this topic back again, as it would be a great help if there was a way that merit sources could provide support to responsible members who are active on some of the neglected boards.

[coinlocket$]

This is a great idea OP. Also I like this idea more than the "translate for merit one". Keep up your work you are doing so much for this community.

[olumyd]

So many people are monitoring merits that any abuse would be seen pretty quickly
Maybe only heroes and legendaries could receive dMerits

Even among those of the heroes and legendary ranking, there are still many who will abuse the privilege. Let's not forget that the ideal reality for those in those top ranking positions does not in any way imply that they are real 'leaders' in BTT forum.

IMO, the staff of BTT forum can be expanded to include paid whistleblowers, merit monitors, and trust network initiators. I actually like the idea of a trust network of merit sources--> dmerit agents --> smerit sources and any other business related to such ranking and evaluation system. This would most likely improve the performance of the BTT forum activities and the overall public image.

[denis-z12]

So many people are monitoring merits that any abuse would be seen pretty quickly
Maybe only heroes and legendaries could receive dMerits

Even among those of the heroes and legendary ranking, there are still many who will abuse the privilege. Let's not forget that the ideal reality for those in those top ranking positions does not in any way imply that they are real 'leaders' in BTT forum.

IMO, the staff of BTT forum can be expanded to include paid whistleblowers, merit monitors, and trust network initiators. I actually like the idea of a trust network of merit sources--> dmerit agents --> smerit sources and any other business related to such ranking and evaluation system. This would most likely improve the performance of the BTT forum activities and the overall public image.

My idea wasn't taken seriously a couple pf posts back so let me try again.
Like another user stated any abuse would be discovered easily. Let the local communities have a vote about which users they can trust to do this task.
If you spend a lot of time in a certain subforum you learn which users distribute merits for quality posts and how they do it.
All the merits allocated for this task would have to be presented to the local communities and it would be transparent for everyone to check.
I dont think you need new moderators or whistle blowers because anyone who discovers an unfair distribution in his local community will find a way to inform the staff and go public about it.

[seoincorporation]

My idea wasn't taken seriously a couple pf posts back so let me try again.
Like another user stated any abuse would be discovered easily. Let the local communities have a vote about which users they can trust to do this task.
If you spend a lot of time in a certain subforum you learn which users distribute merits for quality posts and how they do it.
All the merits allocated for this task would have to be presented to the local communities and it would be transparent for everyone to check.
I dont think you need new moderators or whistle blowers because anyone who discovers an unfair distribution in his local community will find a way to inform the staff and go public about it.

Well, in the case this kind if merit sources are created, it is clear that it is going to be really difficult for them to farm or to abuse, since the merits they will receive are few in comparison with a merit source, and will be under watch from the giver, of course.
I think is far more difficult to cheat by a member of the "team merit" than to a normal merit source.
By building a team also it is going to become more transparent the work of the merit source. Anyway, I don't think any of us is willing to betray or cheat, but to improve the forum.

[paxmao]

No, these aren't negative merits, but they are sMerits that can be delegated.

I gave seoinc. 10 merits so that he can award some in the Spanish community, and I messed up by giving a couple of merits to a copy paster. It would have been great if I could have delegated the 10 sMerits to seoinc. for him to pass on all 10, and of course no merits would have been added to his personal total.

How about giving some merit sources the ability to delegate the awarding of a limited number of sMerits. It would make the task of merit sources much simpler, and it would act as a form of apprenticeship for future merit sources.

Alternatively and on a much simpler approach, Seoinc can use the merit review thread that I have setup in the Spanish section so that he/she can help me finding decent posts. The Spanish section of the forum generates little posting activity, and of that little posting activity a large part is merely opinions that are welcome but not "meritable". Believe me, I will be happy if I am ever able to use up all my sMerit.


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4315906.msg38727495#msg38727495


Even if you don´t know about cryptos, you can still get merit on the Spanish forum in my "Weekly Merit challenge", an effort to make a more engaged community.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4613016.msg41925587#msg41925587


May I ask which boards are neglected in your view? Do you think that 10 more merits were needed on the Spanish section? For which posts? Notice that giving merit requires certain care and even with that, we all eventually give some to spammers, merit traders, etc...


Note: in the Spanish section there are tools to propose deserving posts for merit and at the moment is far easier to get merit there than in the general sections IMO.

Note II:  Be aware, it is very easy to fall into the same argument that hundreds of threads propose in the meta section -  "merit is difficult to get", "merit is unfair", "there should be more merit",... Just changing into slightly more sophisticated version "the board is neglected", "this post should have merit and it did not receive it ,...

Note III: I am not by default against further decentralising merit: I can´t merit myself for my cool posts in the Spanish forum.

[paxmao]

I've thought quite a lot about the merit system, and I think it had given Theymos some difficult decisions to make. In many ways it is a form of board moderation, but with positive rewards rather than punishments. At the moment most people use the rewards to expand their bounty hunting and sig spamming, and this contributes to the cluttering of the boards. In many ways it would be better if nobody were to rank up while sig spamming was still rife. The answer would be for the forum to provide alternative benefits for rank, but I can't think of any - flashing avatars would be an annoyance for example.

The other option is to try to avoid scams and HYIP product promotion in signatures, and encourage the promotion of more stable long term products. I don't really approve of mixers for example, but I can see that some people may have a need to use them, and long term advertising runs for such products will encourage the sponsor to ensure that his reputation is not damaged by bad posting habits.

I think the admins are aware of the importance of the merit system, and the way it has improved the boards. Merit sources will be able to help shape the forum for the future, and I hope that sources can be given some guidance on forum policies. I started my chat room to try to obtain some help with this, and I have received some advice, but I still think I'm a bit of a wild canon with my awards. This is the reason that I suggested the Source2 status. It would allow me ( and other sources) to feed merits into areas with which I have no empathy, but are essential to the maintenance of the diverse interests in the forum

In my case, I have posted my criteria that I think aligns with the forum rules:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4315906.msg41555048#msg41555048


What is quality

- Help others using a special or uncommon knowledge
- Very relevant news with a good analysis or an important implication to cryptos.
- Occasionally, good humor.
- Personally, if anyone corrects a word in one of my translations I will give merit ("of my own")

What is NOT meritable:
- A long post is not necessarily merit worthy.
- If you plagiarise and I notice it you will be in my ignored list for a year.
- If you have been trading merit with other users and I notice it, you will have a hard time getting merit.

An a later addition: Don´t send me PM asking for merit.

[paxmao]

So many people are monitoring merits that any abuse would be seen pretty quickly
Maybe only heroes and legendaries could receive dMerits

Even among those of the heroes and legendary ranking, there are still many who will abuse the privilege. Let's not forget that the ideal reality for those in those top ranking positions does not in any way imply that they are real 'leaders' in BTT forum.

IMO, the staff of BTT forum can be expanded to include paid whistleblowers, merit monitors, and trust network initiators. I actually like the idea of a trust network of merit sources--> dmerit agents --> smerit sources and any other business related to such ranking and evaluation system. This would most likely improve the performance of the BTT forum activities and the overall public image.

Olumyd, As far as I am concerned, one of the things I do look sometimes before giving merit is the merit history of the member. Typically, I won´t merit users that are meriting others in ANN threads, which in turn are meriting others in ANN threads.

But, that´s just me.