My only gripe with the merit system... Edits aren't addressed.

[OgNasty]

I've noticed that if I have left someone a merit immediately after their post, only to have them edit it to something that may not be as agreeable of an opinion within the (10 minute?) time frame, there is no evidence at all the new edited post wasn't the originally merited opinion.

I think it might be a nice feature if merits given to posts had some soft of distinguishing feature if the post has been edited after the merit has been left, even if it was within the time frame to not show an edit.  Perhaps the merit distributor's name could be changed to a different color?

[1713577614]

1713577614

[1713577614]

1713577614

[1713577614]

1713577614

[1713577614]

1713577614

[Quickseller]

You are describing a different flaw in the merit system.

Merits should be given based on the effort put into the post, not based on your agreement with the content of the post.

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.

The problem is that it is very common for people to receive merit based on the merit sender agreeing with the content of the underlying post. I have previously argued this encourages groupthink, and drowns out dissent of those who are powerful.

[cabalism13]

Still don't get it...

Even if they make an edit on it, I think it would be still undeniable that it will be looked the same.

Merit Distributors who has more likely to do this are those who has alts that abuse the bounties. And I don't think if there will be any of you higher ranks will be just giving Merits for a low quality posts or just on a simple thing worked done by these Newbies/Juniors.

And why would they bother editing posts that already has Merits? I don't think there is somebody who does that just to have more Merits unto his posts. Though it's not a big deal if we see some changes to the Merited posts of somebody(IMO)?

The problem is that it is very common for people to receive merit based on the merit sender agreeing with the content of the underlying post.

Nothing can changed that fact unless Mods will try to moderate all of the given Merits whether it is deserving or not. But the thing is, like theymos have said

Code:

There is currently no such thing as a "demerit". I'm hoping that the positive merits alone will be fine. I could add demerits pretty easily later on if necessary, though.

[Quickseller]

The issue is not the lack of moderation, the issue is the way people give out merit. The posts that receive merit are not necessarily not deserving merit, but rather that there are posts with potentially unpopular opinions that do deserve merit, or posts with opinions that do not align with those in power that lack merit.

This is why I believe the merit system should be trashed, and that rank/signature abilities should be determined with activity plus a payment.

[cabalism13]

That rank/signature abilities should be determined with activity plus a payment.

I think payments for the use of signature on a certain time will be fine. Just to be fair, everyone will have to make payments before doing sig cam.


(N) weeks = (x)mBtc


Then after that signatures will be emptied again automatically.

[xtraelv]

I've noticed that if I have left someone a merit immediately after their post, only to have them edit it to something that may not be as agreeable of an opinion within the (10 minute?) time frame, there is no evidence at all the new edited post wasn't the originally merited opinion.

I think it might be a nice feature if merits given to posts had some soft of distinguishing feature if the post has been edited after the merit has been left, even if it was within the time frame to not show an edit.  Perhaps the merit distributor's name could be changed to a different color?

You are describing a different flaw in the merit system.

Merits should be given based on the effort put into the post, not based on your agreement with the content of the post.

While merit should be given based on the quality of the post I agree with OgNasty that when a post is altered after it is merited it can give the false impression that the person who merited agrees with the post.

Something can be well written but if I disagree with the contents I would not want my name associated with it by meriting it. On this basis I agree totally with what OgNasty said. (Unless he edits his post after I post this to something different)  

[cabalism13]

Just to add this:

there is no evidence at all the new edited post wasn't the originally merited opinion.

Maybe there is. If the original was quoted then you'll have the evidence.

(Bad Luck on My Profile-Considered this post as a Bad One. 666 )

[OgNasty]

You are describing a different flaw in the merit system.

Merits should be given based on the effort put into the post, not based on your agreement with the content of the post.

I was giving an example but perhaps used less than optimal wording.  You're focusing on the wrong thing to try and make an unrelated point.  Let's try this example if it makes you feel more comfortable.  Someone makes a long well thought out post, you give it merit, and then they change it to say something horribly offensive making it look like you think the horribly offensive comment was a merit-worthy post.  If done within the right time frame, there is no public evidence to the contrary.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

I quite often edit my posts but because I see some gramatical or misspelling errors after posted. I don't see the point because I'm sure when a post is edited 99%+ of the times it doesn't change the original meaning. I also edit my posts to express better the idea.

Anyway, I think it is unlikely theymos will implement that feature.

[OgNasty]

I quite often edit my posts but because I see some gramatical or misspelling errors after posted. I don't see the point because I'm sure when a post is edited 99%+ of the times it doesn't change the original meaning. I also edit my posts to express better the idea.

Anyway, I think it is unlikely theymos will implement that feature.

I agree it doesn't happen much, but something obviously made me bring it up.  Turning the merit giver another color might be unpleasing as well. Perhaps the option to delete merit if a post has been edited would be a better approach, but I'm sure there's a reason I'm not aware of as to why merit is irreversible currently.

[Crypto Girl]

I quite often edit my posts but because I see some gramatical or misspelling errors after posted. I don't see the point because I'm sure when a post is edited 99% of the times it doesn't change the original meaning. I also edit my posts to express better the idea.

Anyway, I think it is very unlikely theymos will implement that feature.

Me either. Editing post shouldn't be a big deal and as from what I quoted.
On the other hand, what Ognasty pointed it out is there's some people really loves to troll and by making some good post to earn merit is not possible and will just edit it out ans change the whole sense of the post. And by this and surely it firstly needed a strong evidence that someone are really doing that. Thus, lack of evidence will still just an assumption.

[CryptopreneurBrainboss]

I've noticed that if I have left someone a merit immediately after their post, only to have them edit it to something that may not be as agreeable of an opinion within the (10 minute?) time frame, there is no evidence at all the new edited post wasn't the originally merited opinion.

The example used above isn't the right one because if a user gets merited just because the sender agrees with the post, I see it as an abuse or misuse of the merit system.
But in a situation were the actual merit was given based on the quality of the post but user later edited post to less quality or total spammy post then I think your suggestion should be looked into by the administrators of forum or better measure should be implemented. And if it can be automated, I think it will be much easier for the fight against spam and my fav, "making bitcointalk great again"

[Talk merit]

I quite often edit my posts for typing or other errors, but I suspect that this isn't the issue here. The problem is associated with the deletion of merited posts. If an account is sold, and the purchaser edits merited posts, then this could give a false impression of approval for the new post by a merit source.

[xtraelv]

I quite often edit my posts but because I see some gramatical or misspelling errors after posted. I don't see the point because I'm sure when a post is edited 99% of the times it doesn't change the original meaning. I also edit my posts to express better the idea.

Anyway, I think it is very unlikely theymos will implement that feature.

Me either. Editing post shouldn't be a big deal and as from what I quoted.
On the other hand, what Ognasty pointed it out is there's some people really loves to troll and by making some good post to earn merit is not possible and will just edit it out ans change the whole sense of the post. And by this and surely it firstly needed a strong evidence that someone are really doing that. Thus, lack of evidence will still just an assumption.

I'm terribly dyslexic and often have to edit my posts numerous times for undetected typos, jumbled up words and missing sentences that were in my head but never ended up in the article. I know it frustrated some people.

When I edit I try to not deviate form the message and only improve the content. Some threads are ongoing projects and I keep editing to make the content better.

OgNasty has a very valid point because it can make it appear that the person sending the merit agreed with the post. I've personally had it where I merited a post that I misunderstood.

Perhaps merit arbitration can become something in the future with some trusted level headed people becoming de-meriters..

I think I know which post OgNasty is referring to but I'm not going to draw attention to it.

[DooMAD]

You are describing a different flaw in the merit system.

Merits should be given based on the effort put into the post, not based on your agreement with the content of the post.

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.

The problem is that it is very common for people to receive merit based on the merit sender agreeing with the content of the underlying post. I have previously argued this encourages groupthink, and drowns out dissent of those who are powerful.

That's technically a separate issue.  Imagine someone made a highly informative and/or technical post that was worthy of merit.  You read this post and award them however much you deem appropriate.  Then, that person, who is secretly a troll, then edits their post.  They remove all the useful, merit-worthy content and replace it with "Hitler was just misunderstood and was actually an okay guy".  Or something even worse.  Now your merit is attached to this post for all to see and you can't take it back, even though it's clearly not text you would have awarded merit to.  Your only recourse is to report it to the moderators and hope it's swiftly removed.

Whether or not you agree with the content of the original version of the post is immaterial because that post is now gone.  It's entirely possible to have awarded merit to a post only to have that post later change to something completely unrelated and highly objectionable.

[Jet Cash]

 Imagine someone made a highly informative and/or technical post that was worthy of merit.  You read this post and award them however much you deem appropriate.  Then, that person, who is secretly a troll, then edits their post.  They remove all the useful, merit-worthy content and replace it with "Hitler was just misunderstood and was actually an okay guy".

There is an even worse possibility. Just imaging that the edited post now contains a glowing report for a scam coin. This can be seen as approval for the coin, and if the merit comes from a well respected member of the forum, it could mislead newbie "investors".

[manfredmann]

Imagine someone made a highly informative and/or technical post that was worthy of merit.  You read this post and award them however much you deem appropriate.  Then, that person, who is secretly a troll, then edits their post.  They remove all the useful, merit-worthy content and replace it with "Hitler was just misunderstood and was actually an okay guy".

Locked its content automatically using an automated system after giving a merit to the post. Thus, will clearly to specify that no changes will be made after receiving the merit/s and remain the credibility of that post.

There is an even worse possibility. Just imaging that the edited post now contains a glowing report for a scam coin. This can be seen as approval for the coin, and if the merit comes from a well respected member of the forum, it could mislead newbie "investors".

No, a little percentage to edit its content to a new idea will happen. Once a post was being edited, a good reason for this maybe for a little correction of that post on how it was being constructed. A low percentage of chance that a thread which is being merited will be edited to another content of idea that will look like a shitposts.