Bitcoin Forum
September 20, 2019, 12:19:08 AM *
News: If you like a topic and you see an orange "bump" link, click it. More info.
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: LoyceV's deMerit source application  (Read 999 times)
ETFbitcoin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 2029

Use SegWit and enjoy lower fees.


View Profile WWW
September 20, 2018, 05:43:35 PM
Merited by LoyceV (1)
 #21

I get your idea, but this could be abused easily/misused in many ways. Increasing merit requirement for some ranks, limiting signature features for few ranks and permanent ban for obvious merit abuse are far better and should be easier to be implemented.
Report button on merit page and hidden list of trusted member (which only can be seen by moderator/admin when see reports) should be better.

Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1568938748
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1568938748

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1568938748
Reply with quote  #2

1568938748
Report to moderator
1568938748
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1568938748

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1568938748
Reply with quote  #2

1568938748
Report to moderator
Welsh
Staff
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1517



View Profile
September 20, 2018, 05:47:19 PM
 #22

I get your idea, but this could be abused easily/misused in many ways. Increasing merit requirement for some ranks, limiting signature features for few ranks and permanent ban for obvious merit abuse are far better and should be easier to be implemented.
Report button on merit page and hidden list of trusted member (which only can be seen by moderator/admin when see reports) should be better.

Merit abuse is pretty damn hard to spot, unless its blatantly obvious. Unfortunately, I don't think we'll be finding that many abusers with the low requirement of 1 merit. If we had a 5 merit requirement for Jr member then it would of been easier to identify abusers I think.

Cashi
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 378
Merit: 41


View Profile
September 20, 2018, 05:51:25 PM
Merited by LoyceV (1)
 #23

Introducing deMerit sources would be a good decision to remove some Merits given to Newbies by mistake, like this one: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5030749.0

Another idea could be if we increase the rank requirements for Jr. Members later again. Most of them who received 1 Merit now will continue shitposting, not all of them, but most of them. If we wait a few weeks now and then change the rules again that it's necessary to earn 2 Merits to get a Jr. Member we can check their new comments after the account got his 1 Merit. If he didn't change his posting behaviour and continued his shitposting, this second Merit he needs now to be Jr. Member will be refused.

This can be another measure to prevent mistakenly given Merits.

Smiley Smiley
Welsh
Staff
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1517



View Profile
September 20, 2018, 06:03:22 PM
Merited by LoyceV (1)
 #24

Introducing deMerit sources would be a good decision to remove some Merits given to Newbies by mistake, like this one: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5030749.0

Another idea could be if we increase the rank requirements for Jr. Members later again. Most of them who received 1 Merit now will continue shitposting, not all of them, but most of them. If we wait a few weeks now and then change the rules again that it's necessary to earn 2 Merits to get a Jr. Member we can check their new comments after the account got his 1 Merit. If he didn't change his posting behaviour and continued his shitposting, this second Merit he needs now to be Jr. Member will be refused.

This can be another measure to prevent mistakenly given Merits.

Demerit has its usages, and I'm not saying it's a terrible idea. However, just because a demerit source disagrees with a merit source or someone who rewarded the merit, doesn't mean that they should have the ruling over them. Mistakes happen, and they could perhaps be removed by a global moderator or something, but I guess they have enough on their hands. I don't think giving someone the right to just demerit when they disagree with something is the best solution. Everyone has different opinions on quality of posts from users.

LoyceV
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1610
Merit: 4638


Largest Merit Circle on BPIP!


View Profile WWW
September 20, 2018, 06:12:26 PM
 #25

Part of the reason I started this thread was to (re)start a discussion about deMerit. I see good points, both in favour and against it.
I didn't mention it in the OP, but if deMerits are introduced, it should be a shared responsibility, just like the current Merit sources (and not just me).

hugeblack
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812
Merit: 705


Bitcointalk Crossword Puzzle http://tiny.cc/q60jcz


View Profile
September 20, 2018, 06:20:41 PM
 #26

Why we always rush to create more solutions without giving time to the current situation and evaluating and thinking about improving it?.

How many accounts will be ranked-up? Hundred thousand? I do not think the number will be significant because of the limited merits.

Let it be as it is and evaluate the solution after some months.

The improvement will be by adding more merits to rank-up "5 for jrmembers", lowering ranks if no one has access to a certain number of merits, restrictions for some boards "newbie can’t post on altcoin boards."

I do not like this solution "deMerit."  Cheesy

stompix
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1190
Merit: 1130



View Profile
September 20, 2018, 06:49:57 PM
Merited by LoyceV (1), HeRetiK (1), Piggy (1)
 #27

The sadist in me would love to see this happening as I can't picture LoyceV abusing this and I'm pretty sure that if he is proven wrong on something he will award back the merit but if we're going to have 10 or 20 sinks (?) around we are going to end with the same controversy we have with the trust system. And we all know how many sides are waging war on that front.

And having a single person with this "power" won't be a much brighter idea either...

Rather than hunting them down, I would really like to see two things implemented:
a) (this was also LoyceV idea, I think!?) an automated system where you either
- lose 1 merit for every 100 or whatever activity if you wear a signature for even a second during an activity period
- you need at least one merit in the last x days to keep your signature active

b) this is going to piss off a lot of people but I would love to see all jr/full/sr/hero or legendary members who haven't earned a single merit since the system was implemented without the possibility of displaying a signature

After all, legendary and heroes were supposed to have earned their rank with the hundreds of worthy posts made before the system was introduced. So what's the difference between a newbie who made 1000 posts and has not earned a single merit and a hero member who has also done 1000 posts in the same timeframe with the same results Grin?

Don't worry about it, I'm in no rush, and I have hundreds if not thousands of spammers helping me to convince theymos Cheesy

 Grin Grin Grin

Malmoun
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 336
Merit: 6


View Profile
September 20, 2018, 07:55:42 PM
 #28

Yes, this is not a bit bad, but you have to think about how to improve the current situation for the better
shield132
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Activity: 1232
Merit: 542


In bit we sler, Bitsler


View Profile
September 20, 2018, 09:06:31 PM
 #29

I like and support this idea, great! LoyceV is someone we can trust, especially in this task, this man will be fair and won't abuse anything.
Curious, why theymos didn't think about demerit? Well, not everyone has to be available of it but at least we need another group of people who are fair and wish to so this job like we have merit sources.
In LoyceV We Trust Cheesy

Quickseller
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1904
Merit: 1745



View Profile WWW
September 21, 2018, 07:32:05 AM
 #30

The sadist in me would love to see this happening as I can't picture LoyceV abusing this
LoyceV is someone we can trust,
If you think you can trust LoyceV in doing this, you should advocate him becoming a mod, and he can be subject to the forum rules in regards to moderation when handing out bans.

If we allow "normal" users to remove merit from others, then we will eventually have corrupt people such as Lauda handing out negative merit to their enemies, handing out negative trust for giving merit to those he does not agree with and saying that he can leave whatever merit to whoever he wants for any reason he wants.

At the end of the day, I don't think it is a big deal if a small number of people can spam with a paid signature because this will only be a small number of people, and will be easier for the mods to handle, and also because there is a limited number of merits available (to spammers), so they can only rank up a limited number of accounts to spam.

If there is a widespread problem of spammers getting a single merit to wear a paid signature, it would strengthen the argument that you must pay in order to wear a signature (and to rank up above a junior member -- in addition to activity requirements).

Find the fire hydrant in my Avatar for a prize.
Coolcryptovator
Copper Member
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 546
Merit: 810


Self made Hero Member 😎


View Profile WWW
September 21, 2018, 10:18:10 AM
Last edit: September 21, 2018, 10:32:04 AM by Coolcryptovator
 #31

To be honest I am not agree with demerit system. I don't believe that merit could be send by mistake. It's not same as Facebook like that could be press by mistake. During meriting time there is new tab, that means you are fully aware that you are going to merit someone. On the other hand once you are meriting someone you are meriting on post, you are not consider a person. Same thing for others people also. Say someone merited me on a post,  but in case after few days if they aren't agree with me for any reason than may be some one will think I will demerit my merit. It's just example, but I think it would be happen. I don't think it will be fair.

If you think for source of demerit like current merit source than also I am not agree. You will se many accusation against them. Adding demerit source means merit will moderated by forum. So it would be easy to question forum. And it's more difficult to identify who are really abusing. Without proper explanation couldn't be demerited. You can see sometimes there is accusation also against merit source regarding merit abuse. So you can imagine how many accusation will be against demerit source.

For me current merit system is working fine. Just we need to follow who are abusing merit system and identify them for tag. I know merit abusing increase after implement new rules. But I don't think it will longer as well they are getting red tag if caught.

vlad230
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 546
Merit: 277



View Profile
September 21, 2018, 10:55:48 AM
 #32

I think you are on to something here, OP  Grin

Imagine the red trust (irrelevant of course) and the utter fallout of someone being demoted back to Newbie or Jr. Member that will prevent them to participate in bounties.

I think they will start a vendetta against you, maybe even spam you with loads of PMs  Cheesy
stompix
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1190
Merit: 1130



View Profile
September 21, 2018, 01:01:06 PM
 #33

we are going to end with the same controversy we have with the trust system. And we all know how many sides are waging war on that front.

Lauda

As I was saying.... Cheesy

To be honest I am not agree with demerit system. I don't believe that merit could be send by mistake. It's not same as Facebook like that could be press by mistake. During meriting time there is new tab, that means you are fully aware that you are going to merit someone. On the other hand once you are meriting someone you are meriting on post, you are not consider a person. Same thing for others people also. Say someone merited me on a post,  but in case after few days if they aren't agree with me for any reason than may be some one will think I will demerit my merit

I think that less than 0.1% of the merit was sent by mistake, usually with that back page bug but the focus of the demeriting should not be on posts that have been merited and did not deserve it.

The main target should be the shitposts, like the ones here: Wall of fame / shame.


jonemil24
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 448
Merit: 57

imagine me


View Profile
September 21, 2018, 10:52:03 PM
 #34

Rather than hunting them down, I would really like to see two things implemented:
a) (this was also LoyceV idea, I think!?) an automated system where you either
- lose 1 merit for every 100 or whatever activity if you wear a signature for even a second during an activity period
- you need at least one merit in the last x days to keep your signature active
"a" is much better than "b" for reducing spammy posts made by ICO bounties. Say; every 100/75/50 posts(I would prefer 50 posts), 1 merit is reduced. But this kind of method should only be applicable to people who wear "bounty" ICO signatures.

I didn't choose "b" because there are people with default merits who wear signature that aren't ICO related like this one:


IMO, ICO bounties are the reason why people see spamfest posts on every section.

If theymos wants to gamify the new forum software, if ever it comes, method "a" is the best option.

No for deMerits, BTW.

Normally, if given a choice to do something and nothing, I choose to do nothing.
But I will do something if it helps someone else to do nothing.
I'd work all night if it meant nothing got done.
- Roy Swanson
erikoy
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 462
Merit: 13

Trade Commodities and Sports Future using Bitcoin


View Profile
September 22, 2018, 05:10:32 AM
 #35

Let theymos decide on this matter since for the time being had no plan for this to create a demerit committee. Besides if a demerit committee is needed theymos should consider also on how it will be used like a protocol before proceeding to demerit a member for it could be subject also for the possible abuse of its use. Let theymos decide on this matter and its consulting team and not just by one or two members here in the forum.

regtrade
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 196
Merit: 10


View Profile
September 22, 2018, 05:43:41 AM
 #36

Merit is like doing something useful, positive for the community. DeMerit is like denying that positive? If you find that merit is not worth it, can you give RED TRUST?

P/s : sorry for my bad english.



[   BITVALVEⓇ   |   P2P CRYPTO EXCHANGE   ]      ▬▬▬▬    BITVALVE
                                   ❱ BUY BITCOIN       ❱ BUY ETHEREUM                     BUY LITECOIN
                                             ❱ BUY BITCOIN WITH PAYPAL      ❱ BUY ETHEREUM WITH PAYPAL              [   ◾◾◾ JOIN BITVALVE   ◾   WHITEPAPER   ]
LoyceV
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1610
Merit: 4638


Largest Merit Circle on BPIP!


View Profile WWW
September 22, 2018, 07:00:51 AM
Merited by Foxpup (2)
 #37

If you find that merit is not worth it, can you give RED TRUST?
That would be bad as it can easily be abused. Say user A doesn't like user B. Then user A buys Merit to give to a bad post made by user B. You're saying user B should get red trust, while user B is innocent in this scenario.
A deMerit on the merited bad post would solve this without harming user B.

Rather than hunting them down, I would really like to see two things implemented:
a) (this was also LoyceV idea, I think!?) an automated system where you either
- lose 1 merit for every 100 or whatever activity if you wear a signature for even a second during an activity period
This would be a much better solution, but I think it's less likely to be implemented. I'd be okay with dropping my LoyceBot from Full Member down to Member, but it won't even happen as long as it doesn't make new posts.
I don't think the complication of checking for a signature is needed though.

Quote
- you need at least one merit in the last x days to keep your signature active
I'm not sure how effective this will be.

Quote
b) this is going to piss off a lot of people but I would love to see all jr/full/sr/hero or legendary members who haven't earned a single merit since the system was implemented without the possibility of displaying a signature
Now Newbies are complaining that old accounts got their Merit airdrop for spamming. If you have 1000 Merit, but didn't earn anything for the last 100 Activity you gained, I don't think you have any right to be pissed about it.

kogozer714
Copper Member
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 434
Merit: 1


View Profile
September 22, 2018, 10:27:50 AM
 #38

Not really required, IMO.

Jr. Members can't do much. People are focusing a little too much on a ranking system, and concentrating their time on something that's not very important. If I were you, I'd rather go play football or you know...go get yourself wasted.
Nice one,you really cool man. If I have a high rank I will be more focus to work on my bounty task more than complaining about merit.

Little Mouse
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 350
Merit: 69

★Bitvest.io★ Play Plinko or Invest!


View Profile
September 22, 2018, 10:49:36 AM
Merited by bitart (1)
 #39

- Deleted posts should have associated merits removed autmatically
Agreed with your other reason. But the 2nd one, which I have quoted, isn't a good solution, IMO. I have received 1 merit. Someone posted an article in Beginners and Help, I had read the exact one from a website. Then I shared the link by replying to his article and also mentioned that he had copied the article. SOmeone gave me a merit. Later, the thread was deleted for plagiarism.
I don't know whether my reply would deserve a merit or not. But what if someone gave merit in a post which really deserve merit and the thread got deleted somehow. Willn't it take down the real reward? I think it will not motivate people.

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
PLINKO    |7| SLOTS     (+) ROULETTE    ▼ BIT SPINBITVESTPLAY or INVEST ║ ✔ Rainbot  ✔ Happy Hours  ✔ Faucet
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
Welsh
Staff
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1517



View Profile
September 22, 2018, 10:52:33 AM
 #40

Agreed with your other reason. But the 2nd one, which I have quoted, isn't a good solution, IMO. I have received 1 merit. Someone posted an article in Beginners and Help, I had read the exact one from a website. Then I shared the link by replying to his article and also mentioned that he had copied the article. SOmeone gave me a merit. Later, the thread was deleted for plagiarism.
I don't know whether my reply would deserve a merit or not. But what if someone gave merit in a post which really deserve merit and the thread got deleted somehow. Willn't it take down the real reward? I think it will not motivate people.

At the end of the day, quality posts can be made, and then deleted after. I say automatically removing the merit once its been deleted isn't exactly the best approach. What I would say is, if the post is deleted directly by a moderator or whatever then it should be removed. However, if you made a reply in a thread which was removed it shouldn't. So, only if directly removed should merit be removed too. Self moderated threads shouldn't count.

At least that's my point of view on the situation.

Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!