Bounty Manager as a good Merit source!

[DarkStar_]

Some of these users are already merit sources i believe

I believe most of them are sources.

[PlusOne88]

I stopped reading right here. Read this:

I think you should consider adding Sylon manager to your list.
He manages a lot of campaigns, if you check his post history, you can see he everything works very up-to-date and answering all question to his participants.

Lol, seriously? He is probably one of the worst bounty managers on Bitcointalk. He even received negative trust because he accepts many scammers into his campaigns. Do you really think that Sylon deserves to be among best signature campaign managers?

Was just going to say the same thing. This is an anti-spam list and Sylon is one of the worst managers on the forum for spam in my opinion. Sylon accepts and pays for anyone as long as you make the minimum amount of spam. The amount of farmers and copy and pasters on his campaigns is ridiculous and multiple users are banned every day from campaigns he's running so staff end up doing his job for him which is incredibly annoying.

Actually I have not participated in Sylon's campaign but I based my ideas on the spreadsheet where I saw how they marked the posts as red and banned them from campaign. Many of the top ranking forum members are so critical in examining posts. You only mentioned more about Sylon how about the other high ranking FMs. It only shows that not all are really doing bad at managing. So we can put it this way, select only good bounty managers to become merit source. I could agree that some did receive negative trust and that is because they banned spammers and in retaliation they give negative trust. I understand your point, not all or everyone is good but these managers are responsible for the posts and they are the one to read it first, so I just think it would be feasible for them to encourage good post by rewarding bounty hunters and what is 1 point merit to do anyway with ranking to position like yours? It will be funny how many campaigns that needs to be finished just to reach your position. Actually up a little above this post, I don't have to quote, are high ranking bounty managers as well and are known to be doing good, I even read your name from the posts here that means this includes you, which I think you would certainly agree on me that you can be a good merit source. How about that? I am sure you would not allow spam to get in! If you can only understand my point and have read books you would discover that "Rewards are better than Punishment" and that is why the word bounty lives. Had it not for rewards nobody would be interested to post daily on a limit per week because it takes a lot of time to wait for nothing. I am not really arguing you but I only wanted you to see some good points. This is only a suggestion anyway.

[Crypto Girl]

I saw in the past some bounty manager abusing the bounty where they was managering paying their alts.
Now, you want really the risk to get a bounty manager as merit source and get the risk to have a bounty manager with 10 or more leveled up accounts?

This OP's suggestion is empty since we knew that some BM are all just after their payment and it will just have a conflict of interest since they can abuse the smerit for their participants yet might as well returning of favor. Let's just leave this to merit sources so everything will be fair and square.

[mazdafunsun]

Most of the time I try not o be rude, but this is one of the most Stupid ideas regarding merit distrubution which i have seen .
i would say that 90% of bountymanagers do not care about the forum , they just are makeing money, thus they are not a good merit source. There is enough bad bounty mangers getting merit for their threads just because the ICO was succes, not because they have done a great job of managing spam or their campaigns in general.

[flying_bit]

Giving them the automatic sMerit value intended only to be given to the bounty hunters will probably give them the chance to promote only the deserving bounty hunters and allowing better opportunities for ranking up. This will also help the entire site to be checked constantly of posts that bounty hunter....What do you think of this?

I disagree. There will be a conflict of interest and question of integrity.

Also, not all BM are totally responsible and check bounties and rank of bounty managers. Many are either newbies, copper member or jr. member. How can you give them the responsibilities of giving smerit when they themself have not earned enough merit yet to rank even to full member.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

I've got a better idea - don't allow bounty managers to award any sMerits.

Word.  I don't know any of the altcoin bounty managers, but my gut feeling is that they shouldn't be trusted as merit sources--I base that on the fact that I've seen a lot of them who couldn't care less about the post quality of some of the members they select for their signature campaigns. 

I don't know how Theymos chose the 36 new merit sources, but hopefully those individuals are ones he trusts not to abuse the system by either selling merits or trading them with friends and/or alt accounts.

[The Cryptovator]

~snip~

Worst idea for this year. It will be famous way to abuse merit system.
It will be better is disable merit option for bounty hunters . Even BM not doing their own job how they will distribute merit fairly? As far as I know most of bounty managers have assistant for count post and update spreadsheet. So how we expect good result from them? They never check an ICO before start work how they will check the post of hunters.

[bekspes]

I've got a better idea - don't allow bounty managers to award any sMerits.

I think the bounty manager has the right to award for sMerit to keep the bounty participants who have very good post quality.

[SpiderDS]

In my opinion, the Merit system in Bitcoin Forum is such a thing that merit will be proved by those who will be a better quality of post quality. There will be a lot of maintenance. There is some number of Bounty managers who do not do any work, they will be doing this work.

[Steamtyme]

In my opinion, the Merit system in Bitcoin Forum is such a thing that merit will be proved by those who will be a better quality of post quality. There will be a lot of maintenance. There is some number of Bounty managers who do not do any work, they will be doing this work.

All that is missing here is great project or an application to join a campaign.

My favorite is the lapse from logical thinking where they would do the work because they aren't doing their other work.

Edit: Maybe OP wants to lock their topic now

[kawetsriyanto]

I've got a better idea - ban bounties on the forum!

It is not a wise decision. We have a problem with the bounty managers, not with the bounties. I think the best option is to limit the merit activities on bounty managers.

[rab2005]

I've got a better idea - don't allow bounty managers to award any sMerits.

Word.  I don't know any of the altcoin bounty managers, but my gut feeling is that they shouldn't be trusted as merit sources--I base that on the fact that I've seen a lot of them who couldn't care less about the post quality of some of the members they select for their signature campaigns. 

I don't know how Theymos chose the 36 new merit sources, but hopefully those individuals are ones he trusts not to abuse the system by either selling merits or trading them with friends and/or alt accounts.

The other question
Are all new and old sources having the same rules for granting merit?

As for campaign managers
It is not right to make them sources because they are campaign managers.