Top 200 Merit Receivers without Merit from the Top 200 Merit Receivers

[cryptohunter]

Someone has been complaining for a long time all over Meta about the top 200 Merit Receivers being a circle jerking club, asking for statistics of those without Merit from "their 200 friends" on the forum. I got tired of still getting dragged into this drama even after putting cryptohunter on ignore, so I did an analysis.
Feel free to (ab)use this for whatever creative statistics you can come up with. For example: I like it, as I'm above DdrmDdrm again, while in reality he kicked me down one spot. Isn't that great?
Or just apply some common sense, and you'll see it's completely normal to have less Merit, if you exclude the Top Merit Receivers, most of which are Top Merit Senders too. Could it even be possible Merit is mostly sent to good posts?

This goes beyond feeding the troll, this is like climbing into a lion's den at the zoo and trying to pet him. You know you're gonna get mutilated no matter what, right?

If anyone could get the top 200 - remove the top 200 -250- 300 and meta board  then put it up in the format above that would be great. Then just keep that updated and no need to comment on it again in future people can look at it a draw their own conclusions.

So you want to keep removing merits until you get the result that you want?

Let me rephrase that. You want someone else to keep removing the merits and otherwise tweaking the numbers until you get the result that you want.

After my last post I'm not sure why you are suggesting I am trying to maul anyone.

Are you saying that I did not previously and actually requested (r1s2g3 do this on PM even before even posting it on the forum) removing the top 300 from the top 200?  I will find the post if you like. This is not as you are suggesting some new request.

The result will be the result.  The numbers will be the numbers. You can not tweak them. I have explained why I have suggested the top 300 previously.

I don't want a result. The stats are the stats. Where as the statements you have previously made...well..... (i won't keep posting them because it is not nice for you )

Anyway, I am sure you don't want to go through all this again today do you. Take a day off from me and relax. You know what happens when you get all stressed out. I take no pleasure in seeing you get angry upset and irrational. I mean already we are all having a semi civil conversation and you appear instantly with "the troll". Try to be more friendly and lighten up. I was once told by a very smart person on this board that the argument itself is far more important than the tone someone uses to present it. That part of what he said has stuck with me.

 Now just have a nice day. I've already said numerous times I have nothing against you and that you are net positive so just chill out. I even said you had a good idea the other day. but you can be too aggressive and irrational at times. I mean disagree for sure but come with a sensible counter argument and just remain calm. I am a very open minded person actually. I would far rather discover an undesirable reality than live in my own  self constructed matrix.



@dmdrdmdr

thanks for explaining that to me.

[1713981695]

1713981695

[1713981695]

1713981695

[1713981695]

1713981695

[1713981695]

1713981695

[1713981695]

1713981695

[1713981695]

1713981695

[suchmoon]

I don't want a result. The stats are the stats.

Given your incessant rants about the "unfairness" of the 0.13% I have a hard time believing that you don't want a specific result. LoyceV did the stats on 0.13% but that's not enough anymore so let's remove more senders and a whole board. That's the kind of stats that can prove anything you want.

Satoshi is offline 8 year, and have  1712 Merit, i am online and have 0

Yep, that's the solution for you. Go offline for 8 years.

[The Cryptovator]

I have doubts again LoyceV is a human, I am sure he is alien or bot  . How efforts need for this kind of work, I can't think. However OP did a great job. Few important data we could find here. LoyceV is the one who could collect any kind of forum data very fast. That's why I have suggested to add him on Moderator. Theymos should consider about it. So he could serve more for clean forum.

[cryptohunter]

I don't want a result. The stats are the stats.

Given your incessant rants about the "unfairness" of the 0.13% I have a hard time believing that you don't want a specific result. LoyceV did the stats on 0.13% but that's not enough anymore so let's remove more senders and a whole board. That's the kind of stats that can prove anything you want.

Please relax - re read the other thread and ones before that or ask r1s2g3 and you will see what you saying is not true. If you want to just remove the top 0.13% that is fine. However to reference correctly my opinions you must abide by the criteria I had specified or it is a misrepresentation of what I was saying. I am not moving the goal posts as you are suggesting. If you want me to find the posts where I said already the top 300 and meta board then I will if you are unable.

See the language again "incessant rants"  I notice a lot of your posts and not just in my direction take this kind of aggressive already dismissive tone. I don't think it is suitable for anyone but especially not someone who I have found to be generally making unreasonable assumptions and unable to provide any grounding for them. These are strawmen like the ones you often accuse me of and sometimes guilty of but I am learning fast. Nobody is suggesting removing the whole boards merits so why say it. Please don't go all irrational on me already.

Now again please relax. If loyce wants to reference my opinions and then provide alternative argument on the data he pulled he should not misrepresent them and rather push the data through the full set of conditions I had been basing my opinion on. Actually they were assumptions and due to something dmdrdmdr pointed out that I had actually not factored in I feel the reductions may be proven not to be as extreme as I had assumed. I may need to revise the average reduction down to around  mid 70s% not in the high 80's. Some more some less of course. A nice comparison chart like r1s2g3 made with original rank and revised rank would be the best way to display it.

I am not afraid to be out by quite some margin (being wrong during a debate is not a big deal if you are willing to change your opinion when required) since as I say only the reality is worth realising.

Now please fairly consider and reread before posting anything else.

@Coolcryptovator

You need to realise pulling data is a great talent and the effort required is commendable and worthy of merit.
However being a moderator requires you to process data and make an optimal and fair decision. These 2 things do not go hand in hand.
I am not at all sure that many here in meta that I have discussed/debated with honestly have that quality.


If we get any new mods especially from the list that I have seen around  I hope that there is lot criteria in place to guide decisions.
The best thing about this board (along with other things) was the fairness of the moderation... and getting more heavy handed or less fair (not properly considering and weighing all information) will be the only thing that will damage what made it great.

Loyce does seem a nice person and honest and even fair (based on his reasoning) but I feel still needs to work on his critical thinking and reasoning process before he will consistently make the optimal and fairest decisions based upon correct analysis of information with regularity.

To be a mod you should be able to produce reasoning to demonstrate most of the opinions you make are optimal.
 
Again this is not aimed at loyce specifically the same can be said of many on the list that I have debated with since finding meta recently.




 

[suchmoon]

I said already the top 300 and meta board

Nobody is suggesting removing the whole boards merits so why say it.

Then don't say it.

[DireWolfM14]

     2. satoshi earned 1462 1126 Merit from outside the Top 200 Merit Receivers
    

Satoshi is offline 8 year, and have  1712 Merit, i am online and have 0

Please elaborate on your contributions to the forum as they compare to those of Satoshi.

[cryptohunter]

I said already the top 300 and meta board

Nobody is suggesting removing the whole boards merits so why say it.

Then don't say it.

I misread your intent. I thought you were saying the entire board (the entire forum).

Anyway why not just pull the data as per my criteria and leave me referenced in the OP
Or remove me and just leave the data as it is.

People can analyse and make their own opinions on it. I see no need for us few individuals to go around and around stating our opinions on it over and over. Let's just pull the top 200 remove the votes of the top 300 and meta board and leave it there. Or just leave it as it is and remove my references from the op.

Then run some scripts to keep it updated. I feel that being a dynamic stats table will encourage either more balanced merit distribution over time or a more correct insight into how merit works and good posters will not come here from alt discussion wondering how some on the board get huge merit and they get none.

There could be dynamic tables for all different boards that could do similar things for people to look at.

[suchmoon]

good posters [..] from alt discussion [...] get none

Remind me who are these good alt posters who got no merits. I must have misplaced your previous posts on this subject.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

good posters [..] from alt discussion [...] get none

Remind me who are these good alt posters who got no merits. I must have misplaced your previous posts on this subject.

If cryptohunter means Altcoin Discussion, oh boy.  People who complain that they're not earning merits by posting in that section have little basis to do so, because basically nobody reads anything there--most of the members are just sig spammers writing complete nonsense.  Even if someone were to write an exceptionally good post in AC, it'll be buried under a mountain of shitposts within minutes. 

Cryptohunter, if you find any posts in Altcoin Discussion or any of the other altcoin sections, you can PM me links to the posts and I'll give them merits if I agree with your assessment.  I would be happy to do this and would encourage you to take me up on that offer.

[suchmoon]

good posters [..] from alt discussion [...] get none

Remind me who are these good alt posters who got no merits. I must have misplaced your previous posts on this subject.

If cryptohunter means Altcoin Discussion, oh boy.  People who complain that they're not earning merits by posting in that section have little basis to do so, because basically nobody reads anything there--most of the members are just sig spammers writing complete nonsense.  Even if someone were to write an exceptionally good post in AC, it'll be buried under a mountain of shitposts within minutes. 

I'm not gonna even mention that Altcoin Discussion is one of the best boards to search for plagiarism because that's another sore subject for cryptohunter.

I wonder if there might be a correlation between the shittiness of posts and the amount of merit granted to such posts. We'll never know.

[cryptohunter]

@PT - seems like a fair assessment of events and fair offer. I will perhaps take you up on that. I don't agree though that making a good post there and getting no merits is essentially their own fault or they have no reason to make comparison to similar posts in say meta. It is only the fault though of the spammers as I have stated several times before. There needs to be a board for people to discuss alt coins on. It was previously a great board with lots of excellent posters.

@suchmoon - what do you mean it is a sore subject for me?

[LoyceMobile]

There needs to be a board for people to discuss alt coins on. It was previously a great board with lots of excellent posters.

How many posts did you report on altcoin boards? That's how you claim back a board from spammers, and that's what happens to spam in Meta. I've had one post removed from this thread for instance.

[cryptohunter]

There needs to be a board for people to discuss alt coins on. It was previously a great board with lots of excellent posters.

How many posts did you report on altcoin boards? That's how you claim back a board from spammers, and that's what happens to spam in Meta. I've had one post removed from this thread for instance.

Well I have reported some actually that I find when I am naturally browsing. I mean most were years ago when it was rare to see a real spam or bot. I have not really been using the alt discussion boards much but once it was the only place I posted. I had never been on the bitcoin board much nor really any other board. I was very much into the altcoin board which has sadly been hammered the most of all the boards from this latest price rally. I mean you could have 100 mods there and really it would be hard to fix it up because most posts may be low quality yet give no specific reason they can be deleted. So they just build up until like we know the good posters are drown out and stop posting ( i hope temp)

So what i am saying is even if you moved everyone that broke the rules or clearly spammed. Then you would not dent the ton of fake discussions or even the real discussions with no real value.

I have suggested before a system in meta before that would replace the negative experience of searching for negative actions and reporting them with a system where you would search for positive things and reward them. I feel you would have a better chance of preventing spam but even more importantly the low quality dilution stuff reaching the main boards with that system than removing it once it is there.

Sadly nobody liked the idea or else there were flaws in it that I did not realise.

I mean if you reported every low quality post in alt discussion it would be quite a nightmare because some are not exactly low quality enough to be spam but on the other hand many parrot the same message over and over in a slightly different way. I mean deleting them is kind of cruel because to some they may have made some effort to express themselves and to get it deleted could be genuinely like a smack in the face.

Where as if they were not singled out for deletion but merely not merited like 99% of other posts that surround them that would be easier for the mods and reporters (now called rewarders) and less disheartening for the poster that as yet is not advanced enough to make a contribution that the rewarders consider worthy of merit.

A form of decentralised noob jail renamed as junior discussion boards to me are the perfect answer with everyone less than 5? 10 or 15? merits held back from the senior discussion boards (everyone else with greater than 5 10 or 15_.

[suchmoon]

a system where you would search for positive things and reward them. I feel you would have a better chance of preventing spam reaching the main boards with that system than removing it once it is there.

The system is called merit and it works except for a few knuckleheads who think it's for "fun and friends".

Yet shitposts still need to be removed. Those are not mutually exclusive things.

I mean if you reported every low quality post in alt discussion it would be quite a nightmare because some are not exactly low quality enough to be spam but on the other hand many parrot the same message over and over in a slightly different way. I mean deleting them is kind of cruel because to some they may have made some effort to express themselves and to get it deleted could be genuinely like a smack in the face.

No, it's not cruel. Parroting is not a universal human right. If you're still on a mission to improve merit awards in Alts this is the course of action you should take. Clean that shit up. Stop being butthurt about merits in Meta. Those merits are not the reason why shitcoiners don't get merited.

[o_e_l_e_o]

most of the members are just sig spammers writing complete nonsense.  Even if someone were to write an exceptionally good post in AC, it'll be buried under a mountain of shitposts within minutes. 

So they just build up until like we know the good posters are drown out and stop posting ( i hope temp)

This is the truth, unfortunately, and is the reason I and many others no longer bother venturing in to the altcoin boards. It is nigh on impossible to have anything approaching a real discussion as your posts are quickly drowned out by barely English one liners.

Here is one of my last posts in any of the altcoin boards: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5060609. Now, I am by no means saying this is an exceptional post or begging for merit, I'm simply pointing out that this was a serious topic that deserved some level of discussion. It got 7 replies that weren't me and a total of 120 views. Compare that to completely vapid and meaningless topics like Crypto going strong! and Buy altcoins or not? with thousands of replies. The users who are still using the altcoin boards by and large don't even want to have a serious discussion. All they want is to churn out maximum one liners in the minimum amount of time so they get paid for their bounty campaigns whilst putting in the minimum amount of effort.

I don't think any change in reporting or meriting behavior is going to change that. Until we address the root of the problem - bounty campaigns paying spammers for shitposting - those boards will remain cesspools, and any good posts will go buried and unmerited.

[cryptohunter]

a system where you would search for positive things and reward them. I feel you would have a better chance of preventing spam reaching the main boards with that system than removing it once it is there.

The system is called merit and it works except for a few knuckleheads who think it's for "fun and friends".

Yet shitposts still need to be removed. Those are not mutually exclusive things.

I mean if you reported every low quality post in alt discussion it would be quite a nightmare because some are not exactly low quality enough to be spam but on the other hand many parrot the same message over and over in a slightly different way. I mean deleting them is kind of cruel because to some they may have made some effort to express themselves and to get it deleted could be genuinely like a smack in the face.

No, it's not cruel. Parroting is not a universal human right. If you're still on a mission to improve merit awards in Alts this is the course of action you should take. Clean that shit up. Stop being butthurt about merits in Meta. Those merits are not the reason why shitcoiners don't get merited.

I sense agitation and stress rising. Take those meds and relax before continuing to contribute to this sensible discussion. I don't want you to start blurting out any more ludicrous statements as you do tend to at this time of day. Perhaps have a lay down. I see several unsubstantiated statements and more aggressive language starting to leak out. You are better than that suchmoon.

Now

1./ saying it works is not the same as demonstrating it does work optimally or even near optimally.

I have said myself the merit system works in some ways. That does not mean we can not improve and leverage merit to be a far more useful tool in several ways and more balanced system.

I think those that are unwilling or strongly against analysing a current system and how it operates with a view to improve it are those that generally fear optimisation  could lead to it being less beneficial for themselves.

@o_e_l_e_o

I agree with you and many good posters  have stopped posting there for exactly that reason.

A ban of sigs in alt discussion is a great idea and would deal with a lot of them. However my suspicion is that icos have teams of users creating fake conversations about their projects and they could still exist without sigs cos they are on the payroll behind the scenes. I think they would ramp this up if the swarms of sig spammers were eliminated. However they are hard to ban or delete because although most of their posts are lowish quality certainly not many are good enough to get merit they can stay above certain spam levels.

Honestly though to me your post looks worthy of merit it displays technical knowledge, the effort to examine the code and the effort to warn others of this implication for their investments. Hence potentially saving those getting burned by another scam leaving crypto and bad mouthing it to others. I mean honestly these are the posts that require merit no question. I am running out and I don't know when more arrives to top it up else I would have given you more. I can only hope the merit sources here with lots can give some to that post.

I think alt discussion needs the most help and immediately because some great alt board only posters may still be checking now and again if we leave it to long they may not come back. I think it would be great to ban sigs on that forum until we could set up junior boards and dump everyone on there under 15 merit ... let them earn their way back to the senior boards and arm mods with demerit powers to send them straight back for junk posts that are not worthy of bans but will make them think twice before being cast back into the swamp.

[suchmoon]

1./ saying it works is not the same as demonstrating it does work optimally or even near optimally.

I have said myself the merit system works in some ways. That does not mean we can not improve and leverage merit to be a far more useful tool in several ways and more balanced system.

One improvement could be for you to stop hoarding those unicorns.

I can think of a few other improvements too, like actually using the tools already available while we wait for theymos to implement changes, which could take years. I'm truly amazed at your ability to find so many things that are wrong while excusing yourself from any actual effort. How about some balance here too.

[cryptohunter]

1./ saying it works is not the same as demonstrating it does work optimally or even near optimally.

I have said myself the merit system works in some ways. That does not mean we can not improve and leverage merit to be a far more useful tool in several ways and more balanced system.

One improvement could be for you to stop hoarding those unicorns.

I can think of a few other improvements too, like actually using the tools already available while we wait for theymos to implement changes, which could take years. I'm truly amazed at your ability to find so many things that are wrong while excusing yourself from any actual effort. How about some balance here too.

Just try to be more positive.

Theymos has actually said there is no harm in discussing new techniques and ideas to implement. I mean this is meta right?. I have no idea why you are so negative about things. Saying a car from the 1990's can be improved upon and even suggesting sensible methods of improvement and possible advantages is not negative or simply finding problems as you are trying to suggest.  

You have proven previously with statements that you refuse to accept are ludicrous  that you are not a person whom I would really care to to try to reach a sensible and well reasoned solution that was anywhere near optimal. Not in the state you are currently operating. You need be more open minded. Contain yourself to making accusations and statements you have thoroughly thought through and can answer questions on rather than ignore or pretend you did not say and also not get aggressive when you are tired out.

I would rather ask you now to tell me some valid reason to not discuss the ideas I have just proposed. I mean list now some possible flaws/disadvantages compared to the system we have now. I am sure there are probably some good ones else Theymos will have implemented this by now. I would expect he is probably quite well versed in game theory and things that can seem a great idea to a someone who is not may have actually suggested something with gaping holes and leave the board open for greater exploitation than it is open to now.

I sometimes think it is better to spend time discussing and perhaps contributing to make larger changes that will once implemented could save a lot of effort that is being spent now. That we are not approaching improving things for the board in the same way does not make either one less valid.

I mean I notice you said in the 2.5 Million users thread that you hope it took another 25 years for the next 2.5M to join. Now I understood what you meant by that but I think if we put systems in place to filter the net negatives out or hold them in sub boards away from contaminating the net positives then we can deal with a far greater number of new users without needing to expend so much effort (which i admit you are putting in). We just need to make sure the huge influx of new financially motivated posters who don't care about anything except gaining money are held contained with only those of their own kind where they can do little to no damage.

[suchmoon]

Just try to be more positive.

I'm positive that you're all talk no walk.

I would rather ask you now to tell me some valid reason to not discuss the ideas I have just proposed. I mean list now some possible flaws/disadvantages compared to the system we have now. I am sure there are probably some good ones else Theymos will have implemented this by now. I would expect he is probably quite well versed in game theory and things that can seem a great idea to a someone who is not may have actually suggested something with gaping holes and leave the board open for greater exploitation than it is open to now.

Did you even read the thread I linked to? There is a huge list of ideas started by hilarious and commented on by theymos. Some have been implemented (1 merit requirement for juniors), some are in the process of refinement (alt ANN sorting). If you really want to help the forum you should start learning how it works and what has already been suggested, accepted, or rejected. You'd learn for example that theymos is dead set against newbie jail like you're suggesting. But if you find a way to reign in bounty campaigns while keeping everything extremely libertarian - you'll be the senior legendary hero of the forum.

Changes here are very slow and you're not helping at all by throwing around random "solutions" to problems that you can't even prove exist, while refusing to use existing possibly imperfect tools.

[thongexiphstaff]

Results by screening from the The list without Merit sent by the Top 200 Merit Receivers, what I got on guys who have been inactive for too long (months) or last post maded long time ago; or already been nuked.

1) nullius, ranked 16th; last active day on April 24, 2018, 11:02:30 PM [one of the most genius guys who fastly earned merits in early weeks after the first day of merit system].
2) pitipawn, ranked 42th; last active day on March 11, 2018, 03:28:11 AM
3) DannyHamilton, ranked 59th; last active day on September 24, 2018, 01:39:55 PM
4) RichDaniel, ranked 99th; last active day on August 17, 2018, 05:16:08 PM
5) zentdex, ranked 112th; last active day on December 12, 2018, 01:36:46 PM; last post published on July 12, 2018, 05:35:59 AM.
6) Ajpa94, ranked 127th, nuked; last active day on June 23, 2018, 01:34:00 AM.
7) Hal, ranked 138th; last active day on March 29, 2017, 06:22:58 PM [R.I.P].
8> TERA2, ranked 163th; last active day on July 18, 2018, 04:06:38 PM.

In a nutshell, amongst the top 200 Merit Receivers, there are 8 cases (4%) that probably inactive accounts.
One case just woke up recent days (zentdex).
One case has been nuked in June (Ajpa94).

I don't know merit abusers accused by nuking as official rule of the forum or not. I searched and found that merit abusers will only be tagged red, not banned.

Anyone known it, please help me.