|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stack23
Member
 Offline
Activity: 69
Merit: 10
|
 |
October 26, 2019, 05:43:41 PM |
|
GreatOrchid you are a piece of crap till day 1
I do not know how this single post can be merit 20 which will make him direct member. |
|
|
|
|
LoyceV (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3304
Merit: 16623
Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021
|
|
October 26, 2019, 05:55:06 PM |
|
I do not know how this single post can be merit 20 which will make him direct member. You'll have to ask MicroGuy about that. It's not the only case, but it's also not something you should worry too much about. He won't reach a high rank with posts like that, and he doesn't look like a spammer anyway. |
|
|
|
DiamondCardz
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1134
Merit: 1112
|
|
October 26, 2019, 06:02:10 PM |
|
Honestly, this list to me just backs up my belief that the merit requirements are too high right now. We're going to have a pretty bad lack of people ranking up to Sr. Member/Hero Member/Legendary over the next few years if the requirements aren't decreased. That's got a few problems with it but the main one in my opinion is that it will make account selling even more lucrative for accounts that had high ranks prior to the merit requirement being introduced.
That's 16 low-ranked members earning 20 or more merit per month, most being around the 20 mark. If they consistently keep getting 20 a month, that's still 50 months to hit Legendary - so even for that small number of people who are doing well for themselves, it's still a very considerable amount of time.
Right now Full/Sr/Hero/Legendary is 100/250/500/1000, and as I've stated before I think it should be 50/200/400/750 personally, or something around that.
|
BA Computer Science, University of Oxford
Dissertation was about threat modelling on distributed ledgers.
|
|
|
|
FIFA worldcup
|
|
October 26, 2019, 06:12:24 PM
Last edit: October 26, 2019, 06:28:38 PM by FIFA worldcup |
|
Honestly, this list to me just backs up my belief that the merit requirements are too high right now. We're going to have a pretty bad lack of people ranking up to Sr. Member/Hero Member/Legendary over the next few years if the requirements aren't decreased. That's got a few problems with it but the main one in my opinion is that it will make account selling even more lucrative for accounts that had high ranks prior to the merit requirement being introduced.
That's 16 low-ranked members earning 20 or more merit per month, most being around the 20 mark. If they consistently keep getting 20 a month, that's still 50 months to hit Legendary - so even for that small number of people who are doing well for themselves, it's still a very considerable amount of time.
Right now Full/Sr/Hero/Legendary is 100/250/500/1000, and as I've stated before I think it should be 50/200/400/750 personally, or something around that.
No, the reality is different. These numbers are not difficult to achieve but the problem is that everyone becomes miser when it comes to give merits. You see a good posts and give 1 merit to it. (Most of them give just 1 or 2 merits). They could easily give more merits to good posts. As an example above by a newbie who received 20 merits for a single post, its only the merit abusers who give merit generously to their alts for bad posts. All this is bitter truth but who cares. |
|
|
|
|
LoyceV (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3304
Merit: 16623
Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021
|
Honestly, this list to me just backs up my belief that the merit requirements are too high right now. We're going to have a pretty bad lack of people ranking up to Sr. Member/Hero Member/Legendary over the next few years if the requirements aren't decreased. That's got a few problems with it but the main one in my opinion is that it will make account selling even more lucrative for accounts that had high ranks prior to the merit requirement being introduced. That's the point of the Merit system: it was far too easy to farm accounts, and that stopped now. Of course scarcity leads to higher prices, but the number of accounts available to be sold keeps dropping. See A wave of bans: 400 yesterday, 300 the day before. What changed? for example: I'm pretty sure we're still destroying more Merit in bans than we're distributing to users. That's 16 low-ranked members earning 20 or more merit per month, most being around the 20 mark. If they consistently keep getting 20 a month, that's still 50 months to hit Legendary - so even for that small number of people who are doing well for themselves, it's still a very considerable amount of time. Merit was introduced about 21 months ago. Let's say that's 630 days. 101 users received more than 630 Merit in this time, and 235 users reached half that amount. I assume not all of those users have been around every day, but to keep up with Activity, 1 Merit per day is enough. I'm having a bigger problem finding enough good posts, if you find unmerited good posts, please report them in [self-moderated] Report unmerited good posts to Merit Source. Or apply to become a Merit source. Right now Full/Sr/Hero/Legendary is 100/250/500/1000, and as I've stated before I think it should be 50/200/400/750 personally, or something around that. [/quote] This has been suggested and discussed before. I don't think it's going to happen, and I also don't think lowering it by ~25% is going to matter. If you can reach 750 Merit, you can reach 1000 too. Most users can't reach the 750 either.
I know you've been away from the forum for a while so you've probably missed most of the Merit discussions, but there are more appropriate topics to discuss the details of the Merit system.
I'll use my latest list to see if I can Merit some of them. That's the purpose of this topic: find the rare good users and Merit their posts 
No, the reality is different. These numbers are not difficult to achieve but the problem is that everyone becomes miser when it comes to give merits. You see a good posts and give 1 merit to it. (Most of them give just 1 or 2 merits). They could easily give more merits to good posts. I usually give only 1 Merit at a time, but it's not true that I could "easily" give more Merit per post. I've sent 6648 Merit in 4612 transactions, and currently have more than 500 sMerit left. I could at most have given less than 10% more per post with my total supply. As an example above by a newbie who received 20 merits for a single post, its only the merit abusers who give merit generously to their alts for bad posts. All this is bitter truth but who cares. Merit abusers only send sMerit to a few users. I've merited 1315 different users. That explains the difference. |
|
|
|
|
FIFA worldcup
|
|
October 26, 2019, 07:10:43 PM |
|
That's the point of the Merit system: it was far too easy to farm accounts, and that stopped now.
So it means the creation of new accounts would be very low now. If you have that data, it will be interesting to know how many new accounts are being made daily. I usually give only 1 Merit at a time, but it's not true that I could "easily" give more Merit per post. I've sent 6648 Merit in 4612 transactions, and currently have more than 500 sMerit left. I could at most have given less than 10% more per post with my total supply.
Then either the merit sources or the supply for the merit sources should increase. Merit abusers only send sMerit to a few users. I've merited 1315 different users. That explains the difference.
You do the right thing but the good posters have the right or wish to rank up quickly too. My example may not be relevant but consider you give 100 poor people a single bread for breakfast and they still remain hungry or feed 10 people the full breakfast. |
|
|
|
|
Welsh
Staff
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3262
Merit: 4110
|
|
October 26, 2019, 07:12:42 PM |
|
Right now Full/Sr/Hero/Legendary is 100/250/500/1000, and as I've stated before I think it should be 50/200/400/750 personally, or something around that.
Alternatively, users can start merited in higher amounts to high quality posts instead of 1/2/5's. I think the merit system is working fine, and its suppose to take years to get to the highest rank. In my opinion its not an issue of too high requirements, but instead users are trying to spread out their merit points by only meriting with 1/2's, but a high amount of users, but it would probably be better if we rewarded very high quality posts with higher amounts of merit. I hate to say it, but its the argument over quality over quantity. Merit sources obviously have much more leeway when meriting because they can spread while still giving a decent amount of merit per post. |
|
|
|
|
LoyceV (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3304
Merit: 16623
Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021
|
|
October 26, 2019, 07:21:47 PM |
|
So it means the creation of new accounts would be very low now. If you have that data, it will be interesting to know how many new accounts are being made daily. Less than 1000 accounts per day, but most of them never post and are probably waiting for Evil Fees to be lifted. But barely any of those make meaningful posts, many are just created to spam. the good posters have the right or wish to rank up quickly too. Agreed! Find me those good users and I'll merit them it would probably be better if we rewarded very high quality posts with higher amounts of merit. I do sometimes, depending on my source amount and the quality of the post I give more Merit per post once in a while. But there's another thing: if a post is really good, it receives merit from many different people too. See: Top-merited recent replies and Top-merited recent topics for many examples. By sending low amounts to many people, other opinions matter too. |
|
|
|
DiamondCardz
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1134
Merit: 1112
|
|
October 26, 2019, 07:21:56 PM |
|
Right now Full/Sr/Hero/Legendary is 100/250/500/1000, and as I've stated before I think it should be 50/200/400/750 personally, or something around that.
Alternatively, users can start merited in higher amounts to high quality posts instead of 1/2/5's. I think the merit system is working fine, and its suppose to take years to get to the highest rank. In my opinion its not an issue of too high requirements, but instead users are trying to spread out their merit points by only meriting with 1/2's, but a high amount of users, but it would probably be better if we rewarded very high quality posts with higher amounts of merit. I hate to say it, but its the argument over quality over quantity. Merit sources obviously have much more leeway when meriting because they can spread while still giving a decent amount of merit per post. (sorry to LoyceV, I know you said there are better places to discuss this - this will be my last post on this thread on this topic) I agree, but that's wholly down to the merit sources. I predominantly give out 1s and 2s because I don't have enough sMerit to give out more than that - I've got 19 right now, which is about what I had when I got back from my hiatus Maybe eventually (months down the road) I'll consider applying to be a merit source in Project Dev as there are posts there that I wish had more merit. (yes I will put em in the merit source thread soon) Really I think that a gentle sMerit decay would be a good idea to spread merit out more evenly. People who aren't merit sources are pretty limited in their sMerit and so there's a mental block to giving it out, as it might be a while until you can 'stock' your reserves back up. |
BA Computer Science, University of Oxford
Dissertation was about threat modelling on distributed ledgers.
|
|
|
The Sceptical Chymist
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3332
Merit: 6832
Cashback 15%
|
|
October 26, 2019, 07:31:49 PM |
|
Right now Full/Sr/Hero/Legendary is 100/250/500/1000, and as I've stated before I think it should be 50/200/400/750 personally, or something around that.
You know, I don't really disagree with you about that. It's turning out to be way harder for members to rank up, and maybe harder than it was supposed to be. When the merit system was implemented there was no way to tell how many members would be able to get to the higher ranks from scratch, and after almost two years we've pretty much found out. There have been some good members with good posts who didn't start at Newbie rank since Jan. 2018 still stuck at ranks under Hero or Legendary. TheUltraElite comes to mind. Part of the reason may be their number of posts--more posts increase the chance of getting merits, but part of it is just the randomness of earning merits. Lowering the bar might not be a horrible idea. I've been trying to target the lower ranks with my sMerits this month, but it's still as hard as ever to find good posts being made by them. I've been through a lot of threads in Economics, and I swear all the excellent posts are made by Hero/Legendary members, and if someone under that rank posts, it's usually a poorly-written one liner. |
.
.HUGE. | | | | | | █▀▀▀▀
█
█
█
█
█
█
█
█
█
█
█
█▄▄▄▄ | ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
.
CASINO & SPORTSBOOK
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ | ▀▀▀▀█
█
█
█
█
█
█
█
█
█
█
█
▄▄▄▄█ | | |
|
|
|
o_e_l_e_o
In memoriam
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2268
Merit: 18510
|
|
October 26, 2019, 08:09:44 PM |
|
They could easily give more merits to good posts. I wish I could. I am chronically low on both source and personal sMerits - I'm sitting on 0 and 4 at the moment, respectively. I'm afraid I'd much rather give 5 different people 1 merit than I would give 5 merit to a single user, even if that post is deserving of 5 merit. I am not the only one in this situation. The number of merit sources with excess sMerit are the minority. Then either the merit sources or the supply for the merit sources should increase. There are plenty of threads in Meta of new applications for merit sources as well as merit sources asking for a larger supply. The only person who can act on these is theymos - the fact that he hasn't suggests he's happy with how things stand at the moment. Really I think that a gentle sMerit decay would be a good idea to spread merit out more evenly. People who aren't merit sources are pretty limited in their sMerit and so there's a mental block to giving it out, as it might be a while until you can 'stock' your reserves back up. I'm not sure that would make a big difference in the long run. The users who would spend their sMerit to avoid it decaying would likely spend their sMerit anyway, perhaps just a little later once they have a larger supply saved up, as you say. The users who aren't going to spend their sMerit to avoid it decaying (who I suspect would be the vast majority) would simply lose their merit and then not have any when they wanted to use some. The net effect may be to increase merit being sent in the short term, but decrease it in the long term. |
|
|
|
|
|
FIFA worldcup
|
|
October 27, 2019, 02:52:54 AM |
|
the good posters have the right or wish to rank up quickly too. Agreed! Find me those good users and I'll merit them I see it entirely differently. Good users are always here and there and merit sources should help them because purpose is to rank up the good users and clear up the spammers. I will give you an example. If you merit a Member rank user and his current merits are 60-70 and he'e been around for a year in same rank, give him bulk 30 and make him full member. In this way he will not have to wait for another 5 months - 6 months to move up. Similarly you merit a Full member who has 200 Merits already, give him bulk 50 and make him Sr. Member if he's been around sometime and regular and make good posts. Ofcourse for this, you have to spend some time in going to the previous history, genuine merit history of the users and only merit sources can do this as they have larger portion amount of smerits. |
|
|
|
|
logfiles
Copper Member
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1974
Merit: 1653
Top Crypto Casino
|
|
October 27, 2019, 06:49:59 AM |
|
Alternatively, users can start merited in higher amounts to high quality posts instead of 1/2/5's. I think the merit system is working fine, and its suppose to take years to get to the highest rank. In my opinion its not an issue of too high requirements, but instead users are trying to spread out their merit points by only meriting with 1/2's, but a high amount of users, but it would probably be better if we rewarded very high quality posts with higher amounts of merit.
I hate to say it, but its the argument over quality over quantity. Merit sources obviously have much more leeway when meriting because they can spread while still giving a decent amount of merit per post.
The problem is that sMerits are so scarce for a normal user like me (someone who doesn't post so much technical or statistical data or engage in lots of politics around the forum which seem to attract lots of merit), on average i get 5-4 Merits per week, that's roughly just 2 sMerits to give out, it implies a person like me cannot afford to give out 5 or 10 sMerits in a short run... so you find yourself just send one 1 merit per post however good it is. Maybe something should be done to increase more Merits in circulation. Perhaps increase source allocations or increase more merit sources. |
|
|
|
Coyster
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2016
Merit: 1246
Cashback 15%
|
|
October 27, 2019, 08:03:36 AM
Last edit: October 27, 2019, 09:28:36 AM by Coyster |
|
I will give you an example. If you merit a Member rank user and his current merits are 60-70 and he'e been around for a year in same rank, give him bulk 30 and make him full member. In this way he will not have to wait for another 5 months - 6 months to move up.
Similarly you merit a Full member who has 200 Merits already, give him bulk 50 and make him Sr. Member if he's been around sometime and regular and make good posts.
There are a few constraints to this idea, the post must be hell good for it to earn that much merit that would rank up the user, and if you're to go through the users history to start meriting previously made post, then you must be giving something within the range of 5 merits per post. For someone who's not a merit source, I doubt they'll have that much merit to spend, and for the merit sources it'll mean spending their entire months allocation(or almost)on one users which would hinder them from giving out merits and also ranking up other users all through out the month. That would still lead to more complaints by others, the thing is honestly ranking up shouldn't be a hasty process, just like moving from one grade to another, the system may not be the quickest for now, but at least it's working, once you're a good poster you must rank up, no matter how long it takes. |
.
.HUGE. | | | | | | █▀▀▀▀
█
█
█
█
█
█
█
█
█
█
█
█▄▄▄▄ | ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
.
CASINO & SPORTSBOOK
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ | ▀▀▀▀█
█
█
█
█
█
█
█
█
█
█
█
▄▄▄▄█ | | |
|
|
|
Jet Cash
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2716
Merit: 2456
https://JetCash.com
|
|
October 27, 2019, 08:16:08 AM |
|
If we have to increase merit awards above 1 or 2, then in my opinion the forum has a problem. There should be enough reasonable posts to soak up all of the merits available. The problem may be a paucity of interesting threads and posts to encourage senior members to spend more time in the forum. The senior members tend to be the ones with sMerit to award, and if we start to allow them to drift away, then the forum will be the poorer for it. I think that stats on the changes in activity and merit receipts for senior and long standing members of the forum would be an important metric to gauge the health and future prospects for the forum.
|
Offgrid campers allow you to enjoy life and preserve your health and wealth. Save old Cars - my project to save old cars from scrapage schemes, and to reduce the sale of new cars. My new Bitcoin transfer address is - bc1q9gtz8e40en6glgxwk4eujuau2fk5wxrprs6fys |
|
|
Rikafip
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1750
Merit: 5989
|
|
October 27, 2019, 08:50:13 AM |
|
For someone who's not a merit source, I doubt they'll have that much merit to spend, and for the merit sources it'll mean spending their entire months allocation(or almost)on one users which would hinder them from giving out merits and also ranking up other users all through out the month.
@FIFA worldcup will correct me if I misunderstood his post, but i think that his suggestion was mostly aimed at those who are merit source , have bulk of unspent merit, and have issues with finding good posts. So idea is when you are merit source with bunch of merits unspent and you merit someone that doesn't need too many merits to rank up, chances are that in his recent post history there are some quality posts that could be merited. And then you look through his post history and merit quality posts, therefore making that user to rank up. That kind of approach demand some extra effort though, so I am not sure that everyone has time for that. I noticed that @suchmoon usually gives merit in bulk, usually at least 4 merits ( i must admit it feels good to get merits in bulk  ) but i guess each merit source has different approach, and different amount of monthly merits to give. |
|
|
|
LoyceV (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3304
Merit: 16623
Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021
|
|
October 27, 2019, 09:04:39 AM |
|
I will give you an example. If you merit a Member rank user and his current merits are 60-70 and he'e been around for a year in same rank, give him bulk 30 and make him full member. In this way he will not have to wait for another 5 months - 6 months to move up. I was going to ask for some examples of those Members, but I made a list myself. Merit is based on last Friday's data dump. Copper Members are ignored (scraping their real rank is more work). All Members with 60-70 Merit (that means they earned 50-70 Merit, some of them might have had 10 Merit airdropped): 1. Member elliottflz65 ( Trust: neutral) ( 54 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 2. Member LordStapy ( Trust: neutral) ( 61 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 3. Member Craige288 ( Trust: neutral) ( 61 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 4. Member gruve_p ( Trust: neutral) ( 51 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 5. Member Pffrt ( Trust: neutral) ( 58 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 6. Member dobbscoin ( Trust: neutral) ( 52 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 7. Member arcmetal ( Trust: neutral) ( 61 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 8. Member Viktor SPB ( Trust: neutral) ( 61 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 9. Member Robin,Hood ( Trust: +0 / =0 / -1) ( 52 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 10. Member etc.etc. ( Trust: neutral) ( 53 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 11. Member michnkeks ( Trust: neutral) ( 63 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 12. Member giammangiato ( Trust: neutral) ( 55 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 13. Member acarli ( Trust: neutral) ( 65 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 14. Member cho99 ( Trust: neutral) ( 51 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 15. Member Decker ( Trust: neutral) ( 61 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 16. Member StevenMosher ( Trust: neutral) ( 69 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 17. Member pacman7331 ( Trust: neutral) ( 66 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 18. Member heratys111 ( Trust: neutral) ( 61 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 19. Member CoinClarity ( Trust: neutral) ( 55 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 20. Member android17 ( Trust: neutral) ( 66 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 21. Member georgemamat Banned! ( Trust: neutral) ( 65 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 22. Member rDieminger ( Trust: neutral) ( 53 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 23. Member cod3gen ( Trust: neutral) ( 67 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 24. Member Kuala Lumpur Banned! ( Trust: neutral) ( 69 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 25. Member dragonvslinux ( Trust: +0 / =0 / -2) ( 65 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 26. Member cryptoworld2017 Banned! ( Trust: neutral) ( 56 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 27. Member Demirung Banned! ( Trust: neutral) ( 60 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 28. Member vejdemann Banned! ( Trust: neutral) ( 65 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 29. Member polluks ( Trust: neutral) ( 67 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 30. Member thenextking ( Trust: neutral) ( 62 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 31. Member Klara_karlovna ( Trust: neutral) ( 58 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 32. Member Wheelige ( Trust: neutral) ( 58 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 33. Member Raskolhnikov1 ( Trust: neutral) ( 55 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 34. Member akhjob ( Trust: neutral) ( 68 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 35. Member AlexZHankok ( Trust: neutral) ( 61 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 36. Member atrocityx ( Trust: neutral) ( 64 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 37. Member cryptojaani ( Trust: neutral) ( 61 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 38. Member shitcoinoffering ( Trust: neutral) ( 64 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 39. Member SkyLords ( Trust: neutral) ( 70 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 40. Member noorman0 ( Trust: neutral) ( 54 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 41. Member CryptoPravda ( Trust: neutral) ( 69 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 42. Member Raymond_B ( Trust: neutral) ( 69 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 43. Member spirali ( Trust: neutral) ( 61 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 44. Member _ZeD_ ( Trust: neutral) ( 65 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 45. Member thierry4wd ( Trust: neutral) ( 70 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 46. Member anonymous3x ( Trust: neutral) ( 66 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 47. Member AlecMe ( Trust: neutral) ( 65 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 48. Member Mamaecrypto ( Trust: neutral) ( 70 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 49. Member Pirrlokk ( Trust: +0 / =0 / -2) ( 65 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 50. Member bubbalex ( Trust: +1 / =0 / -0) ( 66 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 51. Member TranslateIntoDutch ( Trust: neutral) ( 69 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 52. Member Olegya199 ( Trust: neutral) ( 64 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 53. Member Awesomus Maximus ( Trust: neutral) ( 66 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 54. Member tusherk800 ( Trust: neutral) ( 70 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 55. Member kreims ( Trust: neutral) ( 65 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 56. Member DoriangrayTW ( Trust: neutral) ( 61 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 57. Member VyachikO ( Trust: neutral) ( 62 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 58. Member Helana ( Trust: neutral) ( 61 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 59. Member womanderful ( Trust: neutral) ( 62 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 60. Member Ljunior ( Trust: neutral) ( 61 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 61. Member TimeBits Banned! ( Trust: neutral) ( 62 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 62. Member Oxstone ( Trust: neutral) ( 68 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 63. Member Laskoo ( Trust: neutral) ( 68 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 64. Member Becky666 ( Trust: neutral) ( 61 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) 65. Member StackGambler ( Trust: +0 / =0 / -2) ( 66 Merit earned ( history)) ( BPIP) The problem is that sMerits are so scarce for a normal user like me (someone who doesn't post so much technical or statistical data or engage in lots of politics around the forum which seem to attract lots of merit), on average i get 5-4 Merits per week Valid point, and you're a decent poster so I've re-merited some of your posts. Your Merit amount is almost keeping up with Activity, and you've only started receiving Merit long after it's introduction, so you'll probably catch up: I noticed that @suchmoon usually gives merit in bulk, usually at least 4 merits ( i must admit it feels good to get merits in bulk ) but i guess each merit source has different approach, and different amount of monthly merits to give. Suchmoon is the Most generous merit sender indeed. Theymos prefers if Merit sources empty their source. If they can do that by small amounts if's okay, but if they do it in large chunks it's okay too: If they complain about amounts, tell them to complain to me. It's best if sources try to exhaust their source allocations, even if it means giving posts higher amounts than is typical. If you have 150 source merit and you only see 3 merit-worthy posts in a month, then I'd rather you over-give each of them 50 merit than let the merit expire. That way there are more people capable of sending merit, and the "merit economy" is less top-down. As long as a Merit source manages to empty his source by sending only 1 at a time, there's no need to send more. Unless theymos increases the source amount. At the start of this year my source was doubled, and since then I've been giving larger amounts once my source amount goes up. |
|
|
|
|
