I want a way to demerit posts.

[gmaxwell]

There are a fair number of posts on BCT where the poster is confused to the point of being infuriating or even being maliciously dishonest, trying to manipulate markets or shill altcoins, or whatever. 

The threads fill with other confused people while sensible people just shy away. For example: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5223659.0

What we really need is a button that stabs someone in their motherfucking face over the internet.

But failing that, a "this is awful wtf"  button that e.g. can only be pressed by users who have recieved over (say) 1000 merit and which only shows something on the post when it's been pressed at least three times, would at least be a start.

[1714773406]

1714773406

[1714773406]

1714773406

[1714773406]

1714773406

[1714773406]

1714773406

[1714773406]

1714773406

[hd49728]

LoyceV's deMerit source application. I kind of agree with you about the minor punishment on bad posters or merit abusers but theymos does not care too much about merit abuses at small levels. He stepped in and demerited sometimes. In more than 2 years, there are some demerited posts on the forum but I don't think theymos will make a demerit button or demerit sources.

[bullrun2024bro]

What we really need is a button that stabs someone in their motherfucking face over the internet.

But failing that, a "this is awful wtf"  button that e.g. can only be pressed by users who have recieved over (say) 1000 merit and which only shows something on the post when it's been pressed at least three times, would at least be a start.

Sounds like a good idea to me, but we would have to make sure that the new "button" would not be misused by several users to troll or to slur the creator of a thread. There is so much drama/war going on in the forum, we shouldn't implement a feature which would make it even worse. If the new "button" would become a way to dislike certain opinions or users, the feature would clearly harm more than it would help to prevent FUD or scams.

That's why some restrictions would definitely be needed, e.g.:

- 1000 earned Merits
- 1000 activity
- positive trust score (or only DT1 members?)
- the "button" has to be pressed 5 times
- maybe a "counter-button", if the "wtf-button" was pressed falsely

Nevertheless it can be said that the feature could certainly be useful if implemented correctly.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

What we really need is a button that stabs someone in their motherfucking face over the internet.

Big LOL, as I've had that same feeling about more posts than I can count over the years.  Usually if someone writes something that is so patently idiotic that it convinces me I will never want to waste another nanosecond reading another serving of tripe by the same author, I hit the ignore button so fast my fingers produce little sonic booms.

But this idea has been brought up before and has been either ignored or rejected by Theymos.  In fact, I seem to recall someone calling for a demerit function shortly after the introduction of the merit system.  So as much as I sympathize with your frustration and support your suggestion, I'd keep my expectations low if I were you.

[pugman]

I know theymos had mentioned that making a demerit system would be fairly easier ^[1], but I definitely don't think it would be a good idea to do so. People will use it just like the negative trust option, i.e. for retaliation.

You see, people are very careful towards meriting people, same as for giving positive trust. But when it comes to giving out negative trust, half the people if I am being decent enough, just give negative ratings just because they can. I am not pointing names, but we all know the trust system has been used for everything except for what it is implied for. It would only be a matter of time where people will start getting deranked left and right, if the demerit system becomes a thing.

^[1]

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.

[mk4]

I have mixed feelings for this. For this to work fine, there should be tight restrictions to hopefully prevent people from abusing this feature. There are times where people get into a heated argument, and we wouldn't want people to use the demerit feature on those instances.

P.S. Jeebus I could already imagine the threads.

*user A demerits user B*

*user B immediately creates topic* Re: "HiGh RaNk MeMbErS dOn'T wAnT lOw RaNkS tO eArN mEriT".

[suchmoon]

This would be nice to have but there would be abuse in so many ways that we can't even imagine, and/or incessant whining about imaginary abuse, regardless of how well it's implemented.

Granted we get some that with the current positive-merit-only system too, but negativity tends to amplify emotions a lot more. Demerit would be endless food for trolls too.

[Vod]

Make it cost 2 smerit to remove 1, and don't allow merit sources to participate. 

[NotATether]

That's why some restrictions would definitely be needed, e.g.:

- 1000 earned Merits
- 1000 activity
- positive trust score (or only DT1 members?)
- the "button" has to be pressed 5 times
- maybe a "counter-button", if the "wtf-button" was pressed falsely

Perhaps instead of these requirements, the demerit function could be restricted to moderators of the board, requiring only one press of a button. Just like how the reporting system can be used by anyone but only mods can actually delete posts. Newbies would start complaining about bias or "keeping them down" if legendaries were allowed to do this.

Make it cost 2 smerit to remove 1, and don't allow merit sources to participate. 

This reminds me of the way Stack Overflow implements downvotes that remove reputation. That's another possibility. But it would have to be restricted to people with say 1000 earned merit, and staff I guess.

[stompix]

Demerit will not solve anything, a newbie with zero merits or -1000 merits will still be able to post crap if it fits his agenda.

Probably a flag system like we have right now for scammers and only for the serious boards would be more appropriate as it will warn readers the moment they see the topic that it was flagged by multiple members as misleading or having a clickbait title or presenting false information. Of course, it should not be available for topics in meta or reputation as we all know how it will end.

But, it won't stop guys that do this intentionally, they will simply claim they are oppressed, censored,  that the Illuminati have taken over bitcoin and bitcointalk...and so on...

[Csmiami]

Perhaps instead of these requirements, the demerit function could be restricted to moderators of the board, ----- Newbies would start complaining about bias or "keeping them down" if legendaries were allowed to do this.

Then drama queens would start complaining about censorship, dictatorship and biased moderation on the forum (more than they already do). We don't need that, we don't want that.

Altough the idea is not bad in principle, restricting it to a certain rank, or group of people wouldn't be wise. The idea of X smerit= Y -smerit is the most sensible I've heard so far in this matter; and maybe another round of sweeping the airdropped merits of profiles that have not earnt a single merit in 2 years, and are active posters (not to discriminate the old stablished members that left the forum and may come back one day) could be considered

Edit: Giving it some more tought, I'd say that only posts that have already been merited could be demerited, and it can't get more demerits than the total ammount of merits. It will prevent a misleading post getting merited, but will be harder to use as some kind of retaliatory tool (or at least I want to think that)

[gentlemand]

I like the idea in principle but it would be horrifically abused by all the people nursing grudges out there.

The only viable solution is the existing one - if you're shit your merit score will never get above a shit one. Maybe there should be a flashing 'ha ha' next to merit scores that haven't budged since its inception.

[Yourhomeboy]

It's a nice idea. The forum is working hard to see that they are no bad contents. But this new button can it be in such a way that the merit giver can get back their merit after they are back to their senses.

[bonesjonesreturns]

There are a fair number of posts on BCT where the poster is confused to the point of being infuriating or even being maliciously dishonest, trying to manipulate markets or shill altcoins, or whatever.  

The threads fill with other confused people while sensible people just shy away. For example: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5223659.0

What we really need is a button that stabs someone in their motherfucking face over the internet.

Yes you probably mean cases where deliberate lies are told about premines to shill scamcoins

Like this example by one of your pals lauda


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5231720.0

1000 merits? What does that prove? The only members here with 1000 earned merits are people like the greedy gaming and manipulative scum bags like lauda and his friends?

Reducing any bogus meaning merit is meant to have is probably far more important than your proposal

Respectfully of course. I have not seen any kind of deliberate wrong doing in your specific case.
I oppose any further privileges or weight attributed to cycled merit.

I think you are getting frustrated and worried over something largely unimportant in the tech forums.  0.001% of the forum understands any of that to any kind of level that needs to considered seriously so who cares what the mildly technically proficient think they know. The normal folks dont understand and the super egg heads know it is incorrect.

I'm more worried about malicious scammers and manipulative scum crushing the communities free speech than some semi knowledgable tech people garnering bogus support from other semi technical people who's opinions can be debunked even if they dont notice or understand they are wrong.

No more bogus " only those with x meaningless merits" privileges. Sure egg heads that can objectively debunk arguments and present them on the demerit explanation event page. Nò way to every merit cycling scumbag here.

I feel though you do need merit vampires. They must be able to present objectively robust reasons for demerits and if they fail  they are removed from merit source and merit vampire for good.

Merit needs to denote only  valuable and correct information. If it is not valuable with regard reaching the optimal solution or answer posed in the OP It must not receive merit.

Let's face it merit is a complete disaster from an objective pov if full context is considered.

Stabbing them in the mother fucking face is perhaps a little too much but they should not be getting rewarded for promugating and misleading others intentionally or just because others are stupid enough nor to realize they are being fed shit

Bring on merit vampires. I'd say start with All legends and heros.  If their actions do not stand up to objective scrutiny they are out for good

I like the idea but fuck off to 1000 cycled merit holders only. These are some of the most corrupt here..

Perhaps GM can confirm that lying and misleading others deliberately about premines of a scams they are shilling is just the sort of scumbag he wants to smash their face in over the internet ?

The lying scam pusher lauda loves kissing GM ass.

Can you confirm this is the kind of lying malicious scumbag you want to punch in the face GM?

Or this is just for certain people?  

Earned merits = high percent of cycled pal credits all in each others top 20 fans and recipients all including each other of DT all feeding at the trough of chipmixer fortunejack et al

I am shocked that such an intelligent person would support the merit system In its current form

Perhaps now you start to realize it is annoying to see conclusively debunked and incorrect spew getting heaps of support via meaningless merit?

No offence to you personally. I dont understand your work but far smarter men than I assure me it is to be congratulated and appreciated.

I dont support 1000 earned merits at all.

I mean the fact you are correctly annoyed to see merits given freely to bogus and incorrect even malicious posts seems to suggest it is not sensible to rely on earned merits for shit.

The fact suchmoon merits this is hilarious. He said that without strict criteria to measure against the terms good poster and bad poster are meaningless? Now supports a meaningless metric of 1000 .meaningless points being the foundation for membership to the meaningless club to remove meaningless or malicous merits ??

That's a good idea.

[1miau]

Could be a very useful function if we customize such a tool properly. There's a lot of malicious content posted, that's true and much of it is also misleading readers. The Trust flags are only visible on top of a topic, if someone posts misleading content somewhere forther down the topic, no warning would be visible.  
I made a quick visualisation and it's looking interesting:



For scam topics or obviously misleading content a demerit could actually be somewhat useful in my opinion.

If deMerit is introduced I would only grant users with let's say more than 500 earned Merit the right to distribute deMerit. Above 500 earned Merit every 10 earned Meit will result in getting 1 sdeMerit.
For example:
- an user with 554 earned Merit would have 5 sdeMerit
- an user with 702 earned Merit would have  20 sdeMerit
...

There will be no deMerit sources, deMerit is only generated from earned Merit.
If someone's post is getting 1 deMerit, the Merit score of that user would be decreased by 1 point.

We could also argue that lower ranks can use deMerit but only 1 sdeMerit for every 50 earned Merit or similar.

Perhaps instead of these requirements, the demerit function could be restricted to moderators of the board, requiring only one press of a button. Just like how the reporting system can be used by anyone but only mods can actually delete posts. Newbies would start complaining about bias or "keeping them down" if legendaries were allowed to do this.

Personally, I would like it much more to have it as a community tool. Bitcointalk is decentralized.  

Demerit will not solve anything, a newbie with zero merits or -1000 merits will still be able to post crap if it fits his agenda.

deMerit would also be visible directly under the post like Merit is highlighting good posts.
That way people would be warned against malicious content.

[bonesjonesreturns]

Could be a very useful function if we customize such a tool properly. There's a lot of malicious content posted, that's true and much of it is also misleading readers. The Trust flags are only visible on top of a topic, if someone posts misleading content somewhere forther down the topic, no warning would be visible.  
I made a quick visualisation and it's looking interesting:



For scam topics or obviously misleading content a demerit could actually be somewhat useful in my opinion.

If deMerit is introduced I would only grant users with let's say more than 500 earned Merit the right to distribute deMerit. Above 500 earned Merit every 10 earned Meit will result in getting 1 sdeMerit.
For example:
- an user with 554 earned Merit would have [5 sdeMerit
- an user with 702 earned Merit would have  20 sdeMerit
...

There will be no deMerit sources, deMerit is only generated from earned Merit.
If someone's post is getting 1 deMerit, the Merit score of that user would be decreased by 1 point.

We could also argue that lower ranks can use deMerit but only 1 sdeMerit for every 50 earned Merit or similar.

Perhaps instead of these requirements, the demerit function could be restricted to moderators of the board, requiring only one press of a button. Just like how the reporting system can be used by anyone but only mods can actually delete posts. Newbies would start complaining about bias or "keeping them down" if legendaries were allowed to do this.

Personally, I would like it much more to have it as a community tool. Bitcointalk is decentralized.  

Demerit will not solve anything, a newbie with zero merits or -1000 merits will still be able to post crap if it fits his agenda.

deMerit would also be visible directly under the post like Merit is highlighting good posts.
That way people would be warned against malicious content.

Lol please stop ... the very fact we are noticing merit is given and earned for posting misleading or incorrect crap does not mean we should then say it is a reliable metric to rely on to demonstrate the critical reasoning powers of those we need to employ to ensure merit is only attributed to objectively valuable posts lol

Let's send the merit cycling fools like pharmacist and tman to merit vampire in the tech boards haha

No. These people must be hand selected to have demonstrated specific skillset and critical reasoning in certain areas. They must be able to present robust and conclusive arguments for any merit removal.

Lol at using earned merits as a marker for removing poorly applied merits. The very idea is quite silly.
I suspect GM is not noticing how much merit is handed to people for posting totally bogus crap everywhere and specifically in meta board.  It is not just a problem in the tech boards.   It is probably less of a worry where math can be applied to produce conclusive debunking in many instances.

Everywhere else it is impossible to work with any kind of logic or reason. The meta board is like the twilight zone as correctly noted by a very sensible member.

Merit was a cancer and will remain so. If it is terminal we are yet to find out. 
Bring back noob jail and delete the pile of junk. It creates endless insoluble problems that are more dangerous than some spammers and bots that would never have made it out of noob jail in the first place.

[1miau]

..del..

Nobody is reading your crap...but yeah, keep wasting your time derailing every discussion...

[HCP]

The threads fill with other confused people while sensible people just shy away. For example: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5223659.0

omg... I think I lost a few IQ points attempting to make sense of that thread... jeebus... the level of ignorance on display there was mind boggling!

What we really need is a button that stabs someone in their motherfucking face over the internet.

You owe me a new keyboard... and a cup of tea! hahaha... funniest thing I've read all week! And I totally sympathise... this is indeed what we need! I'm sure anyone that has ever worked tech support can relate:

But failing that, a "this is awful wtf"  button that e.g. can only be pressed by users who have recieved over (say) 1000 merit and which only shows something on the post when it's been pressed at least three times, would at least be a start.

Maybe "tags" that could be applied to a post to give an indication that it's just plain bullshit? Only issue I see is that unless it's available to all, we'll run into the "censorship" issue... and potential for abuse.

[ChiBitCTy]

Could  not agree more! We’ve got a great use case example in Reddit which proves this could be very effective. Obviously with Theymos running r/bitcoin he’s well aware of how helpful this could be for the forum. I try and always search for stuff on both Btalk and Reddit before asking everyone, but there’s no question most people will spend more time “making sure” of their posts before pressing submit on Reddit because of downvotes on your score as well as the potential for posting “time outs”.

I think it should be one demerit per user per post, same as Reddit. This in my mind could be used to help stop not only shit posts, but drama as well. Now for TOAA , wouldn’t mean a damn thing, but for non-super trolls who care about their accounts standing it would. I honestly see very little abuse of this on Reddit. 

[bonesjonesreturns]

..del..

Nobody is reading your crap...buy yeah, keep wasting your time derailing every discussion...

Try debunking my points you slobbering imbecile.
You are one of the idiots that should be nowhere near having demerit or merit powers you corrupt piece of shit.

You are reading them.

So yes demerit will be a good idea if implemented objectively and correctly no just given over to the same idiots giving each other tons of merit for producing incorrect crap with negative value.

Got it now?