<…>
I recall @Jet Cash coming up with an idea to allow for sMerits to be delegated:
I've just invented dMerits.That, alongside some assignment and control parameters seemed interesting at the time, and could be a valid approach if dealt with in a limited way, and from the Merit Source outwards, taking as a basis that a Merit Source (at least the more established ones) should have a good enough criteria to designate whom they would delegate a bunch of sMerits to.
The way I see it dMerits understood as delegate merits could have two non-collisional paths:
1. Delegate Merit as @Jet Cash suggest, where by a Merit Source transfers some sMerit to person of his choice (with no Merit added to the recipient’s Merit counter).
This would have the advantage of delegating some sMerit to others on a discretionary basis, and may help the Merit Source to distribute his sMerits with less of a burden and over a wider network. This approach does not increase the overall Merit Source monthly allowance, but it could help to empty it out on a monthly basis, thus increasing overall received sMerit by the forum members.
The disadvantage is that, although Merit Sources are trusted by theymos for this task (as they are approved or pre-chosen on a one to one basis), there should be a certain degree of tracking taking place so as to avoid speculation on the sMerit transfers from the Merit Source to the Delegate.
Perhaps the transfer process could create a TX just like every other sMerit transfer, but where the message Id involved would have to be an internal reserved code that indicates “delegate merit transfer” (i.e. User A awarded User B n sMerits for this post: “delegate merit transfer”).
2. Appoint a "D" Merit Source. Each Merit Source could appoint another person as a "D" Merit Source.
Merit Sources I figure are assigned a monthly allowance after being cleared, and probably classified in some sort of A/B/C category, where the monthly allowance depends on the category.
The idea is that the "D" category would be a Merit Source with less of a sMerit monthly allowance than a regular Merit Source, but that is vouched for by the Merit Source. This only makes sense if Merit Sources are considered scarce, and as a means to speed-up the process of finding trustworthy members for the task.
Now in order to avoid any speculation or foul use (although unlikely to happen with a Merit Source), the "D" source would need to be cleared by theymos just as any other Merit Source, but perhaps at a swifter pace since he would already be backed by a Merit Source that appoints him.
The "D" source should be a reputable member too, and have decent experience at giving merit with a fair criteria that the Merit Source has cleared. It would also probably be better if the Merit Networks of the Merit Source and "D" source do not coincide too much (see image below).
The advantage of this procedure is that, if there is any real intent to add more Merit Sources to the system with a bit of haste, these would be already vouched for by existing Merit Sources, and could be quicker to appoint.
Say for example @Jet Cash considers @Seoincorporation to be a good candidate for being a "D" source. @Seincorporation has previously indicated on the forum that he would like to be able to give out more merits, but perhaps not become a full merit source (correct me if I’m wrong though). In addition, their Merit Networks as sMerit awarders do not coincide too much <…>
