Possible solution to merit burning

[hd49728]

However, there is no point in stopping spammers to rank up especially if they too created quality posts.

Spammers don't create a single quality posts. They are busy with spam and don't mind, don't spend a second to think for what they will write.

If a spammer changes from spamming to creating good quality posts, that member deserves to get merit for good posts, not for spam posts certainly. If a spammer suddenly makes a long post, you can use google search to find for plagiarism. There are not many spammers change and write long posts. They copy and paste.

[1714792816]

1714792816

[Jet Cash]

Say I have a monthly allowance of 100 sMerits per month. If I only spend 70 within the month (30 days on a given window timeframe really), I’ve conceptually not poured into the Merit System 30 sMerits. It’s really more complicated than that, and the key is that a Merit Source can never have more sMerits than his maximum allowance in a given moment in time. Taken to the extreme, if my allowance is of 100 sMerits, and I don’t spend any, my sMerit counter will stabilize at 100 sMerits (not increasing any further until y spend some and it gets refilled again).
 .

Yes, I am a merit source, and I was only discussing smerit refreshment for sources. Regular smerits have different rules, and fewer restricyions on their awarding.

My understanding is that your bucket doesn't have a time frame for refilling, but each replacement smerit has its own shelf life of 30 days. If is not spent during that period, then it decays, and cannot be spent or replaced. This means that less active merit sources may have a decreasing  pool of source smerits to spend. If that pool drops to zero, then the person is removed as a merit source. Periodically source smerits are reviewed according to a published formula. In this calculation source smerits and earned smerits that have been spent are aggregated, and a new limit is allocated. It is slightly higher than the rate of merit awarding for the relevant period. This means that the supply of smerits available for an active source will increase gradually. Thus a profligate spender supporting spammers will be able to provide more support. This will come from his increased allowance, and fromn any reciprocal "earned" smerits.

[KaneVWE]

The OP is quite strange.

There is clear financial incentive to cycle merits, there is clear opportunity to cycle merits, there is strong compelling evidence in the form of merit fans and recipients data that people cycle merits.

Yet that is most unlikely?
Lol

Like the guy running out of the bank with swag bags spilling with money , with a gun, cashiers screaming and alarms ringing behind him, members of the public pointing at that guy with the swag bags and the gun and telling the police he just robbed the bank.

The cops say... nah most unlikely...probably a legit withdrawal

I mean for a start why would anyone want to steal money? Says the cops?
Also the gun doesn't provide any known opportunity to help steal money? Says the cops?
Also the alarm and screaming cashiers is certainly not to be conflated with sounds that indicate such activities like bank robbery? Says the cops.

Sensible conclusion is criminal activity in this case = most unlikely indeed.

Can you transparently present the thought process that makes you feel merit cycling is unlikely?
I am very interested.

Only then can I evaluate the solution your are proposing. I mean I would suggest burning every single merit on the forum. That may help.
Best to kill the spam or remove the negative of the spam, rather than kill the forum.

[suchmoon]

My understanding is that your bucket doesn't have a time frame for refilling, but each replacement smerit has its own shelf life of 30 days. If is not spent during that period, then it decays, and cannot be spent or replaced. This means that less active merit sources may have a decreasing  pool of source smerits to spend.

That's not how it works - see my explanation in the other thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5280804.msg55344875#msg55344875

The source sMerits don't disappear after 30 days. However you need to spend them if you want a refill. Not sure where you got the about about "shelf life" - that's incorrect. Perhaps the fact that merits a refilled after 30 days makes it look like there is a reduction but those merits do come back.

[hd49728]

My understanding is that your bucket doesn't have a time frame for refilling, but each replacement smerit has its own shelf life of 30 days. If is not spent during that period, then it decays, and cannot be spent or replaced. This means that less active merit sources may have a decreasing  pool of source smerits to spend.

That's not how it works - see my explanation in the other thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5280804.msg55344875#msg55344875

The source sMerits don't disappear after 30 days. However you need to spend them if you want a refill. Not sure where you got the about about "shelf life" - that's incorrect. Perhaps the fact that merits a refilled after 30 days makes it look like there is a reduction but those merits do come back.

JC can use the userscript to distinguish between sMerits from earned merits and sMerits from sourced-merits. With the script and a sheet to follow up in 30 days, JC can see how smerits of sources are refilled.

Topics	Date	written by	Section	Merit
_____________________________________________________________________	________	___________	___________________________	______
Enhanced merit UI [1.1]	27/01/2018	grue	Merit UI	171+
_____________________________________________________________________	________	___________	___________________________	______