Meriting a user who just merited you

[icopress]

I am the 21st user who answered "no" to the question you have asked.

But the first one to admit it. 

I know that account ranking is no excuse for us not send sMerit on quality posts. But sometimes I might miss a high ranking member post from merit...

Man, don't be offended that I'm taking the phrase out of context, but a few weeks ago I saved this picture just for such an occasion ..

[1714000172]

1714000172

[1714000172]

1714000172

[1714000172]

1714000172

[kawetsriyanto]

Do you feel like it looks like an agreed exchange, even if it isn't?

NO. Imagine this, once someone merited your post, you must be interested to know who he is. Then you look at his profile and probably check his post history too. If you find quality posts and merited the posts in this way, I don't think it is a wrong thing. The basic or fundamental reason is quality, not who he is. Is it wrong to give merit to a decent post?

[Vod]

Imagine this, once someone merited your post, you must be interested to know who he is. Then you look at his profile and probably check his post history too. If you find quality posts and merited the posts in this way, I don't think it is a wrong thing. The basic or fundamental reason is quality, not who he is. Is it wrong to give merit to a decent post?

Actually the fundamental reason is retaliation.    Mostly used in a negative way, the term describes responsive action and is tied into society.  If someone is nice to you, you will look for a way to be nice back, even if not consciously.  After all, you view their action as correct behaviour that needs to be rewarded.

[nutildah]

I don't do it for others, but there are a handful of people that are compelled to send me a merit after I send them -- in all likelihood they think they are performing a common courtesy.

There was something Suchmoon said about sending out merits, he said merit a good post not user,.

That user would have to unblock the 95% of the Forum and actually be less selective in the handful of favourites they merits on a regular basis before such a comment from them could be taken to be creditable...

suchmoon has given out more merits to more forum members than anybody else on the forum:



#1 in Sent and Circle... you literally won't find a more open-minded merit-giver on the forum.

[Smartvirus]

Whatever the reason is that someone merited your post, you might sometimes (or all the time) feel like you need to respond in the same way. So, you end up rewarding the user who rewarded you with some merits as well. Especially if you were awarded more merits than you thought you would or deserve.

This is a fact for which most users experience but not so many would be bold enough to accept the fact as you just did without sentiment. This happens more often between a those for whom you are of higher rank than. Its a common thing that, when you get merited, you tend to know its sources as per the meriter, on what post and even at times, you tend to tend the post over again and just the, you might just conceive the idea of responding in the same manner. There is a common saying in my head that goes 'merits begats meriting', most users here might have said this sometimes consciously or otherwise but then, its wrong. Its an idea that must be forth although, we can't deny the fact that meriting kind of puts a user in the spotlight but then, merit for merits creates the idea of merit sharing or cycling which won't very much promote the correct use of merit and as a result, we just might consider meriting an unworthy post all in the name of responding in the same way. Lets just try to keep of this path, it leads the forum no where!

[suzanne5223]

When you merit someone who just merited you, do you feel good doing it?
Do you feel like it looks like an agreed exchange, even if it isn't?

Yes, it something I have thought about several times but I just overlooked it since I am not guilty or abuse the merit system afterall it good to be nice to someone is nice to you.

Do you think it's not a proper use of the merit system?

No, I dont since everyone can independently send merit to whoever she wanted since it does not involve merit selling.

[longlivecapitalism]

I don't usually go looking to merit people who have merited me because they're mostly users who already have enough merits and have a high ranking in this forum.

A user with the highest rank deserves the same amount of merits you would give a member who is ranked lower. His rank shouldn't be a deciding factor whether you will merit him or not. I have done the same thing many times before as well in the past. If given a choice to merit a user with a lower rank and one with a higher, I picked the one who is ranked lower. But I have changed that approach, and now I merit many Legendary accounts if I like their posts. And many times I do. The only factor I consider now is if the member I am going to merit participates in the merit distribution system or not.

What I look for when I have merits to give is users who are low ranking members and I personally have read posts of these users that I would wish to merit.

Nothing wrong with that unless you intentionally neglect and overlook the posts of higher ranked members.

That way I believe that I can help promote members who write good posts.

This statement can only be correct if you don't make distinctions between the users you wish to merit based on their rank.

Yes, the difference here is that you are a high ranking member so you have more merits to give. I am a lower-ranking member with fewer merits to give so I choose to give the few merits I receive to lower-ranking members. Don't get me wrong, I wish I had more so I could give to high-ranking members too.

I don't see how my choice to help users of lower ranks is bad. Maybe you can elaborate more on your point of view. Personally, I don't feel like a post loses value if someone doesn't merit it. However, it is the lower-ranking members who actually need those merits to rank up and gain distinction on the forum, not those who are higher. So, I operate based on that.

[libert19]

Happens to most of us, although I still prefer to distribute my smerits to the needy ones than who has already plenty (ie, leggy members).

[Crptomagma]

It’s kind of complicated for me here as a new member about the concept of sMerit, initially to be very honest I feel  obligated when someone sends me merit. Until I read the forum rules carefully and fully understood the main idea of sMerit so I don’t reciprocate to merit given to me by others on the purpose of trying to pay back but I give my merit to quality post and vital information to the forum.

[Daniel91]

It’s kind of complicated for me here as a new member about the concept of sMerit, initially to be very honest I feel  obligated when someone sends me merit. Until I read the forum rules carefully and fully understood the main idea of sMerit so I don’t reciprocate to merit given to me by others on the purpose of trying to pay back but I give my merit to quality post and vital information to the forum.

I think it's natural and logical to think that way.
I suggest that you look at merits as a tool with which you can reward someone's effort and time, which they invested in their post, and thus help other members with some useful information.
You can express gratitude in another way, by replying to his post, in a private message etc.

[Timelord2067]

You can express gratitude in another way, by replying to his post, in a private message, or adding him to members you trust.

No.

That's buying trust with merits and should be taken into consideration whenever you want to "return the favour" of having been showered with merits, especially from a merit source.

[Daniel91]

You can express gratitude in another way, by replying to his post, in a private message, or adding him to members you trust.

No.

That's buying trust with merits and should be taken into consideration whenever you want to "return the favour" of having been showered with merits, especially from a merit source.

Okay, you're right, I used the wrong word and corrected it, my mistake.
I was actually going to say that we can show gratitude in a number of ways but it's important that we don't do it in a way that can raise suspicions that it's some kind of counter-service.
Of course you're going to respect the person who helped you with the merits, maybe you'll trust that person in other things but the trust network is a whole different thing.

[Poker Player]

What has happened to me more specifically is this: someone merits one of my post. Until then I didn't know who he was, but when I see him commenting on other posts I remember him. I think that most of the people who have given me merits are Hero/Legendaries, so it's very easy to find your posts that deserve merits. So I end up giving them some merit but not because when they give it to me I go to see their post history, it happens after that.

[icopress]

Of course you're going to respect the person who helped you with the merits ....

Judging from the discussion, not only the OP, but half of those present here attach very great importance to how they are perceived and evaluated by others. Although, in general, this is not bad (this is how the world works), but it seems to me in such matters it is better to turn your gaze to yourself ... After all, it is a kind of indicator showing whether you are moving in the right direction. And no matter how valuable you are to the forum, you still sometimes need time (like any of us) to distract yourself from the past discussions to take stock.

[Porfirii]

As the question is about obligation

After all, it is a kind of indicator showing whether you are moving in the right direction.

I agree: the contrary could lead to servility.

In my case, answering to the poll question, I never feel obligated (with one exception). In fact, I am aware that I tend to give my merits to other members who need them, to the detriment of those Legendaries who really deserve them for the content they share. Aware of this, I am now considering regaining the balance on this issue.

I just felt obligated once, when I received 20 merits (the highest number I have received ever at once) in a thread I opened talking passionately about one topic I was afraid of the answers: the reply was so comforting and eye opening, that I felt obligated to send him back the 10 sMerits I earned for his generosity. (Thanks again, @squatz1).

[Pmalek]

I am a lower-ranking member with fewer merits to give so I choose to give the few merits I receive to lower-ranking members. Don't get me wrong, I wish I had more so I could give to high-ranking members too.
...
I don't see how my choice to help users of lower ranks is bad. Maybe you can elaborate more on your point of view.

Look at it this way. Merits are supposed to be given for quality posts, no matter what rank the user has. You aren't meriting a lower ranked or higher ranked member, you are meriting the post that was made. Quality is a subjective choice, so if you feel that a post you want to merit deserves 2 merits for example, your decision to merit that post shouldn't be influenced by the rank of the user.

It sounds easier than it is and a limited merit supply definitely influences the choices you make.  
A legendary user doesn't deserve more merits than a newbie just because the user is legendary.
A newbie doesn't deserve more merits than a legendary just because he is a newbie and needs to rank up.
Because the only thing to consider should be the post and your personal opinion about it.

[Timelord2067]

I mentioned in an earlier post in this thread that I tend to merit totally random users, usually not more than once then move on. If there really is a phenomenon of boomeranging merits back to the sender, then it's not being done by the majority of forum members if my 80th placed merit circle is any indication.

[Oshosondy]

I worked for the merit I got, I can give it to any post I like, so far it is not a spam and it has quality. I do give to anyone I want, but I like giving people that also have merited me before so far they are having quality posts to merit, that should not be a big deal.

[Findingnemo]

If someone is meriting back the user who just merited them then it is called merit farming which I never appreciate among our fellas.

But sadly it becomes a reality, people making it as habit to merit them people who is giving merit them which should be changed, just merit the post which gave you some new information to you or atleast it will be helpful to someone in the future.

I don't really care about the user who I am meriting, if I feel it deserves and got merit on hoarde then I will just go for it.

I request everyone to do the same which will increases your merit cycle.

[OgNasty]

If someone is meriting back the user who just merited them then it is called merit farming which I never appreciate among our fellas.

But sadly it becomes a reality, people making it as habit to merit them people who is giving merit them which should be changed, just merit the post which gave you some new information to you or atleast it will be helpful to someone in the future.

I don't really care about the user who I am meriting, if I feel it deserves and got merit on hoarde then I will just go for it.

I request everyone to do the same which will increases your merit cycle.

It isn't an issue in small amounts in my opinion.  It's the users that have exchanged hundreds of merits back and forth that are a real serious threat to the system here.  I've gone on record multiple times as saying there should be a 50 merit cap on what any 1 user can send to another over the lifetime of the account.  If you look at some of the highest merit earners on this site, they have literally exchanged hundreds of merits between each other.  I'm pretty sure this isn't what the merit system was created for and it should be stopped with a lifetime merit sent limit between users.  

It is also abundantly clear beyond a shadow of a doubt that massive merit abuse took place in the first couple weeks of the system.  I think in addition to a merit per user lifetime cap, rolling back merits received in the first month of the system as well as merits over 50 sent to any one user by another would make the system much more honest and make the merit whores have to go through the additional steps required for alt account signature spammers.  That's if we actually want an 'honest' system instead of a 'who can befriend the most abusers' system we currently see in the trust and merit networks.