ㅤ

[Symmetrick]

ㅤ

[1714061947]

1714061947

[1714061947]

1714061947

[1714061947]

1714061947

[1714061947]

1714061947

[BlackHatCoiner]

I don't know why merit sources are unknown by the rest of the users. Would they really receive PMs from merit beggars? You can understand if someone's a merit source by the way he/she distributes merits. If they're usually generous or they merit very often, they're possibly merit sources.

I state that, yesterday, I became a merit source to avoid any misunderstandings.

But I would like to hear other opinions on this matter. Opinions of others merit sources.

Well, there are some users who I wouldn't ever want to have discussions with. Most of them troll and spread propagandas. Even those aren't included in my ignore list, they were once, but, sometimes, I actually want to read what they have to say. They aren't getting any merits from me except if they add strong arguments to their statements.

Meriting objectively isn't easy, but I'll do my best on useful posts. I'll be encouraged to help newbies rank up, especially those who reply in the Dev & Tech subforum.

Besides NotATether and myself, I wonder who are the other chosen ones.

[Upgrade00]

If I ignore users that I do not like, then I will no longer be able to fully consider myself an objective merit source. Because I will only rate the posts of those who I personally like, and those who I do not like, they are on my ignore list and I do not see their posts, even if they are ultra useful. But at the same time, no one forbids me to use the ignore button.

Ignoring a user does not mean you do not like them, it is likely because they post repeated spam to an extent they are infamous for it, and they could also have very extreme views about topics which can be disturbing to other users, in the same way not ignoring a user does not mean you personally like them.

About objectivity, merits sources should make effort to view posts without prejudice, but should not be forced to entertain content they do not want to; it would be best to not overuse the ignore button, but it should be used where necessary, and possibly set up a system to evaluate those on your ignore list to know if there is any change in posting habit.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

My ignore list is extensive, though I haven't put any members on it in quite some time.  Most of them got added during the 2016-2018 period when the forum was basically wall-to-wall shitposters--and that was before the merit system.

I absolutely feel comfortable leaving all of those members on my ignore list, because I seriously doubt any of them could change their post quality even if they were inclined to.  Most of them were members who dropped one-line crap nonstop, and those kinds of members are only here to make money or farm accounts.

But in general, I think even if you're a merit source it's up to you whether you want to ignore certain members.  If they have a history of making posts that aren't worth meriting, you don't have an obligation to keep looking at them if you don't want to.  There are plenty of posts that are deserving of merit that you'll see, and if you're a generous merit source you might find yourself running low on sMerits at some point (like me recently).  Why waste time viewing posts from people who chronically drop low-value posts on the forum as if they were manure bombs?  So the short answer is that I think it's totally OK for any merit source to have an ignore list.

[Upgrade00]

<snip>

I get your point, but they are not essentially the same to me. I can dislike a users posting habit, due to opposing views we may have on some topics, but except they are crossing an ethical line, I wouldn't see a reason to ignore them, but this is just me, other users could have different reasons why they ignore users.
Regardless of your personal reasons however, users are allowed to use the ignore button as they want, and sources should not be an exemption.

I'll reiterate my previous reply and add the merit sources are volunteers and should only appraise boads or users they are comfortable with as that's how they'll function best.

[Quickseller]

I agree that merit should be given out based on the content of their posts, not based on who is writing the post. This is a principal that I follow when giving out merit, and I would like to think that most other merit sources follow a similar principal. If you review my merit history, you will see me occasionally giving merit to people who I dislike, and who I strongly disagree with, even when I disagree with the specific post (in these cases, the post will receive merit because I believe it makes a well rounded argument, or a lot of effort was put into the post).

With that being said, If you are sufficiently annoying, or are making enough low quality posts to get on my ignore list, chances are you are not going to make many (or any) posts that are worthy of merit. My ignore list is pretty short, and it has been years since I added anyone to my ignore list (intentionally), and the threshhold for me to add you to my ignore list is pretty high.

[hugeblack]

Why do you take Bitcointalk so seriously, it is for discussion and therefore I do not think that the use of ignore buttom for spam is meaningful, the purpose of ignoring is that you do not agree with the opinions that that person issues or affect the normal course of your day and therefore you choose to ignore them. These opinions must be from a certain category, and therefore those who ignore many people either because they cannot tolerate “cyber bullying” or do not know how to use this feature.

[NeuroticFish]

Besides NotATether and myself, I wonder who are the other chosen ones.

Although I've never applied, I've got the surprise and the honor to join this selected group. I guess that I receive less sMerit than those who applied, but it's still a boost.
And this is some sort of side info too: don't look for new merit sources only amongst those who applied.

Why do you take Bitcointalk so seriously

Indeed, I feel like some of these complains come from the fact people take the forum far too serious.
On the other hand, I think that everybody can have his own reasons for ignoring users.

These are my personal beliefs and my personal vision of objectivity merit source, so I refused the ignore button. Thus, I do not miss any posts at all and can rate absolutely any user, even if it is my personal hater.

I think that the difference comes from the way/reasoning behind the way we use the Ignore button. I don't use it just because somebody hates me, although I never got to the point somebody would get to hate me.
And we're back to taking the forum too serious 

I agree that merit should be given out based on the content of their posts, not based on who is writing the post.
[~]
With that being said, If you are sufficiently annoying, or are making enough low quality posts to get on my ignore list, chances are you are not going to make many (or any) posts that are worthy of merit.

Thank you! I feel reassured that others too have the same reasoning as I do.


My ignore list contains basically people with extremely low quality posts and people I've found that they never post anything useful or meaningful. For now my ignore list stays by this logic. If any time in the future I'm proven to be wrong (or I get to that conclusion myself), I'll change. I don't use the ignore button that often.
I'd say that the forum is so vast, you have to acknowledge that you cannot fill all the "gaps" and the merit sources have to "complete" each other.
However, I'm very new as merit source, I acknowledge that there's more responsibility involved and I'll see what I'll do in the future.

[Jet Cash]

I've been a merit source for some time, and I still have a large ignore list. I don't ignore people who disagree with me, as long as they are prepared to debate the issue. I do ignore them if they resort to juvenile person attacks, as I consider that to be an admission of defeat. I ignore people for a variety of reasons. -

Excessive use of capitalisation, as that seems to be the preserve of low quality posters.
Use of large images, as those slow sown my reading of threads, especially if I am on a mobile.
Bad use of quotation, especially nested quotes, as this is another thing that clogs up threads.
Juvenile slurs on a poster, rather than objective discussion about a post content
Begging for merits, especially via a pm
The use of smilies etc. in thread titles.
Also, I ignore many of the boards.

Please remember that we are not paid to be merit sources, and we all have different ideas about the role. For example, I believe that merit was introduced as a barrier to ranking up  in an attempt to reduce signature spamming. It was also intended to encourage quality posting. I believe that sources should get away from the primary objective of increasing the rank of new members, and concentrate on rewarding and encouraging quality posts,regardless of rank. Of course new members should be encouraged, but not just because they are new members seeking to increase their signature income.

[SquirrelJulietGarden]

You can wipe out your ignore list each year. One year is long enough for people to change if they want to change themselves.

If they don't change after one year, you can add them to your new ignore list. Second chance is enough.

[Cult of Lauda] An historic peace: Rome’s treaty with Carthage

[NeuroticFish]

You can wipe out your ignore list each year. One year is long enough for people to change if they want to change themselves.

If they don't change after one year, you can add them to your new ignore list. Second chance is enough.

Actually this would mean that one has to keep track of the changes separately and see who is there for a year, who was removed once and now it's back in the list... too much of a hassle.

But on the other hand, it is not a bad idea to clear the list after one year, on a different principle: most of those shitposters who end up in the ignore list have a very good chance that in a year they're already inactive, hence they've stopped polluting the surroundings. And if they didn't disappear, maybe indeed they evolved.

I will give one more thought, maybe this was the bit I "needed".

[SquirrelJulietGarden]

Actually this would mean that one has to keep track of the changes separately and see who is there for a year, who was removed once and now it's back in the list... too much of a hassle.

By wipe out, I meant clean it up, all, unselectively. You don't have to track anything for your Ignore list, the forum does. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=257071;sa=ignprefs (your Ignore list)

But on the other hand, it is not a bad idea to clear the list after one year, on a different principle: most of those shitposters who end up in the ignore list have a very good chance that in a year they're already inactive, hence they've stopped polluting the surroundings. And if they didn't disappear, maybe indeed they evolved.

I meant it. They can be banned, permanent. They can abandon their account after 1 year because they can not receive 1 merit. You will probably not see those members after 1 year.

They will probably evolve and you will see those members.

[NeuroticFish]

You don't have to track anything for your Ignore list, the forum does. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=257071;sa=ignprefs (your Ignore list)

You misunderstood me. I know very well where's my ignore list. Just that list doesn't give any hint on when an user was added there, for example, and also doesn't tell anything about users that, by chance, were added, then removed, then added back. And your post seemed to suggest that one should check for this.

They will probably evolve and you will see those members.

I tend to give more chances to getting banned or leaving than evolving.
As I said. I will think on it. Maybe I will indeed empty my ignore list after so many years.

[vapourminer]

And now, in fact, the topic itself. I would like to ask the community, in particular, merit sources, how they feel about ignoring active users? Do you think that merit source can add as many users as he wants to his ignore list of those users that he does not like, or, being in such a position, you should not overuse this function?

For example, I have a completely empty ignore list, because I try to evaluate posts without paying attention to the nickname, namely the content of the post itself. If I ignore users that I do not like, then I will no longer be able to fully consider myself an objective merit source. Because I will only rate the posts of those who I personally like, and those who I do not like, they are on my ignore list and I do not see their posts, even if they are ultra useful. But at the same time, no one forbids me to use the ignore button.

These are my personal beliefs and my personal vision of objectivity merit source, so I refused the ignore button. Thus, I do not miss any posts at all and can rate absolutely any user, even if it is my personal hater.

But I would like to hear other opinions on this matter. Opinions of others merit sources. How often do you use the ignore button and do you use it at all? After all, if you ignore active users that you do not like, you cannot evaluate their posts, which means that your objectivity is no longer so objective ... or not?

i have lots of peeps on ignore. but since good posts by those ignored peeps tend to get quoted i will see them. if its good then i can go back to the original post, show/hide it to see it and will merit based on that. so ive merited many people on ignore.

tldr people on ignore if youre a source - it tends work out on its own.. in my case at least.

[sheenshane]

IMO, the more merits sources that have been become appointed it means the merrier and it was expected each of them have a different standard level of distributing their smerit allocations.  Let them be about their smerit distribution because theymos appointed them on that task so it means they deserved on that position, if theymos notice of abusing his position he has the right to demote member from merit source to a regular member and AFAIK, there's already demoted from a merit source.

I saw one such merit source, now it is no longer active on this forum. He did not ignore, but if your thoughts do not coincide with his point of view, he will not evaluate any of your posts ever again. I believe that such people should be maximally fenced off from the distribution of merit.

I noticed this too and it seems until now there are merit sources like this, if there are 2-3 of them, let them be, there are almost 100 merit sources left that possible you can get merit (deserve as a good poster) and it doesn't mean these 2-4 merit sources has the same behavior of the remaining merit sources.  But I tend to agree with the bolded part, lower a little bit their standard of distributing merits means there are some average posters (like me) that will happy to see once we received merit, when my post gets merited, I read it back what's the reason.

I don't know who is(are) ignoring me but if there's a chance to know them, I will never interact discussion with them anymore.  But this isn't good ignoring each other, we're a community here and we're an open forum to discuss different opinions and probably we should supposedly need to have a thick skin against spammer and shitposter, instead report their posts to the mod or give them a warning, later part they will learn and evolve soon.  I believe they need encouragement and once they received at least one, they will surely force themselves to be a better poster, IMO.

Just my two cents anyway.

[LoyceV]

I would like to ask the community, in particular, merit sources, how they feel about ignoring active users?

It feels great

Do you think that merit source can add as many users as he wants to his ignore list of those users that he does not like, or, being in such a position, you should not overuse this function?

It's not about liking a person, it's about not liking their posts. And I don't mean that I disagree with what they're saying, I mean it's just not worth reading. That also means it's not worth Merit, and it's not worth my time. So ignoring such users improves my forum experience.

If I ignore users that I do not like, then ~

Maybe I'm too Switzerland for this, but I don't really consider it about "liking" users.

Would they really receive PMs from merit beggars?

Only a few per year Usually when they ask for Merit, I ask for them to make a good post. Then I never hear from them again

Ignoring a user does not mean you do not like them, it is likely because they post repeated spam to an extent they are infamous for it

I've recently seen some users who look like they only post on the tech boards to earn Merit, but their posts made no sense, so I ignore them to save myself the trouble later.

When I say that a user is ignored because he doesn’t like him, I mean that someone doesn’t like his posts.

Why torture yourself reading posts you don't like?

[The Cryptovator]

I have been serving as a merit source for more than years I think. After reading your post just visit my ignore list and found there are a couple of users. I can't recall why I have put them ignore list but they aren't well-known users. Usually, I use ignore button for scammers. That means I don't like to read their post, so as usual, they won't get merits from me. But it doesn't mean other merit sources can't read their post and merit their posts. I do not hoard my source merit. Some other users getting merit from me which means merit is circulating as usual. We are merit source doesn't mean we don't have freedom, we aren't forum staff. So I don't think it's a serious issue. If you are a good contributor and I keep you on the ignoring list, then definitely other merit sources will merit your post. If all the merit sources keep you on ignore list then you have to understand there is something wrong and you have to correct it. Take it easy, we shouldn't be too serious about merit if it's not hoarding.

[FIFA worldcup]

You can wipe out your ignore list each year. One year is long enough for people to change if they want to change themselves.

If they don't change after one year, you can add them to your new ignore list. Second chance is enough.

[Cult of Lauda] An historic peace: Rome’s treaty with Carthage

The concept of second chance is rare on this forum. Not because people don't wana give second chance but in majority of cases, if you put a person on ignore list (or in spam list) , you check him after a year and you find no change in him.

[Foxpup]

My ignore list is long enough that trying to view it overloads the forum, and it's growing all the time. This is partly because, as one of the inaugural merit sources, I feel it is my sacred duty to not accidentally merit shitposts; but mostly, it's because there would otherwise be so much shit to wade through that I fear I would have to leave the forum to avoid going insane trying to cope with it all (as I suspect many other old-timers have already done).

[Quickseller]

I agree that merit should be given out based on the content of their posts, not based on who is writing the post.
[~]
With that being said, If you are sufficiently annoying, or are making enough low quality posts to get on my ignore list, chances are you are not going to make many (or any) posts that are worthy of merit.

Thank you! I feel reassured that others too have the same reasoning as I do.


My ignore list contains basically people with extremely low quality posts and people I've found that they never post anything useful or meaningful. For now my ignore list stays by this logic. If any time in the future I'm proven to be wrong (or I get to that conclusion myself), I'll change. I don't use the ignore button that often.
I'd say that the forum is so vast, you have to acknowledge that you cannot fill all the "gaps" and the merit sources have to "complete" each other.
However, I'm very new as merit source, I acknowledge that there's more responsibility involved and I'll see what I'll do in the future.

Some people might change their habits and go from a shitposter one day to writing thoughtful posts the next. If someone makes their way onto your ignore list, you can always remove them if you see something insightful quoted by someone else.