Can a merit source use it's status to shill own project by giving merit ?

[FunctionalFedora]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5321507
There are more instances of this behavior.

[1715064010]

1715064010

[1715064010]

1715064010

[LoyceV]

I don't think it's the best use of Merit, but it certainly isn't the worst I've seen.

Consider this:

~ if people complain about whether things deserve merit at all, then that's something to perhaps think about, but if you conclude that they're wrong, then that's that. You don't need to stress about it or defend yourself constantly. It's conceivable that someday you and I will end up disagreeing too much about this stuff and I'll remove your source status, but it's really not a big deal.

(click for full context)

[tranthidung]

What accusation do you have here?

I visited that thread and used Search with keyword is Merit. Honestly, I did not find any word in that OP which contains merit word. No merit give away is mentioned in that OP. Did I miss any rule related to merit in that thread?

Additionally, a merit source has smerits from two sources: (1) from merit source allocation; (2) from earned merits. You can not differentiate what is source of smerit used by a merit source. krogothmanhattan is not a member who readily to abuse merit source for his business I think. He made his name and his business long before the merit system kick-off.

If it is used from merit source, it's bad because it does not stick to original idea of merit system, to highlight quality post with merit.
If it is used from my earned merit, it's not bad at all. It's my own earned merits and I have freedom to use it.

[mk4]

I don't think there's a written rule of it being illegal, but yea if I was the merit source, I probably wouldn't dump merit on the project thread to prevent conflict of interest. With that said, it really isn't "bad" as far as I know; just not something I'd personally do especially if it's a good amount of merits.

[Pmalek]

Many of those posts aren't something I would personally merit, but merit source or not, he has the right to use his allocation anyway he sees fit. What merit sources are not allowed to is to sell their merits. If he feels like meriting those who like his project or say good things about it, that's his choice.

This dude has given a lot to the community. Researching why he is giving this or that member a merit or two isn't something I would worry about.

[Shamm]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5321507
There are more instances of this behavior.

I think that's not a problem if he/she give his sMerits to those who like his/her projects then it's gonna be fine unless what's Pmalek said above that if he/she sells his sMerits and then that's prohibited. But if he/she give merits by his/her own will then we can not blame him cause that is his sMerits, he owns that.

[KingsDen]

I don't think it's the best use of Merit, but it certainly isn't the worst I've seen.

Consider this:

~ if people complain about whether things deserve merit at all, then that's something to perhaps think about, but if you conclude that they're wrong, then that's that. You don't need to stress about it or defend yourself constantly. It's conceivable that someday you and I will end up disagreeing too much about this stuff and I'll remove your source status, but it's really not a big deal.

(click for full context)

Thanks @LoyceV for this.
It is obvious @Theymos isn't much concerned about how a merit source uses his allocated merit. The most important thing is that let the merit serve its purpose of ensuring quality.
I was wondering why some merits sources would rather not distribute 2 merits to 25 people making it 50merits. But will give 1 person the 50merits. Theymos supports this, in as much as it is a quality post.
An ordinary user can give such a parallel merits without being questioned. So, I don't think that him being a merit source has made him lose the right of a common user.

[hugeblack]

I can understand your concerns, but it will be twofold:

 - Bump the topic: A lot of people will reply to get Merits, so that topic will be first.
 - False reviews: If you can prove it, it is like selling merits for a positive feedback, which is a behaviour that deserves a negative trust.

Therefore, you need to prove that Merit source use Merits (indirect selling) to get positive feedback

[DaveF]

Full disclosure I have had may dealings with the person who is discussed in the 1st post.


Context matters a lot.
I have seen them FREQUENTLY merit posts in the collectibles section with a lot of merit. So posts in that section are in general are going to get a lot of merit from them.
So looking at it that way, it's not a big deal.

If they created an altcoin mining project and started giving merit in there, it might look a bit different since as far as I can see they never merit in that section and never post in that section so although it would be 100% acceptable to do it, the 'optics' so to speak would be bad.

-Dave

[Coin_trader]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5321507
There are more instances of this behavior.

There's a possibility that the instances that you brought up will occur due to the importance of merit to rank up user but take consideration that to become a merit source, You should qualify on theymos requirements which is very hard and only few got accepted so far. So there's a low chance that a merit source will do this BS things.

Your example is not an abused since he is just rewarding a merit to the user that he thinks contributes to his collection thread and he is not shilling at all. I don't think so that Krogoth is a merit source since he didn't apply for it. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

I don't think there's a written rule of it being illegal, but yea if I was the merit source, I probably wouldn't dump merit on the project thread to prevent conflict of interest.

Agreed.  I've created threads in which I've given out a lot of merits to people who've replied, and not necessarily because they liked my post(s), but doing that in a thread where you're selling something has an air of ickiness about it if you're a merit source.  

While it's true that there are source sMerits and personal ones, if you're a source you're always dipping into your source sMerits first.  It might be a small matter, but when you merit posts like these it's questionable whether the source is using good judgement as far as merit-sending:



In krogothmanhattan's defense, though, it isn't a ton of merits we're talking about and he might have a lot of earned sMerits at his disposal to cover all of the posts like that.  And though I don't follow the Collectibles section, I don't think he's in the habit of giving out merits frivolously.  In any case, if Theymos thinks it's a problem it's his call to do something about it (which I don't think it is, and I don't think Theymos will).

[AverageGlabella]

krogothmanhattan does not merit just their posts in that board if you look at their sent history they seem to like to merit anything related to the collectibles board. If is not the best use of merit especially as a merit source but I think it is unfair to accuse them of shilling their own project by giving merit probably trying to show their gratitude without posting thank you posts because they would be removed by the mods. I think krogothmanhattan should probably think about stopping meriting these types of posts but I do not think its abuse or shilling but trying to show gratitude without breaking forum rules.

In krogothmanhattan's defense, though, it isn't a ton of merits we're talking about and he might have a lot of earned sMerits at his disposal to cover all of the posts like that.  And though I don't follow the Collectibles section, I don't think he's in the habit of giving out merits frivolously.  In any case, if Theymos thinks it's a problem it's his call to do something about it (which I don't think it is, and I don't think Theymos will).

The amount of merits is not a lot when compared to the amount sent on the forum site wide but comparing krogothmanhattan's recent merit spending habits it is a lot compared to their merit sent because they do not seem very active in sending merits but they do send higher amounts of merit 5/10/15 more regularly than other people I have seen do but krogothmanhattan only sends 1 merit for these posts which probably do not amount to anything more than 10% of their total merit expenditure.

[Pffrt]

I don't think so that Krogoth is a merit source since he didn't apply for it. Correct me if I'm wrong.

You are wrong. According to bpip stats, he has received 1854 merits while has sent 5427 merits which prove he is a merit source. It's not necessary for everyone to apply for a merit source. There were some users given merit sources at the beginning of the merit system and if he didn't have applied for merit sources, I think he is from the initial batch.

[dataispower]

What accusation do you have here?

I visited that thread and used Search with keyword is Merit. Honestly, I did not find any word in that OP which contains merit word. No merit give away is mentioned in that OP. Did I miss any rule related to merit in that thread?

Additionally, a merit source has smerits from two sources: (1) from merit source allocation; (2) from earned merits. You can not differentiate what is source of smerit used by a merit source. krogothmanhattan is not a member who readily to abuse merit source for his business I think. He made his name and his business long before the merit system kick-off.

If it is used from merit source, it's bad because it does not stick to original idea of merit system, to highlight quality post with merit.
If it is used from my earned merit, it's not bad at all. It's my own earned merits and I have freedom to use it.

I believe this op is somebody alt using to attack, after reading your comments i went to read through the link op drop and i could not see something interrelated like merit, the only thing i come across is a stamp design.
I believe that you are of good point, because op is channeling the point of allegations to merit abuse which is not true from what i have seen so far from the link op drop, you are right mate from your observations

[OgNasty]

People realize that Merit is worthless right?  There are better more productive things to be doing with your time then worrying about how someone sends out a useless...I was going to say token but it isn't even that. 

My advice is for people to spend more time worrying about how they can do good and less time worrying about others doing bad.  Bad behavior, scams, trolling, aren't punished here anyway so...  Merit/trust abusers and trolls will always exist here.  The system is setup for them to thrive in groups.  Don't bitch about the symptoms though, bitch about the cause or contribute a solution.

[BlackHatCoiner]

Yes they can. However, they risk their position of being merit sources. Does it really worth trying? The only rule for the merit sources is that they're forbidden to sell them. But, on a second thought, using them this way is more or less the same thing.

I was going to say token but it isn't even that.

Both are sold, both are centralized. Sorry, but I could not get a hold of myself.

[Poker Player]

I didn't know krogothmanhattan but I see he has impressive feedback.

Yes it is true that some merited posts clearly look like shitposts like "great project!" style you see in the alt section, such as these:

Very nicely done 👍

Super cool  

I'm not saying that you can't reply in a forum sincerely to say these things but precisely in this forum posts of this style are not well seen....

I would not give it more importance because it is just one merit per post, and besides I see that there is something that has not been mentioned: krogothmanhattan gave merit to the first replies but did not give any merit to the replies from March 5. So, it's not the case that he is giving merits to everybody who replies in order to keep his thread getting bumped.

[LoyceV]

I'm not saying that you can't reply in a forum sincerely to say these things but precisely in this forum posts of this style are not well seen....

The difference with the "great project" bump spammers is that, judging by their feedback, those users really mean it and really buy such items. The Collectibles board can't be compared with the altcoin spammers.

[noorman0]

I see Krogoth only spends her activities on the goods and collectibles boards. No matter how she has become a source of merit, if Theymos assigns the responsibility it means that he wants merit to be well distributed across that board. And (perhaps) selectively, Krogoth is the one who can distribute it without a doubt.

And besides, I'm sure the average collectors on that board including krogoth, don't care about ranking up or weekly post quotas.

[Pmalek]

krogothmanhattan has so far not responded in this thread. Not that he really needs to do that. It's not an accusation, and even if it was, he has no reason to justify his actions because he isn't doing anything bad. Since he might not even be aware of the existence of this thread, I will PM him a link to it so that he can say something if he feels like doing that.