As for sending merits, if the administrator doesn't judge this, then a neutral tag will probably be enough.
I have a feeling that there is a famous quote from theymos where he said if someone tags you for something stupid involving merit, they are not going to be a DT member for much longer. This is the reason DT members avoid tagging merit abusers. Am I correct lovesmayfamilis?
I have seen the same arguments somewhere else where a member was saying let's say he abused the merit, what is the punishment? You cannot tag him because theymos said this;
If a DT member tags you for something stupid involving merit (ie. probably anything less than selling merit), then they're not going to be a DT member for much longer.
But whoever quotes this line either does not quote the whole post intentionally, or they did not read the context. theymos was talking to a merit source regarding his merit distribution because some people suspect he was abusing merits. It's not for an average user like me and the user in question at this moment. I am quoting you the whole post with context;
Well, it appears that your source merit either wasn't upped to 250 a month ago like me, or you are just letting it expire. Theymos gave me instructions to try and do my best to distribute all of it. I'm doing the best that I can; yet have already had complaints. I really despise this statistic.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;stats=topsendban Now I am on the list that appears to point out merit abuse suspects. I was originally very honored to become a merit source. But now I feel that my reputation is at stake with every single merit that I am obligated to distribute. I know that I only have black trust at the moment. However, I keep checking my trust rating to make sure some DT member doesn't decide to red tag me because they feel that I am being "abusive" or derelict in my duty.
If they complain about amounts, tell them to complain to me. It's best if sources try to exhaust their source allocations, even if it means giving posts higher amounts than is typical. If you have 150 source merit and you only see 3 merit-worthy posts in a month, then I'd rather you over-give each of them 50 merit than let the merit expire. That way there are more people capable of sending merit, and the "merit economy" is less top-down.
If a DT member tags you for something stupid involving merit (ie. probably anything less than selling merit), then they're not going to be a DT member for much longer.
Aside from that, 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.
The topsendban list is just a first indication of abuse, and many excellent people are on it. Your place on there acts as a sort of benchmark: eg. chandra12 has a similar score there, but whereas you are an extremely active merit-giver with a diverse selection of posts merited (most of which anyone would agree with), chandra12 only has two large merit sends. His behavior
in comparison to yours while having a similar topsendban score is what creates a
strong abuse impression.
I appreciate the work of you and other sources who take it seriously!
