[SURVEY] Who thinks the Lemmings should also be removed as Merit Sources?

[Timelord2067]

I am taking a quick survey:

Who thinks those who have requested they be removed permanently of their DT1 status should also be removed as Merit Sources?

The three voting choices are as follows:

• Yes, removed as Merit Sources if they request permanent removal of DT1 ranking
• Not sure - something needs to change.
• No - the merit sources should stay as is.

Discussions welcome as are votes.

One vote per user - you can change your vote as and when you feel like it.


This survey is to get a feel for other users' thoughts - I have no idea who is actually a merit source given @theymos does not appear to advertise such information ^{(and we only have anecdotal information to support any theories who they are)}.  But, given others are calling for change in the DT1 ranks - perhaps now is the time to examine who is a merit source and as the poll asks, should they be merit sources if they do not want to carry the mantle of the rank of DT1.

[1714736388]

1714736388

[1714736388]

1714736388

[1714736388]

1714736388

[1714736388]

1714736388

[1714736388]

1714736388

[Upgrade00]

But, given others are calling for change in the DT1 ranks - perhaps now is the time to examine who is a merit source and as the poll asks, should they be merit sources if they do not want to carry the mantle of the rank of DT1.

I voted "No - the merit sources should stay as it is"

I honestly do not see the correlation between both, besides being volunteer positions (especially merit sources) that users do not get any benefit from. Being a merit source does not come with extra benefit or obligation besides taking your time to find and merit deserving posts, and stay away from dubious merit activities.

Merit sources do not have to carry the mantle of Default trust and shouldn't if they don't feel up to it or interested.
The topic title already gave away a prejudiced view from you

[Timelord2067]

The topic title already gave away a prejudiced view from you

Thanks for voting - I appreciate it.

I voted "No - the merit sources should stay as it is"

I honestly do not see the correlation between both, besides being volunteer positions (especially merit sources) that users do not get any benefit from. Being a merit source does not come with extra benefit or obligation besides taking your time to find and merit deserving posts, and stay away from dubious merit activities.

Merit sources do not have to carry the mantle of Default trust and shouldn't if they don't feel up to it or interested.

I believe most merit sources don't actually go looking for meritorious posts, rather they gift them amongst other DT1 or Merit Sources with feeble stories of some sort of Trickle Down Effect to the lower ranks.

Most Merit Sources were anointed originally while others have campaigned to be given their rolls.

[Upgrade00]

I believe most merit sources don't actually go looking for meritorious posts, rather they gift them amongst other DT1 or Merit Sources with feeble stories of some sort of Trickle Down Effect to the lower ranks.

If you don't know who merit sources are, how do you know how "most" of them act?

Your views could of course be correct and there could be a sort of merit back scratching among sources, but I do not still get the correlation to default trust and a users decision to want to be excluded from it.
No system is perfect, but if you believe the merit source make up is flawed and abused, you can make an argument against that directly.

[NeuroticFish]

No - the merit sources should stay as is.

This is my vote (too). The drama about Trust is one thing, meriting posts that deserve it is another thing. Yes, sometimes people merit posts expressing views on the trust system, and yes, people tend to merit the posts expressing views similar to their own instead of good posts, still, the merit system is imho in a much better shape now that it was 1 year ago (just a random date in the past) and I don't want to risk making it worse (we do need the merit sources).

And back to the Trust system, that one may need improvements. People removing themselves from DT1 or clearing their trust lists are just a symptom of all that. And those are valid choices; people should not be punished for that.

Edit:

The topic title already gave away a prejudiced view from you

I don't agree with OP, still, I find it a valid question. Not really worthy for a poll, still, a valid question.

[Welsh]

I'll be honest, I was also struggling to see the correlation between the two. However, I guess there's one point to be made. If a user isn't trusted in the first place, do we trust them to distribute merit appropriately? I guess that's the only major question I can see from this. However, if you're trusted, and you've just asked the community to not include you in their trust lists, I'm not entirely sure why that would effect their judgement on being merit sources. If theymos has a problem, he will, and has removed merit sources.

I also voted no for the time being, unless I'm missing the point here. Feel free to enlighten me.

[_act_]

Who thinks those who have requested they be removed permanently of their DT1 status should also be removed as Merit Sources?

I will choose that merit source should be left alone regardless of being among DT1 or not, but this may not be perfectly answered because if DT system is regarded to be flawed, so thus merit system. I wonder why they want theymos to make some changes to DT while not complaining some changes for merit source. I expect merit system to be more decentralized than theymos packing most smerits to just few people. Both are not perfect but both are helping, nothing should change is what I think.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

I honestly do not see the correlation between both, besides being volunteer positions (especially merit sources) that users do not get any benefit from.

There isn't any correlation, but Timelord2067 has been known to exhibit a weird form of pareidolia when it comes to forum-related associations, so maybe DT and merit sources being lumped in together is an extension of that.  No offense, Timelord2067; I know I'm not the only one who's noticed that trait, nor am I the first to have mentioned it in a thread.

So who are these members who are demanding to be removed from DT?  I've read about people clearing their trust lists (which I've recently done), but aside from marlboroza a while back I haven't seen any such demands.  Could have missed it, though.

In any case, I wouldn't even care if a DT member-merit source got booted from the DT list by the community.  As long as they're handing out merits appropriately and not abusing the system, they should stay merit sources.  Think about how many sources we have now and how long it takes for members to rank up.  If you started removing sources simply because they wanted off the DT list, it'd throw a monkey wrench in the merit machine that might be hard to fix.

[Timelord2067]

If you don't know who merit sources are, how do you know how "most" of them act?

As I explained, anecdotally we can deduce who the various merit sources are (some have identified themselves in various threads discussing meriting/merit source applications etc)...

From those we can deduce are Merit Sources, my conclusions are based on my observations of their behaviour.

Your views could of course be correct and there could be a sort of merit back scratching among sources, but I do not still get the correlation to default trust and a users decision to want to be excluded from it.

Well ... are there any DT2 merit sources that have *never* been DT1 ?  i.e. they have been voted up by a DT1 member/s rather than being appointed via the monthly lottery?

No system is perfect, but if you believe the merit source make up is flawed and abused, you can make an argument against that directly.

I believe that's what my survey is attempting to do.

[Upgrade00]

I don't agree with OP, still, I find it a valid question. Not really worthy for a poll, still, a valid question.

I never said it was not a valid question. But the use of the word "Lemmings" in the title already shows a prejudiced view.

No system is perfect, but if you believe the merit source make up is flawed and abused, you can make an argument against that directly.

I believe that's what my survey is attempting to do.

No, your survey is not arguing about a flaw in the merit system. It's rather about whether volunteer merit sources should have the freedom to opt out of another volunteer position in the forum

[Timelord2067]

...

Instead of personal remarks against myself, do you have any suggestions of substance?

I never said it was not a valid question. But the use of the word "Lemmings" in the title already shows a prejudiced view.

I find shock and awe gets a reaction where a less forthright comment gets no reactions.

It's rather about whether volunteer merit sources should have the freedom to opt out of another volunteer position in the forum

I'm not suggesting they have the option to opt out of being a Merit Source should they request they be removed from the DT1 lottery, I'm suggesting it ^{(being a merit source)} be taken away from them.

[jackg]

If merit transactions are still loosely monitored by the forum (and the admin team when made aware), would there be a reason to do this?

If there's been a system change where being dt1 automatically makes you a merit source and I've missed that then that'd be different but I think the two accolades should stand on their own as much as possible.

Have people given reasons for withdrawing from dt1 (surely you could just not participate if you didn't want the drama)? If there were cases of this and it become more evident there were reasons that conflicted with the user being a merit source afterwards then it'd probably be a good idea (done individually) but merits might be recognised more than trust so a dt1 member and merit source i could see stepping down from both at the same time if they didn't want the pressure of the trust system.

[Timelord2067]

...

I'm sure most will understand that I'm not proposing a DT1 member automatically be anointed as a merit source and that role be taken away as a part of the monthly lottery.  (We'd have the reverse - more members clamouring to be a part of the DT1 lottery)

I feel that to be appointed a merit source one of the stipulations should be that you are at the very least a DT1 member.  So, it would stand to reason that if you request to be removed as a DT1 member, then you are in effect relinquishing your right to have the roll of merit source assigned to you.

I would be keen to read @theymos' thoughts on this (and the overarching DT1 "issue" that is occurring in some quarters).

[Apocollapse]

DT1 and merit source are completely different, a DT1 member have a power to join the vote of DT system which is about feedback relation while merit source have a power to give many merits that deserve to get merited which is about rank relation. I don't see any reason why DT1 and merit source should be combined, does all DT1 is a merit sources? AFAIK it's no (CMIIW)

If he's become DT2 and still become a good merit source, then he's good.

So my vote is no.

[Timelord2067]

Archived for future reference: [1a]

I'll include this image since what merit source should do is find and give merit to post that are objectively good quality.

That's the best counter suggestion you can come up with?

[DaveF]

Voting no. Similar to what I have said in the past. Trust should have nothing to do with feedback. So in this case DT status should have nothing to do with being a merit source.
There are probably some merit sources in some local boards that will never be off DT2 if they are even there because there is just not enough traction to get them to DT1

With that being said, I am off DT1 lottery at the moment and am not a merit source so if I was yes to both I might feel differently, but I don't think I would.

-Dave

[jackg]

I feel that to be appointed a merit source one of the stipulations should be that you are at the very least a DT1 member. So, it would stand to reason that if you request to be removed as a DT1 member, then you are in effect relinquishing your right to have the roll of merit source assigned to you.

Do the police hand out degrees?

It took a lot of years for theymos to come up with the trust system we have now (and at least 3 s systems have been implemented already, 2 being trashed).

A merit source is there to find posts that contribute effectively to the forum and actively read and take part in a large amount of discussion. A trusted member has built trust with other users (in most cases) which is an achievement but may come to the forum with different interests than that of a merit source.

I would be keen to read @theymos' thoughts on this (and the overarching DT1 "issue" that is occurring in some quarters).

Theymos' idea of the merit system is similar to that of the report to moderator system (I say that because it's easier to find the report to moderator quote): "Do not worry about your accuracy too much; one accurate report is worth many inaccurate reports." they had a similar rhetoric for the merit system when that was first out too.

[Smartvirus]

As other users have stated, there is no correlation between a merit source and a DT position. They are both distinct and functions independently of each other and as such, it should be exclusive to what actions or inactions that could result from the stands of either.

Users might choose to be vote out of DT or be removed as a merit source whol they uphold the other. It's entirely an idea of choice and if we are to be true to ourselves, having to choose is a critical part of cryptocurrency and being able to express it makes us even more stronger.
Them getting to choose where they could perform best is a good for the forum and having that influenced by an exclusively distinct function doesn't make a lot of sense.

[Timelord2067]

... Users might choose to be vote out of DT or be removed as a merit source ...

I count only two or three who've gone down the path of actually requesting to be removed from DT1 while around four or five (if I'm reading BPIP correctly) have taken the soft approach of removing their DT trust lists - for the time being - effectively removing themselves, but not actually being removed point blank from the system.

Do the police hand out degrees?

Perhaps if they did we'd have less fatalities on the roads.

[YOSHIE]

I saw a drama in Reputation about DT, I took an example from the topic @yahoo62278, there I can draw one conclusion, indeed what @yahoo62278 said is true and also I saw other members complaining about DT.

In my opinion, they don't blame and don't ask for the two SURVEYS below to be removed.

• Yes, removed if they request permanent removal of DT1 ranking
• No - the merit sources should stay as is.

They're just tired of drama, all they want is:

something needs to change.

Myself included, also suggesting the above, changes, I don't think the removal of DT and Source merit is victimized in all the drama.