Icopress ' Merit Source Application 🚩

[SamReomo]

Took your advice and only gave him 13 even though I could have done 50.

You could gave him 50 merits that wouldn't be wrong either. But, the point is, your sending of merits shouldn't impact your and his relationship in anyway. Like if you send him 50 merits at a time, and to be honest he deserves those merits, then you may still not feel any hesitation when you may get to work with him in future.

We all are like a family on this forum, and if someone who appreciates a family member's posts or in simple words contribution then he/she can send merits to that member for his/her contribution. After sometime when the member who sent merits to a member gets accepted in a campaign that's managed by the same member then there's nothing wrong in that either.

[1714474778]

1714474778

[1714474778]

1714474778

[1714474778]

1714474778

[philipma1957]

Took your advice and only gave him 13 even though I could have done 50.

You could gave him 50 merits that wouldn't be wrong either. But, the point is, your sending of merits shouldn't impact your and his relationship in anyway. Like if you send him 50 merits at a time, and to be honest he deserves those merits, then you may still not feel any hesitation when you may get to work with him in future.

We all are like a family on this forum, and if someone who appreciates a family member's posts or in simple words contribution then he/she can send merits to that member for his/her contribution. After sometime when the member who sent merits to a member gets accepted in a campaign that's managed by the same member then there's nothing wrong in that either.

Yeah I could continue to support him with merits. I likely will do that.

A lot of the disagreement by  me with this thread  is my Accounting and IRS training. Which define a merit source act as a signature manager as a conflict of interest.

Much like the bill payer in a business should not be the bill collector. Separation of duties is the concept.

So far I gave him 63 merits .

[JollyGood]

Took your advice and only gave him 13 even though I could have done 50.

Forgive me if I am missing something here but did Poker Player actually give any advice aimed at you? I have read his post and cannot work out why you seem to have concluded anything from his comments equating to you giving merits to icopress (or anyone else) in order to support him.

Furthermore, I cannot think of any reason why you would give merits to support icopress or anyone else. How does support even work unless you are a merit source that reviews posts and helps members rank up by giving merits and the merits are all used. In that case members might give merits to help the rank up process for worthy posts but other than that I cannot see find any valid reason.

Yeah I could continue to support him with merits. I likely will do that.

A lot of the disagreement by  me with this thread  is my Accounting and IRS training. Which define a merit source act as a signature manager as a conflict of interest.

Much like the bill payer in a business should not be the bill collector. Separation of duties is the concept.

So far I gave him 63 merits .

I am curious, how do you think your 63 merits supported him?

[philipma1957]

Took your advice and only gave him 13 even though I could have done 50.

Forgive me if I am missing something here but did Poker Player actually give any advice aimed at you? I have read his post and cannot work out why you seem to have concluded anything from his comments equating to you giving merits to icopress (or anyone else) in order to support him.

Furthermore, I cannot think of any reason why you would give merits to support icopress or anyone else. How does support even work unless you are a merit source that reviews posts and helps members rank up by giving merits and the merits are all used. In that case members might give merits to help the rank up process for worthy posts but other than that I cannot see find any valid reason.

Yeah I could continue to support him with merits. I likely will do that.

A lot of the disagreement by  me with this thread  is my Accounting and IRS training. Which define a merit source act as a signature manager as a conflict of interest.

Much like the bill payer in a business should not be the bill collector. Separation of duties is the concept.

So far I gave him 63 merits .

I am curious, how do you think your 63 merits supported him?

63 merits = 31 merits to give out. 

[JollyGood]

If I understand the situation correctly, icopress has made a merit source application like many other members but I do not recall any of them receiving merits for the sake of helping the applicants to merit other posts.

I do not recall icopress ever asking for help at all and definitely not via merits. If he did not ask for members to merit his posts in order for him be able to merit more posts, why should any member take it upon themselves to merit his posts for the sake of increasing the number merits he can send? I am confused.

Also, if this type of generosity was aimed at just one merit source applicant while the others were not given merits, it is clearly unfair and would raise questions.

63 merits = 31 merits to give out. 

[philipma1957]

If I understand the situation correctly, icopress has made a merit source application like many other members but I do not recall any of them receiving merits for the sake of helping the applicants to merit other posts.

I do not recall icopress ever asking for help at all and definitely not via merits. If he did not ask for members to merit his posts in order for him be able to merit more posts, why should any member take it upon themselves to merit his posts for the sake of increasing the number merits he can send? I am confused.

Also, if this type of generosity was aimed at just one merit source applicant while the others were not given merits, it is clearly unfair and would raise questions.

63 merits = 31 merits to give out. 

he is the only one that handles signature campaigns.

if you can point out an application from a person that did not get the merit source and is a signature manager I may award merits to that person. If I like his work. Which is my entire point about Icopress I like his work.

[JollyGood]

Right now I cannot think of any campaign manager that asked to become merit source but having said that icopress asked to become a merit source he did not ask for members (including you) to merit his posts in order for him to be able to send out more merits to other members.

Hypothetically, if you asked to be merit source, given a choice would you prefer a member to post his support for you to become merit source or would you prefer to receive merits from a member because he likes your work but has become a vocal opposition to your merit source application citing a possible conflict of interest?

It seems you do not want icopress to become a merit source yet you are happy to give him merits for posts that might or might not deserve them on the basis you like his work. For me, the two simply do not equate.

If I understand the situation correctly, icopress has made a merit source application like many other members but I do not recall any of them receiving merits for the sake of helping the applicants to merit other posts.

I do not recall icopress ever asking for help at all and definitely not via merits. If he did not ask for members to merit his posts in order for him be able to merit more posts, why should any member take it upon themselves to merit his posts for the sake of increasing the number merits he can send? I am confused.

Also, if this type of generosity was aimed at just one merit source applicant while the others were not given merits, it is clearly unfair and would raise questions.

63 merits = 31 merits to give out.  

he is the only one that handles signature campaigns.

if you can point out an application from a person that did not get the merit source and is a signature manager I may award merits to that person. If I like his work. Which is my entire point about Icopress I like his work.

[SamReomo]

A lot of the disagreement by  me with this thread  is my Accounting and IRS training. Which define a merit source act as a signature manager as a conflict of interest.

Yes, I believe that's because of your accounting and IRS training, however in actual there won't be conflict of interest. If you notice the merit history of Icopress then you can easily observe that he gets more than enough merits and in all of the signature campaigns that he manages, he never asks for number of merits a member earned in past 120 days.

He mostly accept the members based on their posting habits not based on the number of merits earned, and if we keep that in our mind then I'm sure there won't be any conflict of interest even if he becomes a merit source and give merits to the valuable posts of the members who are part of the signature campaigns that he's managing.

I have read his post and cannot work out why you seem to have concluded anything from his comments equating to you giving merits to icopress (or anyone else) in order to support him.

If I'm not wrong then it's a generous act by philipma1957 to support Icopress with merits so he may get some sMerits that he could send to the deserving posts. That's what came in my mind, I could be wrong but it's an act of generosity and support from philipma1957 I believe. If I'm not wrong then philipma1957 also believes that Icopress is doing great job for the forum and that could be another reason why he's sending those merits to Icopress.

[JollyGood]

We are in agreement here, that is what he seems to be doing however he also voiced his opposition to icopress becoming merit source and that is where the two do not equate. No doubt he has been very generous with his merits to icopress but icopress did not ask for them.

The question if asked in a general sense, would any merit source applicant be happy to receive merits from those opposing his application because they like work or would they prefer to read a post to indicate they are (or are not) supporting his application?

Without doubt philipma1957 is being generous with his merits but from what I can see there is a huge contradiction in actions, that was why I stated that for me the two simply do not equate.

I have read his post and cannot work out why you seem to have concluded anything from his comments equating to you giving merits to icopress (or anyone else) in order to support him.

If I'm not wrong then it's a generous act by philipma1957 to support Icopress with merits so he may get some sMerits that he could send to the deserving posts. That's what came in my mind, I could be wrong but it's an act of generosity and support from philipma1957 I believe. If I'm not wrong then philipma1957 also believes that Icopress is doing great job for the forum and that could be another reason why he's sending those merits to Icopress.

[SamReomo]

We are in agreement here, that is what he seems to be doing however he also voiced his opposition to icopress becoming merit source and that is where the two do not equate. No doubt he has been very generous with his merits to icopress but icopress did not ask for them.

The question if asked in a general sense, would any merit source applicant be happy to receive merits from those opposing his application because they like work or would they prefer to read a post to indicate they are (or are not) supporting his application?

Yeah, he opposed the application but his stance was "Conflict of Interest," which's not true as we all know, and in his previous posts he mentioned that he had background knowledge in accounting and IRS training and that made him to bring the "Conflict of interest," topic to the application.

Icopress, never asked for any merits but I believe he won't mind having those merits as he's a deserving member of the forum and if someone sends him merits, no matter if the merits come from an opposing member, then there's nothing wrong with it. I know it could be somehow hurtful to hear opposing words from reputed members but I'm quite sure that Icopress understands that in merit source application, both support and opposition could be present.

You're right that no body becomes happy when they get merits from someone who opposed their application, but still if someone is sending merits as a way to show his generosity then one should accept it as a sign of good will. I highly agree with all your words, however, I believe that philipma1957 could rethink about his opposition and might take it words back because if we analyze it deeply then we can understand that there won't be any conflict of interest or whatsoever even if a manager becomes a merit source.

[Sandra_hakeem]

Also, if this type of generosity was aimed at just one merit source applicant while the others were not given merits, it is clearly unfair and would raise questions.

I just read through the entire argument and it was kinda like amusing at first... So many things happening and it seems like nothing has happened at all ... Meanwhile, philipma1957 didn't necessarily have to give out merit to Icopress -- especially since he's not made to issue an allocation of any sort... Ehnnn... But he said that he felt like supporting him and that he likes his job... In that case, do you feel uncomfortable or like maybe there's any suspicions in his actions?... I haven't seen you pressing on an issue like this without any valid reason.

The question if asked in a general sense, would any merit source applicant be happy to receive merits from those opposing his application because they like work or would they prefer to read a post to indicate they are (or are not) supporting his application?

I didn't get this point... Was philipma previously against icopress' application? Ofcourse they'd prefer to write on this thread whether or not they're in support  
Again Theymos, could you please validate the few merit sources "to-be" that have applied? I believe you can see this....cus I read something about some merit circle yesterday... That's exactly the kinda world we live in.

Sandra 🧑‍🦰

[icopress]

Again Theymos, could you please validate the few merit sources "to-be" that have applied? I believe you can see this....cus I read something about some merit circle yesterday... That's exactly the kinda world we live in.

At the moment, theymos is not considering anyone for the role of m'sources (I believe this will be the case for at least the next 6 months).

[Timelord2067]

Just scrolling back through many pages of your post history (going back over the last few months) anyone can see the majority of your own posts are in the gaming section (usually typical one line glib comments) - do you feel you have enough coverage of the various sections of the forum to be in a position to hand out endless merits to a wide cross section of the forum?

Or just people in your signature campaigns?

[m2017]

Again Theymos, could you please validate the few merit sources "to-be" that have applied? I believe you can see this....cus I read something about some merit circle yesterday... That's exactly the kinda world we live in.

At the moment, theymos is not considering anyone for the role of m'sources (I believe this will be the case for at least the next 6 months).

Well, then I believe that this topic can be closed for discussion for at least 6 months. Otherwise, the debating an irrelevant topic will not stop.

Just scrolling back through many pages of your post history (going back over the last few months) anyone can see the majority of your own posts are in the gaming section (usually typical one line glib comments) - do you feel you have enough coverage of the various sections of the forum to be in a position to hand out endless merits to a wide cross section of the forum?

In the gambling section, very little merit is given out (I wonder why) and an active Merit Source in that section could correct the imbalance through their actions.

Or just people in your signature campaigns?

This is precisely why it is unacceptable to combine the role of a campaign manager and a Merit Source.

[philipma1957]

Also, if this type of generosity was aimed at just one merit source applicant while the others were not given merits, it is clearly unfair and would raise questions.

I just read through the entire argument and it was kinda like amusing at first... So many things happening and it seems like nothing has happened at all ... Meanwhile, philipma1957 didn't necessarily have to give out merit to Icopress -- especially since he's not made to issue an allocation of any sort... Ehnnn... But he said that he felt like supporting him and that he likes his job... In that case, do you feel uncomfortable or like maybe there's any suspicions in his actions?... I haven't seen you pressing on an issue like this without any valid reason.

The question if asked in a general sense, would any merit source applicant be happy to receive merits from those opposing his application because they like work or would they prefer to read a post to indicate they are (or are not) supporting his application?

I didn't get this point... Was philipma previously against icopress' application? Ofcourse they'd prefer to write on this thread whether or not they're in support  
Again Theymos, could you please validate the few merit sources "to-be" that have applied? I believe you can see this....cus I read something about some merit circle yesterday... That's exactly the kinda world we live in.

Sandra 🧑‍🦰

This is very simple

1) I like icopress I gave him merits because I like him.

2) I think no signature manager should have merit source

3) I am a trained accountant and separation of duties is a concept I believe in. This is why I think no signature manager should be a merit source.


As an aside I just gave icopress a few merits. to show I still like him.

[Poker Player]

1) I like icopress I gave him merits because I like him...

As an aside I just gave icopress a few merits. to show I still like him.

Do I have to tell you that this is wrong?

That's not what the merit system was created for.

To be honest with you philipma1957, you can say that because you have been on the forum since 2012, you are the human user who has written the most posts etc., otherwise anyone who said that would be severely criticized and I would personally have left a neutral tag on your profile about it.

I also like him but I've never given him any single merit just because I like him.

Besides I don't think it's simply because you like him, more a way to compensate for your stance against him being appointed a merit source.

[JollyGood]

This is very simple

1) I like icopress I gave him merits because I like him.

2) I think no signature manager should have merit source

3) I am a trained accountant and separation of duties is a concept I believe in. This is why I think no signature manager should be a merit source.


As an aside I just gave icopress a few merits. to show I still like him.

When it comes to giving merits to someone you like rather than giving merits because of the contents of a post, it is clearly not the correct use of the merit system.

Do I have to tell you that this is wrong?

That's not what the merit system was created for.

To be honest with you philipma1957, you can say that because you have been on the forum since 2012, you are the human user who has written the most posts etc., otherwise anyone who said that would be severely criticized and I would personally have left a neutral tag on your profile about it.

I also like him but I've never given him any single merit just because I like him.

Besides I don't think it's simply because you like him, more a way to compensate for your stance against him being appointed a merit source.

If I have understood his point of view correctly, it seems he is not using the merit system in the correct manner. Furthermore, because he believes he is using it in an appropriate way it will be difficult to try to convince him otherwise.

By the way, I have seen merit sources asking theymos for more merits in order to give them out to (what they deem to be) deserving posts and receiving merits from members including mostly other merit sources as a way to help out. If this is what philipma1957 is doing, I think there is no need for him to do that in this case.

[BlackHatCoiner]

To be honest with you philipma1957, you can say that because you have been on the forum since 2012, you are the human user who has written the most posts etc., otherwise anyone who said that would be severely criticized and I would personally have left a neutral tag on your profile about it.

It's good that we're being honest lately. Here's an honest question of mine: what are the mitigating factors of having a 12-year-old account? If you think this deserves a neutral feedback, then you should do it regardless the reputation of the user, otherwise you're being dishonest to the new users.

This recent discussion is the reason I'm in favor of not having strict rules when it comes to the merit system. People should be free to do whatever they want with their merits. If the admin notices suspicious activity from a merit source, they can just take their source role away.

[philipma1957]

1) I like icopress I gave him merits because I like him...

As an aside I just gave icopress a few merits. to show I still like him.

Do I have to tell you that this is wrong?

That's not what the merit system was created for.

To be honest with you philipma1957, you can say that because you have been on the forum since 2012, you are the human user who has written the most posts etc., otherwise anyone who said that would be severely criticized and I would personally have left a neutral tag on your profile about it.

I also like him but I've never given him any single merit just because I like him.

Besides I don't think it's simply because you like him, more a way to compensate for your stance against him being appointed a merit source.

So if i like a person must I give all the reasons that I like them to justify the merits I give him.

Is liking him not enough words for you.

Do you want a detailed explanation of why I like him why I trust him?

Here is one reason I like him and trust him. He pays the signature participants the correct amount of money due to them.


The internet will always have issues when writing to communicate.

My apologies if saying I like someone was not detailed enough for your standards.

So me giving him merits is my way of saying he does a good job distributing payments to people. He has been honest from all evidence I have seen. He has done this for years.

All qualites of a good campaign manager.

[Sandra_hakeem]

It's good that we're being honest lately. Here's an honest question of mine: what are the mitigating factors of having a 12-year-old account? If you think this deserves a neutral feedback, then you should do it regardless the reputation of the user, otherwise you're being dishonest to the new users.

But why?.. tchh! Accountability is part of the core problems we have in our community... Even in my newbie days, I tried as much as possible to point out so many cases that proved our merit system is biased; several elite members never seem to agree with it -- though it was obvious already.., they keep beating about some petty sentiments that doesn't even correlate with the proper way of recycling merits ... You could choose to merit only elite members like yourself if you were never a merit source but; It's a different thing if you've been appointed/allocated merit for sourceship -- you have a duty... The case is different today.
Amongst all the reputable members in our forum; if merit sources were inclined to meriting technical post&thread alone/ appointed due to their vast technical knowledge, do you think most members would rank up/ be called up as merit sources??... Lol..THE SYSTEM is made to be as free as possible; but it looks like some powerful people feel others shouldn't be like them.

Sandra 🧑‍🦰