Is this an obvious misuse of merit?

[uchegod-21]

I was going through the service board and I saw this user's signature and avatar rent thread. I checked the user's feedback page and discovered he has 2 neutrals, one of which states thus;

He misuses the merit system by proposing to give merit to whoever guesses the price of bitcoin on a date instead of giving merit for quality.

I don't think that this is an enough reason for a tag. Being able to guess the price of bitcoin is a good job already, it must not be some walls of text to be quality. Secondly, the user being tagged is a full member and also not a merit source.

Note: I don't know if there are other ill behaviours of that user, I just created this thread to get clarified if there was an obvious merit abuse incase of subsequent scenarios.

[dkbit98]

This topic belongs to Reputation board, not Meta, so better move it there.

Member krishnaverma received only neutral feedback so I don't see why this would be any issue, especially for some other member like you, unless there is some connection between you.
However, other members previously received merits for running bitcoin nodes, making bitcoin art, and doing other stuff, so I don't think his price prediction rewarded with merit should be a problem for anyone.

[Coin_trader]

I don't think that this is an enough reason for a tag. Being able to guess the price of bitcoin is a good job already, it must not be some walls of text to be quality. Secondly, the user being tagged is a full member and also not a merit source.

The tag is a neutral feedback doesn’t affect his trust score. There’s a lot of neutral tag use for personal reasons which doesn’t follow @LoyceV guidelines for trust system even high trust score user when they have an argument to each other.

Remember that trust system is not moderated so anyone is free to send any kind of feedback but only positive and negative feedback only matters since it’s affect your trust score.

Follow @dkbit98 suggestion to move this topic on the right board. This is not about the forum.

[uchegod-21]

This topic belongs to Reputation board, not Meta, so better move it there.

No, this is not a reputation topic. It is about merit and not anyone's reputation. Merit related matters belong to meta.

Member krishnaverma received only neutral feedback so I don't see why this would be any issue, especially for some other member like you, unless there is some connection between you.

You are wrong again, there must not be connections between us before I raise an issue I need clarity about. Because it is a neutral tag doesn't mean it should be neglected even if it was given for a wrong reason.

However, other members previously received merits for running bitcoin nodes, making bitcoin art, and doing other stuff, so I don't think his price prediction rewarded with merit should be a problem for anyone.

It is here you aired your opinion and it is aligning mine.

The tag is a neutral feedback doesn’t affect his trust score. There’s a lot of neutral tag use for personal reasons which doesn’t follow @LoyceV guidelines for trust system even high trust score user when they have an argument to each other.

Remember that trust system is not moderated so anyone is free to send any kind of feedback but only positive and negative feedback only matters since it’s affect your trust score.

Are you serious about this?
So even if I am accusing someone wrongly, in as much as I keep it neutral, it is fine and good to go??

Follow @dkbit98 suggestion to move this topic on the right board. This is not about the forum.

I insist that this is not a reputation issue, I think it belongs here. I am interested in knowing about the right and wrong use of merits. I think the topic is more of meta than reputation. Unless a moderator thinks otherwise.

[LoyceV]

I'd say this is a case of "not great, not terrible". Nothing much is lost, spammers won't suddenly be able to rank up because of this, and it's not the first time I've seen Merit being used as some sort of reward.

[dkbit98]

No, this is not a reputation topic. It is about merit and not anyone's reputation. Merit related matters belong to meta.

Yes it is.
Even your topic title it is saying MISUES OF MERIT 
You are talking about member and feedback he received, not about forum related stuff.

I insist that this is not a reputation issue, I think it belongs here. I am interested in knowing about the right and wrong use of merits. I think the topic is more of meta than reputation. Unless a moderator thinks otherwise.

Go ahead if you want to be silly and continue fighting with moderators and theymos

[Coin_trader]

The tag is a neutral feedback doesn’t affect his trust score. There’s a lot of neutral tag use for personal reasons which doesn’t follow @LoyceV guidelines for trust system even high trust score user when they have an argument to each other.

Remember that trust system is not moderated so anyone is free to send any kind of feedback but only positive and negative feedback only matters since it’s affect your trust score.

Are you serious about this?
So even if I am accusing someone wrongly, in as much as I keep it neutral, it is fine and good to go??

I’m not saying it’s fine or some sort for that feedback. My point is whether can you stop someone writing a neutral feedback on your account?

All I’m saying is trust score is unmoderated which means everyone can write anything they want on your trust page regardless if it’s right or wrong. Ask @theymos to partly moderate the trust system to delete feedback that didn’t follow the forum guidelines to solve the issue or PM directly the user who put that feedback. That’s how the trust system works for a long time.

[_act_]

I don't think that this is an enough reason for a tag. Being able to guess the price of bitcoin is a good job already, it must not be some walls of text to be quality. Secondly, the user being tagged is a full member and also not a merit source.

It is just a neutral feedback. But you are right. That is why it is good to grow a thick skin. You can see that the user is not having good posts to make. Check his topic to know that. If the user that gave him the neutral tag is not right, but the user that was given the neutral tag has no value or anything useful to give which means he is not necessary to fight for. The user is just having nothing good to render and will most likely be a troll and a spammer.

[No, this is not a reputation topic. It is about merit and not anyone's reputation. Merit related matters belong to meta.

This is more about someone on this forum and it is about reputation. It is not about this forum.

I'd say this is a case of "not great, not terrible". Nothing much is lost, spammers won't suddenly be able to rank up because of this, and it's not the first time I've seen Merit being used as some sort of reward.

What I know is that the user is just not having the quality posts that is worth someone fighting for. I have seen merit source and people that are sending merit to other thinge like contest or using it to merit people that make use of their service on this forum. Some will merit people that post under their campaign management or anything like that but nothing happened because their presence is still worthy on this forum. I totally agree with you.

[Lucius]

~snip~
I don't think that this is an enough reason for a tag. Being able to guess the price of bitcoin is a good job already, it must not be some walls of text to be quality. Secondly, the user being tagged is a full member and also not a merit source.

I agree that it makes no sense to give someone such feedback (even if it is neutral), because as far as I understand, @krishnaverma did not ask that someone give him merits, but he suggested that he would reward others with his sMerits. In addition, merits are not exclusively related to the quality of the post, but everyone gives them based on their own preferences - and I remember posts with only one word that received merits.

Note: I don't know if there are other ill behaviours of that user, I just created this thread to get clarified if there was an obvious merit abuse incase of subsequent scenarios.

I can say that I know the history of that user, considering that he has been trying to sell his signature/avatar for a long time and that I wrote a comment in his topic. From my perspective, it seems to me that he is trying to do something by trying to copy the moves of other members, but it seems that he only irritates others with these moves.

[pakhitheboss]

If you take a look at his posting history, you'll notice that he has been spamming important discussion boards with topics that are only one-liners. Additionally, some of his topics don't seem to make sense because he is either asking something very basic or it's a topic where he could have easily used common sense.

That being said if a neutral tag or a negative tag had been placed on his profile it should have been about spam. I don't think that giving merit, as being subjective should be the reason for any tag on his profile.

Since the tag is neutral it would not affect him in the future. All he needs to do is to work on his way to interact in the forum and to stop thinking that he is one of the best quality posters in the forum.

[Jawhead999]

My question: How you can say he misuses merit if he didn't even send the merit to the correct guessers?

I'd say the neutral feedback is more necessary since it can warn him to not continue the giveaway... but now why you need to create a new thread to gain more attention on that thread?

[Majestic-milf]

 No, it's not a misuse of merit considering he didn't just dole it out to whoever he felt like ( although that wouldn't be a bad thing since it's his smerits to do whatever he pleases with).
I saw that thread and I think @Krishnaverna was just doing what he felt other users would do to either keep the forum lively but what I found strange there was that he was willing to part with only a few amount of merits. I think 10-14 of it.
 Does that count as a misuse of merits seeing as he has a neutral tag which in my opinion doesn't affect anything until it were something bigger? I doubt not.

[Coyster]

My question: How you can say he misuses merit if he didn't even send the merit to the correct guessers?

OP is asking here if the neutral tag is justifiable and if merits should be used for such purposes.

I'd say the neutral feedback is more necessary since it can warn him to not continue the giveaway...

Why is it necessary to warn people on what they should or shouldn't do with their smerits, of course we know users should not sell their smerits, but that is not the case here. The feedback is unnecessary and should not have been left.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

That being said if a neutral tag or a negative tag had been placed on his profile it should have been about spam. I don't think that giving merit, as being subjective should be the reason for any tag on his profile.

FYI, negative feedback should not be given for spamming or shitposting per Theymos's diktat (I don't have a link, but I betcha LoyceV could produce one in 30 seconds if it was important enough).  Then again, in practice anyone can leave negatives for any reason....but there might be consequences, especially if the feedback-giver is on DT.

This topic belongs to Reputation board, not Meta, so better move it there.

No, this is not a reputation topic. It is about merit and not anyone's reputation. Merit related matters belong to meta.

It's probably a judgement call for the mods to make, but since this is dealing with a particular member and not necessarily a forum-wide issue (that hasn't already been covered, I might add, if I recall correctly) it should stay in Reputation.  But it's not a huge deal.

Since this member isn't a merit source and since merit abuse isn't punished unless there's an egregious case that demands action, I don't think anything needs to be done as far as krishnaverma is concerned.  If all he got was neutral feedback, it's a non-issue.  Neutrals are given for anything and everything and have been for years, and I think Theymos even endorses that in lieu of giving someone a negative feedback.

TL;DR: Meh.  Not much to see here.

[SamReomo]

The user got one neutral tag because a member didn't like the way he used to offer his sMerits. He got another neutral tag because he somehow took text of Loyce without his permission. Both of those neutral tags are justifiable and aren't any type of issue for that user as long as he makes good and useful posts.

I don't know if you have some kind of relation with that user or he might have asked you to post this thread on his behalf, but as far as I know, the neutral tags on that user's profile won't cause any issue for him. He can still join signature campaigns even having those neutral tags on his profile I believe.

[uchegod-21]

I don't know if you have some kind of relation with that user or he might have asked you to post this thread on his behalf, but as far as I know, the neutral tags on that user's profile won't cause any issue for him. He can still join signature campaigns even having those neutral tags on his profile I believe.

It is so bad that people will only contribute to the case of someone they know or someone who pmed them. I'm responding to this because you are the second person to have alleged this. No one will see an unclear situation and bring it to the public anymore, unless they persuaded or doing it for someone they know?

As I have said already, my interest is not the reputation of the user, but if giving a neutral tag because someone wants to give merits for guessing bitcoin price is right. Now, majority of the community said the tag is inappropriate, the victim could be lucky if someone that left him the tag could read this thread and reverse it.

[SamReomo]

Now, majority of the community said the tag is inappropriate, the victim could be lucky if someone that left him the tag could read this thread and reverse it.

I can understand that you want to do good to the user who received that tag but like The Sceptical Chymist said, a neutral tag isn't an issue, and I agree to him because I also believe that having that neutral tag on his profile won't cause him any problems in getting into signature campaigns.

If the user tries to make good posts with valuable information that might be helpful for other members then he might get chance to be part of a signature campaign even having those tags. The campaign managers look for the contribution of the members to the forum, and they don't care a lot about neutral tags.

I know if someone gets a red tag then that member might face issues when getting accepted in signature campaigns but those who have neutral feedback on their profiles don't face such issues. Revising or removing of that tag is always going to be the decision of the one who left that tag.

[lovesmayfamilis]

OP, have you read all the replies in the thread created by the person whose tag you are worried about today? Firstly, the topic itself was not written correctly. There was a serious error in the date, which he did not try to correct, even after receiving several comments from users and being on the forum at that time. Besides, if you OP like that some people play with their vanity by creating useless threads and treating others with disrespect, then many users are offended by this behavior. The tag is sometimes useful for making a person think about their actions. A neutral tag about him being a liar will help open the eyes of other people and make them not take him seriously. And if he is concerned about his mark, he will fulfill his obligation; if not, then the topic looks like another merit fishing incident in which the author screwed up.

But if you look at the whole situation from the other side, then the topic created as a competition only speaks of the lack of attention of the author himself, which he tries to compensate for by regularly creating such useless topics. I think you know that if someone lies once, then the next time they may lie twice.

The tag is justified; the forum should know its "heroes."

[Don Pedro Dinero]

This whole thread is about a neutral trust of mine? LMAO.

I'll state the obvious, OP. What's obvious is that you don't understand what the Meta and Reputation sections of the forum are all about. What you also don't seem to know very well is what the trust and merit systems are all about. The merit system was created to force people:

... to post high-quality stuff in order to rank up.

And while it is true that it is not always used in this way and is somewhat subjective, and we may give merit for something funny, for example, I am sure that theymos was not thinking of a thread like the one I used as a reference for the neutral trust as 'high quality stuff'.

Interestingly I have received several PMs about neutral trusts I have left but never about negative feedback (in most cases I have ended up deleting them).

I will not go any further, I agree with my colleague:

The tag is justified

If you don't like my neutral tag, please feel free to distrust me if you think it is a misuse of the trust system. I am not going to delete this one.

[JollyGood]

The tag is justified; the forum should know its "heroes."

I agree. Indeed, in my opinion the tag is also justified.

This whole thread is about a neutral trust of mine? LMAO.

This was my initial reaction too. Regardless of who left the neutral feedback and regardless of who it was left for, I think this thread was a pointless exercise because quite clearly it relates to a neutral tag.

The thread title asks if an obvious merit abuse took place but deeper within the OP he asks specifically about a neutral tag. The fact you explained your reasons for the neutral tag should have sufficed for any curiosity as it contained enough information/background to the reference therefore yet again creating this thread was a pointless exercise.

Even the receiver of the neutral tag knows he has come under the observation of other members therefore he will be cautious with any future endeavours relating to him hoping to receive merits and/or ranking up.