How many of the merits source are doing what Theymos Said?

[Nwada001]

This post is not accurate because one month, one user can only send to another user a maximum 50 merit, not more, so dumping 100 merit on one post is impossible.

Are you sure about this? That someone can't merit a single post more than 50 merit. There is no limit to how much you can merit a single post, but there is a limit to how much you can merit any user each month. You can see a post that deserves even more and decide to merit the post 50 merit each month. There is no limit to how much merit a single post can receive. limit of 100 merit to 1 post.

Edit: There is limit to how much you can send in a post but you can send more than 50 merit each month for total of two to sum it up to 100 maximum per post.. thanks to LoyceV for the correction.

Too many threads about merit discussion on the META board lately. it's now looking as if there is so much uniqueness about the merit system. I think legendary members wouldn't care much about merit anymore since they have achieved the highest rank of the forum because irrespective of the fact that merit is for quality posts, they won't care much about it anymore.

It's true that those who are trying to rank up are the ones who care so much about merit, but that does not mean that it ends there. As long as the person is contributing positively, they definitely should be expecting to be rewarded for their efforts.

[LoyceV]

Are you sure about this? That someone can't merit a single post more than 50 merit. There is no limit to how much you can merit a single post, but there is a limit to how much you can merit any user each month. You can see a post that deserves even more and decide to merit the post 50 merit each month. There is no limit to how much merit a single post can receive.

That's incorrect. You can't send more than 100 Merits in total to a post.

[Churchillvv]

Are you sure about this? That someone can't merit a single post more than 50 merit. There is no limit to how much you can merit a single post, but there is a limit to how much you can merit any user each month. You can see a post that deserves even more and decide to merit the post 50 merit each month. There is no limit to how much merit a single post can receive.

That's incorrect. You can't send more than 100 Merits in total to a post.

Absolutely haven't seen any of the post received more than a 100 merits, however when looked at I figured out that posts that has 100 merit by a user are basically sent over time months or two months of sending 50.

The merit system was corrupted the moment the concept was typed out.

There is no trickle down effect and the various gangs will shower their own members for self gratification overly inflating their own egos.

It's an abject failure.

Absolutely can't agree less to this, but according to BitcoinGirl.Club abusers will always abuse. but whether it's used for egoistic purposes by some I guess it's meeting the purpose of its creation.

[SmartGold01]

Are you sure about this? That someone can't merit a single post more than 50 merit. There is no limit to how much you can merit a single post, but there is a limit to how much you can merit any user each month. You can see a post that deserves even more and decide to merit the post 50 merit each month. There is no limit to how much merit a single post can receive.

That's incorrect. You can't send more than 100 Merits in total to a post.

You are right and only 50 can be sent for the duration of 30 days or 1 months after which that user can be able to still top another 50 in that same post.
I have seen some post having 100 merits from a particular user but they don't earn the 100 at a go but after one month gap.
By the way from OP,  I will advise that many merits source aren't holding back their merits sometimes it's actually very hard for them to keep finding quality post to merit but they can't just dump such amount of merits to any random posts they comes across without evaluating how quality such post could be or how contributive and helpful it's to the general public before receiving such quality.

[SilverCryptoBullet]

Are you sure about this?

I am sure, please read my post again.

This post is not accurate because one month, one user can only send to another user a maximum 50 merit, not more, so dumping 100 merit on one post is impossible.

I said it is a limit of one month, you can not send another user more than 50 merit.

That someone can't merit a single post more than 50 merit.

I did not say there is a limit of 50 merit for a single post. You said it, I did not.

[nutildah]

I had to quote it completely so you see it yourself that he once actually said such just to clarify a situation that once aroused.

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.

I tried doing this for a short while and got burned by giving merits to alt accounts; some of which ended up becoming scammers or sig campaign cheaters. That is the personal reason why I am unlikely to give an account which I am not overly familiar with a bunch of merits all at the same time.

When the Merit system was introduced, I started by sending 1 most of the time, then 4, and now often 6. And the occasional much larger amount for posts that I believe deserve it. If I were to just dump 50 Merit on a few posts that are "okay" but not exceptional, that doesn't feel right.

Agreed.

You know which other Merit source disagrees with this, and doesn't empty his monthly source? This one:

Hehe.

I would give LoyceV more merits for this post but he has too damn many already. He's too good, is why. Not just because he's part of the Merit Cycling Gang.

[hugeblack]

Since the role of merit sources is voluntary, forcing them to remain active without paying them is ridiculous. Merit sources list can be updated every two or three years, but sending 50 Merits per post will definitely not solve the problem.
Adding dMerit with a 50-point-per-month limit may be more effective at reducing spam than adding more sources.

[Perfectbaby]

Since the role of merit sources is voluntary, forcing them to remain active without paying them is ridiculous. Merit sources list can be updated every two or three years, but sending 50 Merits per post will definitely not solve the problem.
Adding dMerit with a 50-point-per-month limit may be more effective at reducing spam than adding more sources.

Then lot of people do not have to come on the forum anymore to interacts with people, let us be frank to each others, the reason why this forum is pulling the highest crowd today is because of it's free nature possessing the true vision of Bitcoin.

With that it attract people around country to come together to share their opinions, and if there are much or harder restrictions on it you wouldn't have much interest to still stick around such platforms, watch forum traffic since from when merits aren't introduced and to now that introduced, it would interest you that there are less activities due to just that limits.

Yes, that was sets to at least to filter good post over bad past and that's enough, and again, gaining merits interest people over here if you don't know especially newbies that are just finding interest to forum it would encourage them more to put more efforts to keep creating quality post but if you think adding dMerits to the system will filter out spammer then I beg for a try then Theymos should watch out the next 30 working days to see how the forum would be so quiet like a grave yard.  

Although, I didn't believe that you of all people would have to suggest such a thing to the forum, instead of what would keep motivating new beginner to come here to pick interest about Bitcoin and to which that with cryptocurrency at large.

[Bitcoin Smith]

Since the role of merit sources is voluntary, forcing them to remain active without paying them is ridiculous. Merit sources list can be updated every two or three years, but sending 50 Merits per post will definitely not solve the problem.
Adding dMerit with a 50-point-per-month limit may be more effective at reducing spam than adding more sources.

Demerit is a different subject and I don't think theymos shown interest having one.

I do agree a post deserves 50 merit is rare but it is better to exhaust merit that goes unused which is what admin said about too when it is asked but still merit sources decide how they want to spend and no one can question their spending nature unless it reaches a stage of abusing their merit source position.

We need to accept that merit system is effective in controlling the spam but it is not fair to everyone. Some users post's can still go unmerited while a mediocre one get more than what it deserves.

[KingsDen]

Since the role of merit sources is voluntary, forcing them to remain active without paying them is ridiculous. Merit sources list can be updated every two or three years, but sending 50 Merits per post will definitely not solve the problem.
Adding dMerit with a 50-point-per-month limit may be more effective at reducing spam than adding more sources.

Instead of adding a demerit system, it is fine to leave the system as it is with the current number of merit sources or even reduce if necessary. I have never liked the demerit idea since the first day I read about it. I also think that theymos will not like to implement anything that will hinder growth in the forum, which is the reason he is against ideas such as newbie jail.

[TheUltraElite]

Instead of adding a demerit system, it is fine to leave the system as it is with the current number of merit sources or even reduce if necessary. I have never liked the demerit idea since the first day I read about it. I also think that theymos will not like to implement anything that will hinder growth in the forum, which is the reason he is against ideas such as newbie jail.

Here is what I feel is important:

Each local section should have at least one if not more merit source dedicated to that section and one merit source who attend that local section plus global sections. Because the first source can also share in global, the roles are interchangeable as well.

This should be policed by the admin or an internal group set up by admin (like the previous Account Recovery Team) to mark those who are become inactive and either notify them or remove and appoint new sources.

[LoyceV]

it is not fair to everyone. Some users post's can still go unmerited while a mediocre one get more than what it deserves.

If a post deserves Merit and didn't get it, by all means, report it: Report unmerited good posts to Merit Source

[dkbit98]

Since the role of merit sources is voluntary, forcing them to remain active without paying them is ridiculous. Merit sources list can be updated every two or three years, but sending 50 Merits per post will definitely not solve the problem.
Adding dMerit with a 50-point-per-month limit may be more effective at reducing spam than adding more sources.

I agree with you, forcing them to do anything can only have counter effects.
Maybe it would be better to change and update merits source more often, but that should be based on their activity in forum and only if they applied for merit source spot.
I think there are plenty of good merit source candidates to choose from.

[Bitcoin Smith]

it is not fair to everyone. Some users post's can still go unmerited while a mediocre one get more than what it deserves.

If a post deserves Merit and didn't get it, by all means, report it: Report unmerited good posts to Merit Source

It's great that you took initiative not too long after it's addressed and it helped many of such unmerited ones still it doesn't makes it fair which is my point.

I am not a fan of judging which of my posts deserves to be merited because I feel each one of them does.

What I was talking is some replies those are very generic and mostly in broken english manages to get more just because they're at the right local board as well as got generous active merit sources which creates bias in the system.

[LoyceV]

it doesn't makes it fair which is my point.

Well, tough luck I'd say the Merit system is pretty fair on average: many different people send Merit to many different posts for many different reasons. That's really the best it can get.

I am not a fan of judging which of my posts deserves to be merited because I feel each one of them does.

Easy fix: don't report your own unmerited posts, report other posts you stumble upon.
I've often been surprised which ones of my own posts get Merit, and which ones don't get anything. That doesn't always align with my expectations.

What I was talking is some replies those are very generic and mostly in broken english manages to get more just because they're at the right local board as well as got generous active merit sources which creates bias in the system.

Why would anyone post broken English on a local board? Unless you mean something like Nigerian Pidgin, that doesn't make sense.