When can it be called merit abuse.

[knowngunman]

OP, instead of continuing the discussion in an existing topic, you open a new topic to ask a question as if you came to the forum yesterday. Merits abuse is something that is difficult to prove and even more difficult to sanction. From 2018 to today, I only remember a few cases where the admin reacted to things like this.

Additionally, everyone can give their sMerits to whoever they want and as much as they want. It's not just a matter of quality and the criteria each member has when it comes to giving merits, because a post can get merits even if it's funny, sarcastic or for some other reason.

It baffles me as well to see a different thread discussing almost the same thing and both threads created today with just an interval of few hours. Perhaps, Op thought his question might not get proper attention but that's very unlikely since the thread he referenced is also a new thread created today.

The merit system is a bit controversial even though it was clearly stated that it was introduced to improve quality contribution. People have diverse opinion here and quality can be interpreted differently to different people. This make it hard to detect merit abuse unless in obvious cases. This is why there's less or no penalty to merit related issues.

What happened in the thread reference by Op is not surprising to me. I have seen campaign applications receiving merits.  some more irrelevant posts as well. As long as they're not selling the merits, I think it's fine if they can prove their case. Forum does not specify the number of merits to be sent to a particular post and as such, in your own judgment you can merit a post as much as possible if you consider them worthy. It's based on individual standard rather than community.

[Mia Chloe]

~snip

The person who created that post made two of it and one was later moved to archival board. The fact is although I didn't connect the dots by reading in details, it seemed a lot like an abuse because of the reference to bounties and wallet addresses. The account sending is a millennial one.

Chance has it that it probably changed hands and the person is trying to spread out the smerits to his alt accounts. It's been very long since the last sets of posts I guess somewhere are 2020 which seems kinda odd.

[hypebrother]

~snip

The person who created that post made two of it and one was later moved to archival board. The fact is although I didn't connect the dots by reading in details, it seemed a lot like an abuse because of the reference to bounties and wallet addresses. The account sending is a millennial one.

Chance has it that it probably changed hands and the person is trying to spread out the smerits to his alt accounts. It's been very long since the last sets of posts I guess somewhere are 2020 which seems kinda odd.

lets just put it this way.

some hands shake, some dont, some sometimes..others never.

[Zaguru12]

Talking about the aIt that’s okay, but can’t someone acknowledge himself through merit for a very good post, especially when the aIt is known to everyone?

This is just like a student grading themselves, the real question is how do you ascertained that such post was actually a very good post, it might look good because it is definitely coming from you but acknowledgement must be coming and from others who have looked into your work. It’s like artists or sports people designing awards and then giving it to themselves that they deserved it.

Since I have been on this forum, I have seen people in few cases that were known and topic created about them which led to negative tags on the accounts but the admin and moderators did not do anything, they were only just looking. But it would be good for people to have it in mined that if they abuse merits, that they can get negative trust. Not from the admin or moderator but from some people on this forum.

Should we say that the admin or even moderators are actually not allowed to do anything because of the statement of theymos in the quoted post below, since the abuse isn’t maybe buying and selling of merits? since his statement said anything less than selling of merit is what is questionable.

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.

Additionally, everyone can give their sMerits to whoever they want and as much as they want. It's not just a matter of quality and the criteria each member has when it comes to giving merits, because a post can get merits even if it's funny, sarcastic or for some other reason.

Exactly we have seen many posts which are just meme getting like three figures of merit in total or even campaign applications getting merited because the sender feels it’s worth it, so it’s complicated to justify which is an abuse aside selling because the sending of merits is based on preference which is definitely subjective to each person

[Sandra_hakeem]

Chance has it that it probably changed hands and the person is trying to spread out the smerits to his alt accounts. It's been very long since the last sets of posts I guess somewhere are 2020 which seems kinda odd.

Bad for them as the CryptoATM account-- the one that got 50 merits at once.. got blown out of its cover on another case entirely, and got red tagged. Since it has the stakes signature, I was looking to see if they still post actively, but like you said, the political enthusiast stopped arguing politics since 2020.

OP, instead of continuing the discussion in an existing topic, you open a new topic to ask a question as if you came to the forum yesterday.

It baffles me as well to see a different thread discussing almost the same thing and both threads created today with just an interval of few hours.

OP, maybe you should consider locking up this thread?

[suzanne5223]

If someone sent 10, 30, or 50 merit to another member on a post post that is really not that good but just okay, and that user that was sent that merit has not sent back merit to the user that sent him that amount of merit, can it be said that or called merit abuse.

If there's no proof of the merit sent being sold, send to own account, or the account is a recent wakeup, and other things that could serve as evidence of merit abuse, the huge merit sent to the user cant be considered as merit abuse since some merit sources choose to disburse their smerit before it's the next circle.
Having said that, I have seen a lot of posts that are worth getting merit, which receive none, while posts that aren't worth getting merit are receiving more than enough, and this is why I don't solely believe the number of merit determines a quality poster, which is why I don't request it for my campaign.

At what point can someone TAG a user for merit abuse, or at what point can it be said a user has abused the merit system.

Yes, you can tag the user found guilty for merit abuse if you can provide solid evidence based on what i and others stated.

 Edit: look at this POST can it said what happened their was merit abuse.

I think this is merit abuse based on the amount of merit sent too soon, but at the end of the if no additional evidence is added based on the user's activity on this forum, there's a chance that it will be discarded.

[hypebrother]

If someone sent 10, 30, or 50 merit to another member on a post post that is really not that good but just okay, and that user that was sent that merit has not sent back merit to the user that sent him that amount of merit, can it be said that or called merit abuse.

If there's no proof of the merit sent being sold, send to own account, or the account is a recent wakeup, and other things that could serve as evidence of merit abuse, the huge merit sent to the user cant be considered as merit abuse since some merit sources choose to disburse their smerit before it's the next circle.
Having said that, I have seen a lot of posts that are worth getting merit, which receive none, while posts that aren't worth getting merit are receiving more than enough, and this is why I don't solely believe the number of merit determines a quality poster, which is why I don't request it for my campaign.

At what point can someone TAG a user for merit abuse, or at what point can it be said a user has abused the merit system.

Yes, you can tag the user found guilty for merit abuse if you can provide solid evidence based on what i and others stated.

 Edit: look at this POST can it said what happened their was merit abuse.

I think this is merit abuse based on the amount of merit sent too soon, but at the end of the if no additional evidence is added based on the user's activity on this forum, there's a chance that it will be discarded.

Conclusion:

Question: When can it be called merit abuse?

Answer: When trusted members with full green trust lies to you.

Please approve? ffs i need to pay colab bills man!!!

Edit: Thanks for the 1 month grace period, It was an episode of "let us not have some fun", next episode ETA: NEVER!!!

Thanks philipma for the 10534 merits, I can sell it and buy a 99999999in1 cartridge

[uchegod-21]

First of all, the value or meaning one sees in a post is subjective. A post may make very little sense to you, but makes a lot of sense to another person. So, there is no criteria to judge what post deserves to be merited or not. Except maybe obvious shit posts.

Secondly, the number of merits a post gets does not automatically mean merits is being abused. But when there is a perceived reoccurring pattern, for example User A always giving User B that much merits even though User B isn't returning the merits, then there is room to suspect something against the forum's rules is going on. Well, where there is no concrete proof, I don't think anything can be done about it.

[m2017]

I know one has the right to send any number of merit to any post he likes.

I just want to ask this question.

I'd like to ask a counter-question: are there any rules governing the "correct" way to send merit points? Is it even spelled out anywhere, stating who can send merit points to whom, in what quantities, and under what conditions?

If not, how can it be abused?

If someone sent 10, 30, or 50 merit to another member on a post post that is really not that good but just okay, and that user that was sent that merit has not sent back merit to the user that sent him that amount of merit, can it be said that or called merit abuse.

On this forum, I've seen cases where people were awarded multiple merits at once, either upfront or based on past activity and postings. That is, merit sources and users with a large number of merits often simply find it more convenient to award multiple merits at once (if they believe the user deserves it and it's a simple time saver) than to award 1 merit for each post. Incidentally, something similar has happened to me in the past.

At what point can someone TAG a user for merit abuse, or at what point can it be said a user has abused the merit system.

Is it only when merit is distributed between two or more people, we all send merit to each other so at what point can it be called merit abuse.

I'll return to my question above. Any abuse of merit must be specified in the rules, otherwise it's not abuse.

If there's no prohibition on certain actions, it can't be abuse.

[LoyceV]

If someone sent 10, 30, or 50 merit to another member on a post post that is really not that good but just okay, and that user that was sent that merit has not sent back merit to the user that sent him that amount of merit, can it be said that or called merit abuse.

It sounds like you're complaining about the amount. Go complain to theymos

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!

Note: this post was made in the context of Merit sources.

[Free Market Capitalist]

So you are saying that person who creates 5 accounts and then shares merit among those deserves nothing more than a neutral? That just doesn't seem right to me, and would send the wrong message to all alt farmers.

I'm not the one saying that.

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.

Although in the extreme case you mentioned—sending merits to five alts—if you were to red-tag someone, I don't think anyone would exclude you for it. I would probably red tag in that extreme case as well.

According to what is said here by hilariousandco a negative tag which is also red tag if you send merit to your aIt account,

Just because he’s a moderator doesn’t make what he says any more credible than what I say. He’s a DT1 and I’m a DT1 right now; DTs’ opinions may differ, but I do give a bit more weight to the person who created the system, quoted above, and has the authority to change it if he wants to.

Although I’ll repeat that it’s rare to see cases of people who only send merits to their alts without getting caught breaking other rules.

[The Cryptovator]

I know one has the right to send any number of merit to any post he likes.

I just want to ask this question.

If someone sent 10, 30, or 50 merit to another member on a post post that is really not that good but just okay, and that user that was sent that merit has not sent back merit to the user that sent him that amount of merit, can it be said that or called merit abuse.

At what point can someone TAG a user for merit abuse, or at what point can it be said a user has abused the merit system.

Is it only when merit is distributed between two or more people, we all send merit to each other so at what point can it be called merit abuse.

I was about to quote theymos's post made on reputation, but it seems a couple of users have already quoted it, and from there you might get your desired answers. Admin isn't too strict about sending merits unless there is clear merit abuse by merit sources like selling merits. For merit source, we can't sell merits; otherwise, we can send whatever we want based on the circumstances. For general users, it's their earned or airdropped merits; they could spend it anywhere.

It's all about what kind of abuse; if selling or exchanging merits, then it should be considered shady behaviour. A few members will tag and a few will not. For me, unless there is merit in selling or exchanging, I don't tag without strong evidence. I want more merit circulation; at least merit should dry or decay. Since theymos isn't strict, then we shouldn't overreact at all.

[TypoTonic]

I think these are different cases: selling merits warrants a red tag, whereas sending merits to alts would be better suited for a neutral tag.  

So you are saying that person who creates 5 accounts and then shares merit among those deserves nothing more than a neutral? That just doesn't seem right to me, and would send the wrong message to all alt farmers.

Here are some statements made by the admin before regarding concerns about merit (e.g., selling, trading to alts, tagging). These were all posted on the Merit & new rank requirements thread. Seems like it wasn't too much of an issue back then, but he did say that it was "too early to get a clear picture". I'm curious to know whether his views remain the same.

So what are you proposing that be done against shady behavior regarding the merit system? Nothing? Or are you simply saying that *we could/should* tag them, but that some of the tag's by actmyname were unwarranted?

I think that tagging may be appropriate in particularly obvious cases, or particularly egregious cases involving hundreds of merit points and several posts. But generally you should start out by assuming good faith, and only change that opinion as the evidence really piles up. Tagging someone immediately after an instance of apparently-inexplicable meriting is too trigger-happy IMO. Even if it is a case of illegitimate merit, even hundreds of illegitimate merit points are not much of a problem IMO, so you have to ask whether it's worthwhile to possibly make a mistake by tagging someone who is merely suspicious.

Now, I'm not 100% sure that actmyname's ratings are outside of what I would consider appropriate, which is why I didn't take action to immediately remove him. But from what I've seen, it does seem likely that he is too trigger-happy.

Merit sales, transfers to aliases, back-and-forth trading, etc. are not much of an issue. All illegitimate merit will decay, and will account for a tiny and very expensive fraction of the total merit economy. It's basically a rounding error; fight it where convenient, but waste no sleep over it.

Also, what are your thoughts on people here using their numerous alt accounts to abuse the Merit system?  Granted, there's not much to "abuse", but someone who has a dozen alt accounts, say one of them gets selected as a Merit source, couldn't that have a negative impact on the system?

If they don't have a source: how would they? Unless they are a source, they have to get the merit from somewhere. A group of accounts without a source can't generate merit without making good posts; they can only inefficiently spread it out among the accounts.

If they do have a source, then that's something that we'll need to detect. The merit transfers are public, so it shouldn't be that difficult. There are also various limits in place which would help to limit the damage from that.

[Rikafip]

I'm not the one saying that.

Neither does theymos. 

Although in the extreme case you mentioned—sending merits to five alts—if you were to red-tag someone, I don't think anyone would exclude you for it. I would probably red tag in that extreme case as well.

I don't think that anyone would be excluded even if only 2 accounts were involved. On the contrary, few others would probably join with their red tags as well. 

[dkbit98]

It's not that hard to identify if member is abusing merits or genuinely sending them to someone.
Just check his post and merit history and you will certainly find something suspicious there.
I would not focus only on high number of merits since we have several active merit sources.
That being said, we still have a freedom when sending merits, and I don't want to see more restrictions for that.

[alegotardo]

I know one has the right to send any number of merit to any post he likes.

I just want to ask this question.

If someone sent 10, 30, or 50 merit to another member on a post post that is really not that good but just okay, and that user that was sent that merit has not sent back merit to the user that sent him that amount of merit, can it be said that or called merit abuse.

At what point can someone TAG a user for merit abuse, or at what point can it be said a user has abused the merit system.

Is it only when merit is distributed between two or more people, we all send merit to each other so at what point can it be called merit abuse.
 
Edit: look at this POST can it said what happened their was merit abuse.

I think it is abuse, yes, but I also believe the problem is much deeper than that!
Sometimes someone receives merits this way because they found someone "charitable" (yes, read that ironically), but this is also very easy to avoid if the person dissolves the merits into several smaller posts that don't attract attention, and then it becomes much harder to identify, and I believe that is how most illegal merit distributions work.

Anyway, I am not too worried about it because the quality of a person's posts is easily measured by what they write, and not just by their rank or the number of merits they have.

The number of merits is also a mandatory requirement for applying to many subscription campaigns, but it is the personal assessment of manager that decides who gets into a campaign or not.

If the person is buying merits, that is their problem, it is their money, because that will not improve the quality of the posts they publish.