I can agree with some points of view, but i can't agree with disproportion. Why Members received 10 merit, when Full Members 100? Why the activity wasn't taken into account?
Activity requirements are 60 and 120, why not to give 50 merit that is twice less? why 10 ?
Also u need to understand, that some people waited 10 weeks for Member rank, but now people can receive it in two weeks.
The underlying activity requirements did not change.
While I agree that it was a disproportionate difference between the two ranks, it was directly related to what was required to achieve that rank currently. Both the activity and merit requirements are much higher from member to full member which is how it should be.