1. For someone asking others to improve on their grammar, you too need to work on your Grammar and Spellings too.
Thanks for the corrections. Learning is a constant endeavour.
3. But if the disdain takes the form of blatant name-calling and racial overtones (not undertones), I believe it is an explicit form of RACISM; eg. 3rd world monkeys, pajeet, etc.
I'm not defending those who are criticising the merit system simply because it is not allowing them to earn Bounties. They should realize that shit-posting won't pay anymore. I don't expect people to pay me for shit-posting too, but there are a lot of issues in the current system too and to have a high-level of arbitrariness seems awful. The irony of having a Centralized forum to host discussions primarily focused on a Decentralized system is amusing in itself.
The racial overtones you refer to have surfaced on the forum very recently. A lot of people spent their time and energy in making this forum what it is. Moderating, writing FAQ's, Beginner guides and what not just to ensure that forum quality is maintained.
While most people will agree with your views on the need to cut back the name calling, I think it is simplistic to take the moral high ground on this. Its not like the people indulging in this behaviour don't know what they are doing. They are running sophisticated spamming and alt-account farming campaigns. No problems gets resolved unless you identify and accept it. The name calling doesn't fix it but does the job of calling out these people.
I personally feel that any hierarchical system, should be done away with, be it the merits or the ranks. All Bounty Managers should individually access the participants and pay them on the basis of their posts (just like in an article campaign). I have seen Legendary posts worth shit and they are still paid twice simply because they joined it early.
My 2c.
We'd all like the situation to be perfect with complete decentralisation of the forum but it's not feasible. We may find it ironical or amusing but unfortunately, that's where the usefulness of this realisation ends.
Completely agree with you that a lot of Bounty Managers need to get their act together. In fact, if the bounty managers were made a bit more responsible for the actions of their participants, the situation would be greatly improved.
P.S. Trusts should, however, stay and be more rationalized, you cannot simply neg someone for supporting a counter viewpoint and Trust should only be based on trading issues.
Again, it's easier said than done. Negging someone on the basis of constant spammy behaviour should be fine. I am yet to see many examples of people being negged due to a counter viewpoint.