@d5000 Thanks for your contribution.
I also like the idea of slowly and very gradually removing the distributed merit but I've got the impression from theymos's posts that he won't consider anything that would result in anyone losing their rank. That was really what lead me to come up with hiding signatures as an alternative.
I think either approach would be good but a few of the replies here have highlighted long term members who just don't have time to be very active. I'm currently coming to think there could be some way of making the ongoing merit requirement proportional to activity. That way satoshi and Hal are in no danger or anyone else that contributed early but either doesn't come very often or at all.
I do like your hybrid suggestion but I haven't really spent any more time on this because I don't think these sorts of proposals are being considered seriously.
It is Bitcointalk itself which is risking its status of the leading discussion board in the cryptocurrency community if shit-posting isn't prevented. It could become a pure "paid-for-community" without relevance out of the "clickworker" circle.
And if the trend continues, in some moment Bitcointalk won't be attractive anymore for cryptocurrency-related companies as a medium to advertise in. Maybe this could be even positive - as it would mean that signature campaigns and spamming would disappear without any "staff action". But I doubt if in this case the death spiral could be reverted.
Exactly!
I have noticed the moderators seem to be a bit firmer lately. Merit has made it really difficult for new spammers and account farmers so maybe banning the spammers that are already here is the way forward.