<...>
I do not follow this logic...
<...>
Fella, your logic is based on two false assumptions:
1. 100+ merit -> good poster
2. 100- merit -> bad poster
The first assumption is false. I already showed you the reason, that's because of merit airdrop.
The second assumption is false. That's because of Nullius-like or Anunymint-like members.
Let's discuss ...
it is to be a decentralised decision of what makes a good or bad poster
my method would leave it to all those that already have sufficient merit to decide upon what is good and what is bad.
the board would naturally through a decentralised process decide who and how quickly should be able to start threads on the main board.
bad would not qualify or at least be very delayed at reaching the main board.
it is not only a matter of good and bad it is also a matter of real poster vs bot
also this is only thread starting on the main board ... although posting at all even in thread could have a 25 merit threshold.
I don't get your point about anonymint ? he was an exception to the rule and was banned due to some disagreement with the mods although obviously a high merit worthy member (imho). I don't think he would have any issue starting a new account and accumulating his merit threshold in a very short amount of time if this ever became an obstacle for him.
I'm not sure how we can argue leaving things as they are now is a better option.