<
>I will post more proof about other problems, but this guy is the perfect example of only writing about merits for most part, if you look whom he gave merits, you will see some other people also who do similar activities.<
>
Nice summary there
Merit just happens to be an area on the forum where one can contribute through analysis. The official data files provided by the forum are merit.txt and trust.txt, so its rather natural from an availability point of view that those willing to analyse this sort of information will have this information at the core.
Since overall Merit System overview is scarce with the default system statistics, I for one would appreciate anyone that does and has come up with information derived from the data that helps me/us understand how, a now vital element to the forum, is being used and highlighting the flaws we may see. We are in Meta after all, which is about the forum structure and governance, were really most of the energy is unfortunately spent on wishful thinking, but that serves some intelligent brainstorming sessions (with a few exceptions).
I would suggest that you go a step further and read the content of the posts you mention, and not just criticise the fact that they have been merited. If you actually manage to understand them (I know they are not that simple to grasp), youll see that they either try to give answers to what other forum members have asked, go on to stating that merit is rather concentrated and therefore puts a focus on this fact, highlighting the fact that merit is ever so more difficult for the higher ranks, displays multiple views to see how the system is working week by week, by forum section, etc., serves as a base to see our complete history (amongst other swifter methods devised by other forum members), maybe help to track-down merit abuse, etc.
I cant see the above as non-valuable. Off to the beach now...