Although it might be heresy for you bitcoin maximalists, the altcoins/mining subforum does have a surprisingly high signal-to-noise ratio. Here's a post from a 16 activity newbie that I just merited (and whose post history suggests more good things to come):
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5024771.msg45483725#msg45483725.
Of course, when I go slumming in the altcoin or bitcoin discussion subfora I never see a post worth meriting (but plenty of posters who get reported for plagiarism) so if those are the only subfora you frequent then pickings are slim, indeed.
I know what you're saying, but as someone who's interested mostly in a few (very few) altcoins and the altcoin miners, most of my knowledge spans around this subject and I can be more helpful with my posts in this subforum. Most of what I'd post in the Bitcoin subforum would be considered "unnecessary" or "spam" by many because I don't have deep knowledge of the Bitcoin itself.
Also it saddens me that merit sources are probably prejudiced against everyone who use signatures, even legit people like myself. For example look at this post just above us (
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2818350.msg45458026#msg45458026), JayJuanGee, a very respectable and old member received a merit for quoting my post and enriching my point with some comments. That's all good, but on what ground was this post merit
-able and mine wasn't? What set us apart?
This is only an example and please don't take me wrong, I have nothing against JayJuanGee, on the contrary even! But it makes me wonder... if a respectable legendary member with no paid signature and a newbie with a signature were to write the exact same post with the same wording... would merit sources and other members be fair?
I guess I shouldn't complain, I have been given 52 merits even though I'm always taking advantage of a paid signature (why wouldn't I? I'm not posting to get paid; I get paid for posting) but I'm sure without a signature I would have reached 100 merits by now.