If anything I believe this system just created yet one more way for higher ranks to keep monopoly over yet another "trust" system.
That's quite a statement after being inactive for more than a year. Is it really that hard to believe this forum has a terrible spam problem, which has to be limited before all signature campaigns are banned entirely?Quote
Let's face it, an un-established user would need to post either the cure to cancer, or to fork a cure to solve all unconfirmed bitcoin txs -and even then, MAYBE- he'll get one or two merits simply because he's not part of the top well-known 10% that browses Bitcointalk.
I count 22925 users who received at least 1 Merit. I think this invalidates your statement.Quote
And because "merit sources" are obviously part of this 10%, it will only further benefit them into boosting their alts merit, making it harder and harder for members below the poverty line seniority line to make any money from sig campaigns, or any offers that take into account this account criteria.
Oh please, I don't have 429 alts.Quote
It's really sad because I've had to deal with a lot of accounts, that are good, honest and serious people, but never really stand out because they don't intentionally deal with specific people to farm trust, or don't have some explosively booming business.
Trust has nothing to do with Merit. I've merited red trusted accounts. That doesn't necessarily mean I agree with the post, it means I think the post is worth reading, and better than 99% of the spammers.Quote
What I'm trying to say is that it's easy to make constructive, well-written posts that contribute to the discussion, it's just that the majority of people doing it are incentivized. And I don't blame them, I wouldn't write a post like this unless I was paid for it, or I was emotionally invested into it.
Welcome back to the forum 
Keep posting like this, and you'll do just fine