Quote from: cryptovigi on October 18, 2018, 09:46:13 AM

<...>Looking at this data one very important thing is missed. They are not showing the whole truth (unless @DdmrDdmr correct me). I've checked it on my own example and saw that data about rank aren't stored each time merit is given - they are current. <...>

Yes you are right, I stated so on the OP of the Merit Dashboard thread (on a note). Ranks shown are current ranks, not the actual rank at the time of the awarding of every single sMerit (which would be the ideal tracking, but is not feasible from the outside). It is also interesting to play around with the Date Range filter and see how the proportions shift in some segments over time.

Quote from: KingZee on October 17, 2018, 08:03:46 PM

<>One thing about the data you're presenting : It's a local comparison.<>

Yes, it is as you say a rank-base view, but it does show a point I wanted to make, and that is that most merit TXs are of either one or two merits, and most posts get merited by either one or two people at most, regardless of the rank. This patterns barely shows differently on the higher ranks than on the lower ranks.

That does have a collateral reading in my opinion: if you look at it from the point of view of what is required for an account to reach the next level, if the majority of posts are merited in a similar quantity regardless of the rank, then the marginal contribution of each merited posts is very low for higher ranks (i.e. 1 sMerit is 10% of that needed for a Jr. Member to get to Member, but 0,2% of what a Hero needs to get to Legendary). Of course, this also depends on the number of posts one gets merited on.

Quote from: KingZee on October 17, 2018, 08:03:46 PM

<> What I would like to know is :
Total number of 1 Merit Tx to Newbie merited posts / Total Number of 1 Merit Tx to all merited posts.
Total number of 1 Merit Tx to Member merited posts / Total Number of 1 Merit Tx to all merited posts.
and so on varying by Merit and by Ranks.

Something like this:

Code:

TXMer. toRank nTXs nUsers %1MerTXs%Users AvgTX/User
1 Founder 98 1 0,12% 0,01% 98
1 Administrator 640 2 0,81% 0,01% 320
1 Global Mod. 192 3 0,24% 0,02% 64
1 Staff 1079 25 1,36% 0,13% 43,16
1 VIP 56 4 0,07% 0,02% 14
1 Donator 351 21 0,44% 0,11% 16,72
1 Legendary 15499 1060 19,59% 5,72% 14,62
1 Hero Member 8304 948 10,50% 5,11% 8,76
1 Sr. Member 11545 1517 14,60% 8,18% 7,61
1 Full Member 13191 2645 16,68% 14,26% 4,99
1 Member 15523 3873 19,63% 20,88% 4,01
1 Jr. Member 9894 6507 12,51% 35,08% 1,52
1 Newbie 2588 1862 3,27% 10,04% 1,39
1 Brand new 138 79 0,17% 0,43% 1,75

Ive only done it here for 1 sMerit TXs, since anything more is too long here and is better suited in any case on a thread of its own. We could go into the details, but I wouldn't like to extend myself further here.

Quote from: KingZee on October 17, 2018, 08:03:46 PM

<> On the other hand, it's funny how people feel so patriotic about spending their merit points <>

Its not that easy to interpret. Legendries do give more sMerit to Legendries on the whole, but are ones who enable more lower ranks into the game. Heroes award more evenly amongst ranks down to Members, and even award less to their own rank. Sr. Members are rather even amongst three rank levels, but on aggregate have awarded similar amounts to Legendries, Heroes and Jr. Members. Members seem more self-centred on their rank, and then favour the nearest ranks on equal parts. Jr. Members favor preferently their own rank, and the one above, way above higher ranks.

There are likely many factors involved, amongst which are psychological featured ones, that influence certain ranks being more prone to merit someone from the neighbouring ranks on a similar roadmap, or whatnot.

What I do find is that there is normally a large difference in the posting style of higher ranks versus lower ranks. This is obviously not an absolute truth, and there are plenty of exceptions on either end, but as personal perception, it makes it clear for me to a large extent why higher ranks get more merited than lower ranks.