Quote from: KingZee on October 17, 2018, 02:05:26 PM

So explain to me how does the merit system prevent heroes and legendaries from posting equally low effort posts if they start with more points, have more to distribute to each other, and vice versa, how does it encourage lower ranks to merit posts that deserve to be merited, if they don't have many sMerits nor Merits themselves?

It doesn't. It prevents new users from becoming them just by shitposting, I wouldn't be against everyone starting from zero merit either, but then you would still have all the shitposters crying about that. "y u take awai mah merit! Its nut fare!". We really can't win. Without merit the forum is a shitshow, but with it people complain that they can't get paid for shitposting.

Quote from: KingZee on October 17, 2018, 02:05:26 PM

Lol? I don't even have a sig campaign under me.

Where did I say you did, but you're actively trying to join the highest paid one repeatedly.

Quote from: KingZee on October 17, 2018, 02:05:26 PM

I already know I'm never getting merited because the top people who have the points only merit the people they care about.

You've already been merited. I'd say you'd actually have little problem in rising through the ranks, but this is something you seem to be unwilling to do. You seem to want it all now, and that's not how this works.

Quote from: KingZee on October 17, 2018, 02:05:26 PM

So what are you even talking about? I am writing these long-ass posts out of pure disgust of the merit system.

Well this would be fair enough if you don't ever join a signature campaign, but this is exactly what you're trying to do, so you have motivation for writing "long-ass posts". In fact, you have little to no chance of getting on the ChipMixer campaign without a history of great posts. If only every campaign was run like them there wouldn't be an issue with spam.

Quote from: KingZee on October 17, 2018, 02:05:26 PM

And YES, I don't want to post 60 posts a week to make 20$/week. That's the whole POINT I'm arguing for. It's MERIT that denied me access to higher paying sigs. This last paragraph you wrote is just pure garbage..

This is a bitcoin forum to discuss bitcoin. If you don't want to talk about bitcoin without payment then you're probably on the wrong board and you could be better spent earning money elsewhere. You are 100% only here to earn and that is exactly why the merit system was introduced to stop people just signing up in droves to bleed the system. If you want to earn then bide your time, get the merits and try join a signature campaign. You've already got enough merits to join most campaigns so I don't really know what you're moaning for.

Quote from: KingZee on October 17, 2018, 02:11:15 PM

Regardless if your observation is true or not, merit isn't even a problem for those newbie accounts. It BECOMES a problem for legit newbies who WANT to commit to the forums to make money later, because it's now HARDER for them to breach the line to become relevant.

The fact that they're newbies already fucks them over because no one is going to merit them, and that's it, stuck in a deadlock, not just as newbies, but again and again until they reach Hero level.

What exactly are "legit newbies". This is a bitcoin discussion forum and "legit newbies" can post about bitcoin here as intended. The fact that you can get paid from posting here is secondary, but I don't believe people should be able to come here and get paid for posting straight away. The fact that we require one merit to be able to do so is nothing and should be much, much more, but if you want to earn more money here then you now need to put in the time and earn the merit and ranks. With the merit system ranks actually mean something now and are something people could be proud of once they achieve.

Quote from: KingZee on October 19, 2018, 08:13:02 PM

Here's a solution I proposed a few posts ago :

Quote from: hilariousetc on October 16, 2018, 09:07:13 AM

Quote from: KingZee on October 15, 2018, 01:15:13 PM

Or maybe the merit system but in reverse, instead of people being able to +1 people, how about them being able to -1. No one might care about meriting a well-written post, but that doesn't matter because it also prohibits people from using merit as a bargain chip. On the other hand, if a user posts some extremely low quality post, make other users punish him.

Really? How is this any different? This is actually a far worse system and I don't think you've actually thought it through. If we would have implemented this system you'd be here complaining about that right now as would thousands of other angry shitposters who had been neg-bombed into oblivion and have negative chance of being able to earn. How would they even get that back to positive or neutral without some sort of +1?

Why are negatives so important? Because they give weight to neutral points. Just like trust.

If a user has positive merit : This guy knows how to get himself sucked by other users.

If a user has negative merit : This user writes shitposts and spam.

This wouldn't work and isn't a solution to anything and would be far worse than the merit system. I don't get why you are ok with giving people negative points but positive merit is a no-no. How would it even work? Can anyone give negative points? What happens if someone who doesn't like you and gives you negative points for every post you make? You would never be able to join a campaign. How is that better than making decent posts and hoping someone merits you? You're so blindsided by your dislike of the merit system you'll propose something that would be infinitely worse and more abused just because.

Quote from: KingZee on October 19, 2018, 10:02:53 PM

So how about another idea, decentralize it. (ha-ha) Make everyone able to give out merit, just not by large quantities, and only by peer confirmation.

Someone posts a good post? If 5 different users give it a +, the user gets rewarded by a point. But wait, what if people make junior armies to spam +?

Let's see, let's make it weighted. For a user to get a point out of a useful post, he's need + from 3 different user ranks, and 5 total +. Everyone has the ability to give out +s, but they all have an equal amount of currency. Rank doesn't matter, each user can only + 5 posts per month. These are just numbers I'm pulling out of my ass. But I hope you see the point.

It's really not hard to try and come up with a less biased system if you spent a long enough time thinking about it. But like I said, I'm burnt out of this topic and feel like I'm wasting my time contributing. You can reply to let me know your opinion, but I'm afraid this is going to be my last post, cheers.

You're just needlessly complicating something that is actually very simple and desperately trying to come up with alternative systems which you haven't really thought through and which would in fact be much more worse. You're complaining that merit is hard to get, but now you're suggesting people can only get merit if five others agree. So now it's five times harder to get merits.