Re: Posting in forums with moderators who give no smerit? Solutions?
.....
I'll make you a deal acarli: if you (and this offer is only valid for you) post links to 10 unmerited good posts in this topic, I'll merit them if I agree. And I'll comment on the "why". When you post the links, please quote (the relevant part of) this post so I receive a notification.
I'll make you a deal acarli: if you (and this offer is only valid for you) post links to 10 unmerited good posts in this topic, I'll merit them if I agree. And I'll comment on the "why". When you post the links, please quote (the relevant part of) this post so I receive a notification.
Thank you LoyceV. I've only three so far. I wasn't quite sure if you meant any other threads in the "meta" forum. I'll go with this specific topic. So far, I would give merit tp 2 posts for sure, and a solid maybe on the third.
Here they are:
(1) cryptohunter : firstly he gives good quality information that is not readily obvious. He showed he made an effort and spent time formulating his post. I also searched for duplicate content, just to make sure you guys werent' pulling my leg. lol
He wrote:
.......
You are indeed correct. However the real fault lies with the myriads of spammers and bots and puppet accounts because they make it far more difficult to locate good posters.
This will eventually be solved meanwhile don't worry too much about merit. If you are determined to get optimal recognition for good posts (in terms of merit) you will need to use the stats provided on meta to locate the best boards to post on. Sadly for you the fact is the top 0.02% of merit receivers cycle over 50% of their merit between them at this time. I calculated that if you were to remove merits given by the top 300 to the top 200 and removed all merits given in this meta sub board most people (except a handful) would only have got max 100/150 merits. Most of the top 200 saw reductions in the 50% - 75% range (that was without subtracting merits given on the meta sub board. With that you could be looking at reductions up to 95%.
So if you have got even say 10 merits and none from the meta board (except what I just gave you for noticing this and making a relevant post here) then you are doing very well actually.
If you are a good poster you will eventually get known on the basis of your work here and I would then not worry about the rankings and merits too much.
On top of all of that there is serious gaming going on. There was a case of a legend just giving 50 merits each to 2 other accounts for nearly identical post (not really deserving of any merit) when analysed all 3 shared an eth addy so looked like highly probably alts. I would think these cases should be treated a little more harshly but merit is subjective so not really possible to police to make it fairer right now.
There does not really need to be a solution right now because merit is working to prevent a lot of negative behaviour ( as opposed to having no merit system) and also over time once the bots, account farmers, ico spammers vanish it will be easier to locate your posts and you would hope the merit system will balance out. I have suggested a few alternatives but nobody really liked them.
You are indeed correct. However the real fault lies with the myriads of spammers and bots and puppet accounts because they make it far more difficult to locate good posters.
This will eventually be solved meanwhile don't worry too much about merit. If you are determined to get optimal recognition for good posts (in terms of merit) you will need to use the stats provided on meta to locate the best boards to post on. Sadly for you the fact is the top 0.02% of merit receivers cycle over 50% of their merit between them at this time. I calculated that if you were to remove merits given by the top 300 to the top 200 and removed all merits given in this meta sub board most people (except a handful) would only have got max 100/150 merits. Most of the top 200 saw reductions in the 50% - 75% range (that was without subtracting merits given on the meta sub board. With that you could be looking at reductions up to 95%.
So if you have got even say 10 merits and none from the meta board (except what I just gave you for noticing this and making a relevant post here) then you are doing very well actually.
If you are a good poster you will eventually get known on the basis of your work here and I would then not worry about the rankings and merits too much.
On top of all of that there is serious gaming going on. There was a case of a legend just giving 50 merits each to 2 other accounts for nearly identical post (not really deserving of any merit) when analysed all 3 shared an eth addy so looked like highly probably alts. I would think these cases should be treated a little more harshly but merit is subjective so not really possible to police to make it fairer right now.
There does not really need to be a solution right now because merit is working to prevent a lot of negative behaviour ( as opposed to having no merit system) and also over time once the bots, account farmers, ico spammers vanish it will be easier to locate your posts and you would hope the merit system will balance out. I have suggested a few alternatives but nobody really liked them.
Again he engaged with other's comments. This shows me he actually read the responses and is engaging. Doesn't that generall add value to the forum? I think so. Now the question I would have is what is the threshold for merit allocation.
(2) cryptohunter :
it is actually 100% true you can test it for yourself.
also this bunch of stats provided by r1s2g3 after I asked if he could provide
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1SAi_b3umCcFJO2dMoLYjWCjNz1JhOLWrsRHhYQK-nb8/edit#gid=429409603
demonstrates the scale of the merit cycling in the tiny fraction of a percent of posters
that is without meta subsection (highly concentrated merit club) being removed. My figure estimates I think will be found to be entirely correct. You can expect some of the highest merit receivers to take a 95% hair cut.
@loyce
It only makes sense the merit back slappers club that the top 0.02 retain 50% of all their merits cycled around internally and mostly in meta
I am clearly observing merit is mostly given for simply aligning your view with others whom are active in meta and have lots of merit to give. I am seeing merit given time and time again for the voicing of opinions that are actually clearly wrong based on observable events.
Trying to conflate high merit with high value posts is incorrect.
Let me say though this is not entirely negative and I see no reason not to merit people you agree with or a friend/pal posting something you find amusing etc...... merit is for fun as well it seems. Also in meta people will almost do things you ask and you feel justified in repaying with a bit of merit.
What is wrong is to imply merit is an indication of a posts value or rather having high merit qualifies you as automatically a better post than those with less merit.
Merit is helping stop lots of negative behaviour and is fun. Therefore a positive thing.
also this bunch of stats provided by r1s2g3 after I asked if he could provide
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1SAi_b3umCcFJO2dMoLYjWCjNz1JhOLWrsRHhYQK-nb8/edit#gid=429409603
demonstrates the scale of the merit cycling in the tiny fraction of a percent of posters
that is without meta subsection (highly concentrated merit club) being removed. My figure estimates I think will be found to be entirely correct. You can expect some of the highest merit receivers to take a 95% hair cut.
@loyce
It only makes sense the merit back slappers club that the top 0.02 retain 50% of all their merits cycled around internally and mostly in meta
I am clearly observing merit is mostly given for simply aligning your view with others whom are active in meta and have lots of merit to give. I am seeing merit given time and time again for the voicing of opinions that are actually clearly wrong based on observable events.
Trying to conflate high merit with high value posts is incorrect.
Let me say though this is not entirely negative and I see no reason not to merit people you agree with or a friend/pal posting something you find amusing etc...... merit is for fun as well it seems. Also in meta people will almost do things you ask and you feel justified in repaying with a bit of merit.
What is wrong is to imply merit is an indication of a posts value or rather having high merit qualifies you as automatically a better post than those with less merit.
Merit is helping stop lots of negative behaviour and is fun. Therefore a positive thing.
(3) Infinixhot1996 : he ws the first to help me (the post originator) clear up the role of a moderator. I found this valuable and appreciated the clarification. So I'd say he's damn close to merit worth regardless of the other posters echoing the same.
The duty of moderators on each"board" is to clean up that board/section and try and keep it as sane as possible,through deleting low content and spam posts or topics
It's not their duty to hand out merits,thats not to say they dont/do,as a matter of fact it's not anyone's duty to hand out Smerits except probably the merit sources which to an extent is their duty, and they'll only do so to worthy posts.
With or without merits,or merit giving mods or members,that definitely shouldn't deter you from coming up with the quality stuff you claim you want to, merit is just an addition,as our major purpose here is to discuss(sensibly through quality topics)
Be careful of the section you'll post your topic,otherwise it definitely may not even merits but get reported for being a spamfest
It's not their duty to hand out merits,thats not to say they dont/do,as a matter of fact it's not anyone's duty to hand out Smerits except probably the merit sources which to an extent is their duty, and they'll only do so to worthy posts.
With or without merits,or merit giving mods or members,that definitely shouldn't deter you from coming up with the quality stuff you claim you want to, merit is just an addition,as our major purpose here is to discuss(sensibly through quality topics)
Be careful of the section you'll post your topic,otherwise it definitely may not even merits but get reported for being a spamfest
(3)
Sadly for you the fact is the top 0.02% of merit receivers cycle over 50% of their merit between them at this time.
You keep posting this as if it's a bad thing 
Quality posts deserve Merit, and the same posters have sMerit to give. It makes perfect sense that a large share of all merit goes around in a small number of users.I'll make you a deal acarli: if you (and this offer is only valid for you) post links to 10 unmerited good posts in this topic, I'll merit them if I agree. And I'll comment on the "why". When you post the links, please quote (the relevant part of) this post so I receive a notification.
What's your take LoyceV?