Quote from: DdmrDdmr on December 08, 2018, 06:35:13 PM

Quote from: cryptohunter on December 08, 2018, 02:19:16 AM

<> 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 think the figure is really the top 2% of merit receivers. If Im right I calculated some data some weeks ago where I stated:

Quote from: DdmrDdmr link=topic=5066315.msg47803125#msg47803125

<>Ive continued scaling the Top X Merited for the following groups:
Top 200 -> 43,29% received merit from Top 200.
Top 500 -> 50,61% received merit from Top 500.
Top 1000 -> 56,62% received merit from Top 1000.
Top 5000 -> 69,44% received merit from Top 5000.<...>

The top 500 had an inner merit sending pattern of 50,61%. There are currently 25.008 merited forum members, so that makes the top 500 merited 2% of the total merited users. In my opinion, it is rather natural for the best posters to merit the other best posters quite often, whilst keeping an eye out for posts on any other rank or segment (most of those top 500 have merited many other people outside the top 500, just not in the same amounts or frequency which is also natural Id say).

Quote from: suchmoon on December 08, 2018, 05:59:54 PM

<> the top 5 merit receivers (theymos, satoshi, LoyceV, hilariousetc, Last of the V8s) <>

BPIP seems to have me on its ignore list. Im right in between @LoyceV and @hilariousetc really

I am not sure about this but 200 from let's say 150k active users as a percentage is under 2% right? is it not 0.13% that's posted in the last month i think not since merit was introduced that would be far greater so this is being more than fair.

There is no way that if you remove the merit from the top 200 that comes from ONLY the top 300 (out of 150,000 lets not use the 2 million members)

So to if you leave out the top 0.13% of inner circle meriting and those merits from a tiny subsection of posters on the meta board it is natural that their merit scores plummet up to 95%?

Not sure how natural that is.

Never pay attention to suchmoon he simply does not abide by any kind of logical argument.

There are 150k posters in I believe in the last month. Just because such moon claims they are not valid to be considered for merit because they have not had any merit he leaves them out of his calculation. That is quite a crazy thing to say.

The link I posted is 100% valid.

The facts

There are 2 million registered members
There are 150 posters in the last month

0.13% of that 150k circle 50% of their merits and have huge merit scores some as many as 1200 merits received.

Take merit that is being circled inside that 0.13% away and take also merit given on the meta board which is super concentrated by these 0.13% and their ass kissers and you will see for sure that most of them lose min 50% with most losing over 80% heading to 95%.

Simple observable fact. If they are out by a couple of % does not spoil the message that I present.

Anyone believing that 0.13% of posters spiraling away higher and higher in merit (gained from each other) who would lose 95% of their merits if that was not included along with their fav hang out meta is natural distribution of merit based upon objective analysis of the value of a post compared to others is wrong.