Re: Top 200 Merit receivers without Merit from the Top 200 Merit receivers
Sad to hear that I am on ignore but I do understand that you did not enjoy me asking you to substantiate certain claims which were untrue.
That's not why you're on ignore. You're on ignore because you keep asking the same thing over and over again, in several different topics. That's close to trolling, and ignore solves that. Read the last few pages of your post history: it's the same thing over and over again.I don't have to disprove your claims. If you make a claim, it's up to you to back it up with data.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5081670.msg48556141#msg48556141
I am not sure about that. You made these claims and never substantiated them see above link. Data was on that thread that served as the basis. Also feel free to read closely all of those last posts because it demonstrates at several periods I said I would like to drop the discussion about that but you guys kept repying and asking me things about it. This thread reopens the entire same thing all over again so seem another strange claim to make. I mean surely you can not open a thread referencing me in it and some of what I said and expect me not to respond to correct points I see are incorrect.
Quote
I mean most members on this forum never visit meta so that would be more of a sensible comparison
You're contradicting yourself: if most people don't visit Meta, it wouldn't matter if Merit earned in Meta was removed. Then again, you can make the same claim about any board: "most users don't visit ".This seem illogical to me in many ways. 1/ because you don't need many people with lots of merit to give for others there to obtain lots of merit. The merit score is not dependent on lots of users. No I don't think I can make that claim about alt discussion or bitcoin discussion or any other high traffic (in terms of users) board.
Quote
I will give you some merits once you fulfill a true representation of what I said in the other thread but don't half meet my criteria for my statements and then assume you have made a rebuttal.
That sounds like work, I don't work for Merit, but I do work for Bitcoin
How about some wireless coin ask foxy these are the real deal?
Quote
Great work so far and I do appreciate the effort.
Thanks 
I still think you're barking the wrong tree though.That is fair enough you are entitled to your opinion.
Quote
For instance a poster posting only in alt discussion that has earned only 20 merits total could actually be as good or better poster than someone earning 400 merits in meta. That's all there is to it.
Good posts in Spam Megathreads aren't worth anything if nobody reads them. Of course the altcoin boards would be much better without all the spam, but Merit isn't enough to end that.Well, to say that is true in one way. However not all threads on the alt sections can be grouped as spam mega threads. I also view any good post regardless of location is a good post in its own right and can provide basis to an insight into who is capable of making and will put the effort into making a positive contribution to the board.
I will just say though that is not correct to reference someones claims with out entirely stating the criteria they made clear those claims were based upon. It is is a misrepresentation.
@ dmdrdmdr
Those look like 2 cases of blatant merit abuse. I don't think we should include clear merit abuse to skew our understanding of general patterns we can observe. I mean this actually demonstrates even more clearly that high merit score does not relate to high quality poster. Since they are certainly not the best posters on the alt board.
could anyone lay it out like this too
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1SAi_b3umCcFJO2dMoLYjWCjNz1JhOLWrsRHhYQK-nb8/edit#gid=429409603
but without the weird scrolling bit on the sheet.
If anyone could get the top 200 - remove the top 200 -250- 300 and meta board then put it up in the format above that would be great. Then just keep that updated and no need to comment on it again in future people can look at it a draw their own conclusions.
Actually a sheet like that that was updated but actually only included merit from each board would probably be very interesting. Since dmdr already demonstrated the 2 top merited in alt discussion were blatant abusers. So what I mean is a table that takes the top earners from each board and removes the real top 200 (overall on all board receivers and their merits given). If that is what dmdrdmdr did then it immediately identified some serious abusers.