I appreciate the effort you've put into this post, and the math is quite telling.  But, like nearly all statistics they only tell part of the story.

If we take my example: I'm not one of the top 200 merit recipients, yet I've only received 22 of my 133 merits from outside the Top 200 Merit Recipients.  That's only 16% of my total.  I'm new around here, and certainly wouldn't consider myself as a member of the "Circle Jerk."

Of the members you referenced as examples, (to the best of my knowledge) three of them are very likely merit sources.  They can afford to be generous with their sMerit.  I myself, have never given more than a single merit to any post, and yet I've never received fewer than 4 from suchmoon.  And frequently receive a minimum of 2 from the Top 200.

It seems fairly clear to me that merit is awarded to good posts 99.99% of the time.  Of course "good posts" are subjective, and that's why we have over 100 merit sources on the forum, so that subjectivity is spread around.  

In my opinion, Cryptohunter's issue with legendary members getting banned is the opposite side of the effort to reduce spam.  The merit system is working in reducing spam, but there are still many hero and legendary spammers around.  They escaped the merit system simply by being here a year or two before it's implementation, and it's only for that reason that they were awarded their rank.  To keep their rank, they merely need to follow the rules.

~snip~
Again: you're looking at this the wrong way. Instead of looking where the Merit came from, you should look at the post it was sent to. Obviously there's some abuse, but I'm pretty sure most of the Top Receivers received it for legit good posts. Why would it matter who gave it, if the post deserves it?
I've merited your post, not because I agree, but because it's worth reading and you're not a spammer.
~snip~