Incorrect as usual - - that is if you want merit to become a real meritocracy

Motive even if stated is irrelevant -- only the posts actual content and its value should be analysed and then awarded merit based upon its contribution in relation to reaching the optimal solution.

You are suggesting an adhominem fallacy.

If we start using motives for removing merits let us start analysing bpips fans and receivers, trust lists and observable allegiances on this board. Any removal of merit without first providing a strong case the post itself does not warrant that merit is a political move and tampering.

Since merits are now trust in effect then we need to bring forth some criteria that ensures merit is given to valuable posts only. Why should persons proliferating provably incorrect / valueless information or even fighting against the formation of a fairer, transparent and more equal system for all even be considered trustworthy it the first place? makes no logical sense.