In other words, one has to be a good poster first to earn a vote for DT1, while possible trustworthy members with less meritable posts are sidelined.
True, and this is a potential drawback of the new system. However, I would argue that if you are a proven trustworthy member, and have been here for any length of time, you would have absolutely no problems earning 10 merit, which would give you both a vote for DT1 and the potential to be elected to DT1 yourself.
There are plenty of users with high activity who have farmed it by just spamming in Games and Rounds -
such as all these spammers. 500 days spent spamming Games and Rounds or ICO Announcements isn't worth 1 day spent in Meta, reading the stickies and learning about the forum.
That will sadly do you no good because if someone with 250 cycled merits does not want you there it is likely they will collude with the small circle of pals to get you removed.
250 earned merits are the key positions in the trust system.
cryptohunter, you shouldnt have a problem getting 250 earned Merit?
Youve been here a long time, you know how the forum works. You should get that in 12 months max if youre a good . poster.
Sorry no if you are not a colluding ass kisser like yourself or hanging in meta for months backslapping and cycling them around then that is not going to be easy.
Certainly coming to their home board into the nest of vipers and bitch slapping them all around with facts demonstrating they are bunch of merit cycling colluders and trust abusers isn't likely to gain you much merit either.
.
Go tell gjhiggins, smooth, davidzimbeck and a host of real valuable posters how you are a 10x-20x more valuable poster than them too.
Merit score is meaningless according to suchmoon. As he says good poster bad poster is meaningless without definition and criteria. Hence why merit is a misleading and dangerous metric to try and build upon.
I mean you have over 400 can you show me some of your best original thought inspiring contributions so I can see these great and valuable posts.