theymos hat gesagt er würde es vorziehen, denen die sie verdienen, mehr Merits zu geben, als dass diese Merits überhaupt nicht verteilt werden.
Ich denke, seine genauen Worte waren, wenn eine Merit-Quelle nur zwei gute Beiträge findet, kann er diesen zwei Beiträgen 50 Merit geben. Das ist besser, als die Merits nicht zu verteilen.
Ich kann den Beitrag nicht finden, in dem er das gesagt hat, aber wahrscheinlich wird sich jemand daran erinnern.
Das hatte ich mir damals sogar aufgeschrieben, dass ich es später mal wiederfinde. Ging darum, dass dort Allerweltsposts eine große Menge Merit erhalten hatten und das natürlich nicht gut war aber Theymos kommentiert hatte, dass 50 Merit gerechtfertigt sind, wenn der Beitrag eine gewisse Qualität hat:
If they complain about amounts, tell them to complain to me. It's best if sources try to exhaust their source allocations, even if it means giving posts higher amounts than is typical. If you have 150 source merit and you only see 3 merit-worthy posts in a month, then I'd rather you over-give each of them 50 merit than let the merit expire. That way there are more people capable of sending merit, and the "merit economy" is less top-down.
If a DT member tags you for something stupid involving merit (ie. probably anything less than selling merit), then they're not going to be a DT member for much longer.
Aside from that, if people complain about whether things deserve merit at all, then that's something to perhaps think about, but if you conclude that they're wrong, then that's that. You don't need to stress about it or defend yourself constantly. It's conceivable that someday you and I will end up disagreeing too much about this stuff and I'll remove your source status, but it's really not a big deal.
The topsendban list is just a first indication of abuse, and many excellent people are on it. Your place on there acts as a sort of benchmark: eg. chandra12 has a similar score there, but whereas you are an extremely active merit-giver with a diverse selection of posts merited (most of which anyone would agree with), chandra12 only has two large merit sends. His behavior in comparison to yours while having a similar topsendban score is what creates a strong abuse impression.
I appreciate the work of you and other sources who take it seriously!
Und in dem Beitrag war das auch verlinkt, wo er dazu ermutigt, besonders Newbies Merit zu geben, wenn der Post bereits "nur" lesenswert ist (Zitat ist leider nicht verlinkt)
~snip
I recommend:
- If a newbie posts something that could be even called good, then give them 1 merit. It doesn't need to be a great post.
- It's best to use all of your source merit. If you don't naturally do so, try giving people more merit per post on average. If you don't send your source merit, then nobody gets it, but if you do send it, then the recipient can pass half of it on.
Thanks!