The above means less than 95 people have become hero members
It's much less: many of those (less than) 95 users had a high rank already and didn't rank up.
My weekly Merit update isn't finished yet, but here's a sneak preview with this morning's data:
17 users earned 1000+ Merit
76 users earned 500+ Merit
204 users earned 250+ Merit
607 users earned 100+ Merit
7336 users earned 10+ Merit
27732 users earned 1+ Merit
Ranking up is no longer for everyone, and I think that's a good thing. I haven't seen too many good users who are being limited by Merit, but if you find them, please report their posts their good posts
here.
I agree ranking up probably isnt for everyone, such as those who dont have a grasp of how bitcoin works, at least past full member status. The forum is after all a place where people can learn about bitcoin. A lot of people also earn some money while learning (such is what I did). I never needed the money, but I probably wouldnt have taken the time to learn as much as I have if I wasnt earning money here either via conducting business or signature advertising. I would argue someone with a basic understanding who is showing an interest in learning and is making progress in learning should at least achieve full membership and perhaps senior member status with a decent understanding and the above.
There are hundreds of thousands of people who use the forum every month, most probably wont participate continuously for 16 months, but I would expect for at least thousands to have enough activity to be a hero.
I don't think it's realistic to expect thousands of users to earn more Merit than Activity. And I think you're off on the total number of real users, hundreds of thousands of active posters doesn't mean they're all unique users. I expect many alt accounts, and ranking up more than one account is virtually impossible (
empirical evidence here).
Most people cant rank up one account.
I would also point out that I had extensive knowledge about bitcoin when the merit system was introduced, which probably increased the amount of merit I received. This would not be the case for the average person.
I'm pretty sure your red trust discourages people from meriting you, otherwise you'd probably have had much more by now.
Perhaps that is true. That only makes my point stronger though. I also dont think trust should affect someones ability to rank up, especially considering theymos is explicitly no longer trying to cultivate a good trust list/DT list.
I do think that merit sources tend to get much more merit than most other people. Look at Vod for example, he is a merit source, but makes very few if any objectively good posts and nearly zero (if any) helpful posts, but he is one of the most merited people here.
Legendary - 11
Hero - 43
Senior - 108
Full - 183
I don't know that we need to change the requirements. So what if you don't get to Hero in under 2 years. You can still actively participate in all aspects of the forum. There are also a lot of resources out there to gain merit, even coming to Meta and
bitching about it.
I would point out that no one said he isnt deserving of being a legendary account but he is still not one. There were multiple merit sources who said they thought he should be a legendary but didnt give the max merit to him.
I think the above number of people who have ranked up is too low.
I would also point out that I had extensive knowledge about bitcoin when the merit system was introduced, which probably increased the amount of merit I received. This would not be the case for the average person.
I'm pretty sure your red trust discourages people from meriting you, otherwise you'd probably have had much more by now.
I would have to agree with that. It probably doesn't help that QS does tend to have a differing opinion with quite a few of the most generous merit givers. Which can lead to overlooking a quality post due to disagreeing with the message.
I would say this is additional evidence that the merit system is a way to get people to agree with you, and it encourages groupthink. Any merit sources that withhold merit because they disagree with what is being said, is effectively censoring the person because they are being forced to either say what they agree with or not be able to rank up.
~but I would expect for at least thousands to have enough activity to be a hero.~
That's why the merit system was implemented. You now need to actually contribute to the forum rather than just stay logged-in for the requisite time period and spew enough off-topic shitposts to rank up. Again, I don't know what's an acceptable number of members that the community thinks should be ranking up, but as Loyce's data shows 76 members were able to earn enough merit to reach hero.
Now, I don't know what your idea of a "Hero" is, but I've always used the word in an rather exclusive manner. Not to mention "Legendary."
The merit system was created to prevent spammers from being able to rank up. I think it is spilling over to also prevent legitimate users who do make an effort to contribute from ranking up.
Edit: bb code.