<
> How many of those 1602 were legendary when merit came into existence and have provided no real content for over a year but just keep posting for the sig campaigns?
Edit a minute or 2 after after I posted this: Keep in mind the merit numbers I used I pulled out of my ass. More data points could give better numbers, it was an example. <...>
The numbers I provided were to enable us to see (roughly) the impact of your/a suggestion. Obviously there are plenty of cases amongst any rank that do not provide any meaningful content, a range that do, and a select reduced group that do and manage to be merited in the event to some meaningful extent.
Im not one to vouch for maintaining ranks perpetually, but once given, its not easy to make the decision to revert it, from a social and psychological point of view. One has to view the reach of the numbers to understand the impact it would have, especially from the global perspective of the forum, the number of members and its traffic. That has to be balanced against changing the ranking system to a reward+punish one, based on the amount of earned merits, and finding the right equilibrium and the driving need to undergo the task is rather much a feat.