Congrats fillippone! That's impressive!
Now imagine what ratio you could achieve if you were accepted officially in the Merit Cycling Club =))) Just kidding.
But seeing your OP now (I didn't know about its existence before), it would be interesting to see a new metric, based on Merits vs. Activity ratio. Eventually, it could be something (no matter its name - let's call it just "New Metric") based on certain intervals. I imagine something like this:
- Rank 0: [0 ... 0.25] ratio (remember, this is for Merits vs. Activity, not for Activity vs. Merits)
- Rank 1: [0.26 ... 0.75]
- Rank 2: [0.76 ... 0.175]
- Rank 3: [0.176 ... 3]
- Rank 4: [3.01 ... 5]
- Rank 5: >5.
It is hard to believe there would be many users with this ratio bigger than 5, thus I stopped there the interval. I imagined the interval bigeer from a rank to a superior one, similar to the difficulty of the merits / activity system, which requires way more merits / activity for upper ranks (example: for becoming Junior you need 1 merit, but for becoming Member you need 10, which means 1000% more merits; for Full Member you need 100, which also means 1000% more than the requirement for Member and so on).
And, of course, it would be even more accurate if such a metric would count just the earned merits, not the airdropped ones.
Edit: oh and about nullius, as I saw his name in this topic also - he is above and beyond this system
nullius has not just a Merit vs. Activity ratio > 1; he has a Merits vs. Posts ratio >1
Now imagine what ratio you could achieve if you were accepted officially in the Merit Cycling Club =))) Just kidding.
But seeing your OP now (I didn't know about its existence before), it would be interesting to see a new metric, based on Merits vs. Activity ratio. Eventually, it could be something (no matter its name - let's call it just "New Metric") based on certain intervals. I imagine something like this:
- Rank 0: [0 ... 0.25] ratio (remember, this is for Merits vs. Activity, not for Activity vs. Merits)
- Rank 1: [0.26 ... 0.75]
- Rank 2: [0.76 ... 0.175]
- Rank 3: [0.176 ... 3]
- Rank 4: [3.01 ... 5]
- Rank 5: >5.
It is hard to believe there would be many users with this ratio bigger than 5, thus I stopped there the interval. I imagined the interval bigeer from a rank to a superior one, similar to the difficulty of the merits / activity system, which requires way more merits / activity for upper ranks (example: for becoming Junior you need 1 merit, but for becoming Member you need 10, which means 1000% more merits; for Full Member you need 100, which also means 1000% more than the requirement for Member and so on).
And, of course, it would be even more accurate if such a metric would count just the earned merits, not the airdropped ones.
Edit: oh and about nullius, as I saw his name in this topic also - he is above and beyond this system
nullius has not just a Merit vs. Activity ratio > 1; he has a Merits vs. Posts ratio >1