Quote from: vapourminer on Today at 10:15:23 AM

Quote from: LoyceV on Today at 09:55:55 AM

I made this post yesterday:

Quote from: LoyceMobile on August 31, 2023, 05:21:59 PM

Quote from: fillippone on August 31, 2023, 05:07:42 PM

Observing 27,145@stamp
Where am I?

In the past Undecided

It received 4 Merit. I've made better posts that received 0 Merit. I think it's safe to say earning Merit in WO is even easier than in Meta.

it gave me a chuckle for whatever reason - so one merit from me... thats my story and im sticking to it

and now i must resist going back and giving 49 more.

It made me giggle too.. but for whatever reason I did not end up sending an smerit to that particular post.. even though I have sent smerits to similar kinds of posts.. and whatever random thing that might be going on with me at the time too.. or maybe I ran out of smerits at the time.. so yeah a bit of randomness, perhaps?

.. I think describing why one of us might send several smerits to a seemingly low quality post (from a usually (overwhelmingly) high quality production robotic-like member) goes to the point that there is quite a bit of subjectivism in smerit sending, and surely there is no problem with theymos saying that he would prefer smerit sending from sources to aim towards the meriting of the higher of quality posts - but there is still no exact resolution towards getting away from a certain level of subjectivity and even any of us could have days in which our judgement might happen to be fogged and even perverted.. and surely if any of the merit source members are acting in those kinds of ways on a regular and ongoing basis, theymos may well choose to remove them as merit source members and/or to reduce the quantity of their source smerits.

We could also back theymos in a corner, if we might publicly proclaim that our purpose might happen to be to do the opposite of what he has stated to be concerns of his regarding the sending out of smerits.. and yeah sure threads like these might push the subject matter and even contribute towards theymos considering that some actions might be needed by him... but I am still having my doubts regarding the extent to which either OP or the paradoy OP have pointed out concerns to actually show that there is some kind of a problem in which there questionable objective value to some posts that are getting merited.. just for shitz and giggles...

.....but even shitz and giggles does not rise to the level of either abuse, corruption and/or quid pro quo, which seems to be more in the balliwick of smerit distribution devolution that theymos might need to see in order to actually conclude that the problem is worthy of some kind of a solution attempt. and the dumbass one of doing that ONLY on the WO thread seems nutso.. but hey. .anything can happen, even if a couple of nutsos create a thread to argue such nutso points.. ..

....or maybe if we go by the recent ruling against the SEC, I am not even sure if merit source members would need to be arbitrary and capricious in their smerit sending in order to be enough to disqualify them from carrying out their smerit sending because there would likely need to be some level of showing bad faith rather than their randomness or not really having any kind of a reason for the merits they sent.. although , I am sure that theymos does prefer some kind of conscientiousness in the smerit sending.. rather than pure aribtrariness.. and the idea of capricious does have some kind of irresponsibility built into it.. and maybe in that regard, I recall that QuestionAuthority was removed as a merit source member after he had engaged in some seemingly random game-related merit distribution practices...and who knows what else was going on with QA (that was of theymos's then concern).. and maybe the QA example goes to the idea that some level of publicness might push theymos into feeling that maybe some kind of action from him might be preferable.