What is the fine line between quality and quantity and how does it affect merit?
Most people are naturally lurkers I would think. Often a lurker has very little to say, but when they do have something to say it might be very valuable!
Is there a chance that some people are just posting to abuse the merit system without having anything useful to say?
Should people have an alternative way of being rewarded with merits besides posting?
How could this look like, and how would you design the system so it can't be abused?
The giver of merit, whether it be the source of merit or even yourself, is subjective in nature. There are no specific rules stating that someone must give merit to anyone; it is the freedom of the owner of merit—the source of merit.
The usefulness of merit is different for you and me. It may be that you find it useless, but I find it useful. Each person's perspective is very different.
Even I myself, when I have written a long post that I think is valuable but does not receive merit, it may be that it is only according to you, but for other people it is just ordinary. What needs to be done is to realize that our arguments are not very interesting.
The awarding of merit is not fixed on highly academic or theoretical arguments or other things that are extraordinary in scientific terms. There is no measure for this because the system is subjective (free).
As for those who abuse it, that is beyond our control, but you can see it if the distribution is problematic and suspicious.
These kinds of things are often questioned from time to time.
It is better not to focus on seeking merit on this forum. If you want to make a useful contribution, just do it. It doesn't matter if you don't get merit, as long as you can gain knowledge, connections, and information from this forum and/or benefit some people on this forum with your posts.