Local section is a different story. There is much less traffic, and also, you correctly noticed, that merits are always subjective. They are similar to "likes", but just have a more serious name.

No, it just means, that people are either hoarding merits, or there are not enough sources in a given place.

Giving a merit is very similar to writing "+1", "thank you", "I agree", or something similar. Theymos didn't receive a single merit from Satoshi, but when he got "+1", then you can look at it in the same way, as if he would get it.

Because this is the main reason, why the whole merit system was invented. If all posts would have high quality, then that system would never be needed, because the mere presence of a given post would imply, that it is worth reading. And this is the case for example in mailing lists, where everything is strictly moderated. But when you have a forum, where newbies are also invited, then something like merit system is needed, just because newbies don't want to see "your post is waiting for approval" after writing anything.

And also, the presence of "+1", "thank you", or similar posts, instead of merits, is usually a hint, that instead of writing it, merits should be sent. Which is why I think some people should be able to somehow reach negative amounts of merits, which could be filled by those with positive balance. Then, we wouldn't need topics like "link posts to merit sources", but instead, some users could do that from UI directly, and that list of posts could be browsed by sources. Maybe it is a good idea, to have a rank somewhere between "source", and "non-source", where some people would be able to fill that kind of lists (making it open for everyone would be too spammy I guess).

My own definition of giving a merit is "this post is not a spam". I can disagree with someone, and merit that person anyway. Maybe I want to correct someone, who is wrong, by quoting that person, and pointing it out (and also sending a merit, because if something is worth replying to, then it is usually also worth a merit).

And then, it becomes semi-automated: if something is quoted, then it is usually merited (unless blacklisted). And if something is "not a spam", then it can be whitelisted. By using "quotelist - blacklist + whitelist", I can spend many merits, without thinking too much about it (and of course, it is never fully automated, so each merit requires a manual action from me; my tools can only make suggestions, not decisions).

It is already implemented. You can give any amount from 1 to 50. If you want to split it between WO merits, and non-WO merits, then just send a single merit in one place, and two merits everywhere else.

Not to mention that merit history can be explored by anyone on pages like BPIP, so maybe it is just a matter of adding some rows and columns, when displaying statistics of a given user.

Sending things should have some costs. If that would be implemented, then users would need to provide some Proof of Work, before sending zero merits.

Also, merits should be treated as "likes". It has a serious name, but it is just an anti-spam feature, really.

I think it is better to link posts to people, who have plenty of merits. And then, they can give just one, if they like the content.

Merits are always subjective. And I think demerits should be avoided. If you think, that there should be less content, then this is what can be achieved by making moderated threads, where every post would be reviewed by someone, before being published. Some places, like mailing lists, are using that model, the question is: do you want to see it here?

You can always try to reach more moderated places, like mailing list, GitHub comments, Delving Bitcoin, or things like that. They have higher standards than forum, and if you wonder, why developers are no longer as active here, as they were in the past, then I can give you an answer: they just moved somewhere else.

But, if you decide to join different places, then be prepared for your posts being rejected. Or be prepared to wait a few days, to see your content published. It is all normal and healthy: if there are higher requirements, then obviously, there is less content.

Because it is often the case. There are many things, which I would like to see (and merit), but they are not there yet, because a lot of effort is needed, to make them. And it is yet another reason, why I usually send a single merit, and not "50". Also, receiving a single merit from 10 people is usually worth more in my eyes, than a single person sending 10 merits, because then, there is a bigger circle of people, who need my content, and think I am not a spammer.

And what is done, when some features for BTC are proposed, and rejected? Well, you make a soft-fork, or a no-fork solution, and then it pushes things one step forward (some people also make altcoins, but then, they are usually worse than the original version).

Want to see zero merits flying around? Write a plugin for a browser (hint: put some Proof of Work or other protections, to avoid being flooded). Want to separate WO merits from normal merits? Just display them differently, and count them differently in statistics. There are a lot of things, which can be solved by plugins or third party tools like BPIP, if they won't be solved officially, by changing the code on server's side. If server cannot meet your requests, then you have to modify the client, or make another server, which will do, what you want.

Yes, of course, that's the spirit! This is exactly what should be done in practice: less complaining, more coding. Because this is what can really push things forward.

OGNasty,
those accounts that receive merits are able to "rank up" in the forum. After you had a good rank you get enrolled in a signature campaign.
Maybe it's worthless but if you have it... you can earn money on the forum. It's not like anymore like 2014 where accounts grow thanks to activity.

Moreover as we have seen in collectibles, accounts could be easily used for scamming people after have a kind of trust...
Some guys are even collecting personal data as "side job" from this section of other collectors! ...  they think this is "normal" but no its not .
 

---

Now you had to receive merits. But these are assigned "based on mood of the source".
I can try to understand stwenhao post, but it's evident something isn't working since 95% of post merited are only from certain guys and something like:

"Are they like AIs that do things with trading? I don't understand. Where can I find something to read about it? Thanks to anyone who can provide me with information."
"Here we go! Now it's beer and chips, but where are the beer and chips? So now you're part of the Olympus of the gods, lucky you. Good for you."
"And here you are right, definitely worth selling."

These are the first two (unofficial) rules of the forum. It's clear that this section is not applying rules anymore. https://bt.irlbtc.com/view/703657.0
1. No zero or low value, pointless or uninteresting posts or threads. [1][e]
2. No off-topic posts.

It's clear that retard messages receive dozens of merits for no reason, meanwhile long explanation about bitcoin remains without merits (maybe because the poster is not an alt account or some friend of a scammer).
If we continue to keep all "at personal evaluation" it's clear that scammers can just support between them.
Some local sections (and not only full threads like WO) are already pure garbage with no real users but just clones or clones supporter.

If you support those cheap scammers, you're supporting in some way a scam behaviour that would impact brands advertising in forum, even the way we trust each other.
Did you think it's normal there are "cartels" of scammers that have growth Hero and Legendary accounts by farming merits?
I don't think this is something ok, so it's better to keep ALL posted in public about this argument.
If I have spent 162 days on the forum has been for bitcoin and for community (the good part of community) that is here around.

@stwenhao
Lets be clear here, since I am seeing a questionable "defense" on your side.

If a moderator or a reputable user posts one time a "one word" comments, doens't means nothing since this is just "one time". And probably this was an answer to provide, maybe has just avoided a long text because he is not earning from signature .
If there are users that have reached the higher ranks creating ALL worthless messages, yes this is worth. And there are dozens of these.
This is ongoing clearly from years and anyone could just check how 90-95% of merits are collected by just few users with non sense post.

You decide to make this assumption (wrong) that merits are "like +1" .
No this is not the meaning and clearly people are using for launching altaccounts/scam brands that advertising here.
Even if you consider as "like +1". Some users have reached higher level of yours granting 0 meaning on the forum.

Even another assumption (wrong) is that without merits the forum will be garbage.
In this way we created the "elite garbage" where "questionable" users that have hundreds of merits can decide who can be a shitposter and who not.
This has just created a new category "spammer supported by merit sources" .

Of course any system could be abused. That's why I am highlighting this... I am not proposing a solution but just clearly exposing an issue.
Also because I continue to highlight that some of these users involved ARE STOLEN PRIVATE DATA OF OTHER USERS... it's clear they are acting in a fraudolent way and they don't deserve any kind of trust/respect.

Of course, if the same users are also merit source it's an offense for ALL serioustrusted users of the forum or all people that are following this community.

If we disable merit usage on certain threads, there will be no end to it. Eventually it will be banned in most mega threads. Not sure how that makes sense.

The thing is account farmers will always find a way to exploit the system no matter which one is in place. It is because they adapt.

Why not establish a system that only allows users only making minimum 2 pages long academic level posts to be  ranked up?

Or just demand a PhD for the legendary membership.

The quality would go through the roof. All sig campers would be as wise as Gandalf the White.

**opens chat gpt**

-hey mf tell me how to write posts like gandalf the whitey would

I've come to peace with the reality that my request won't be put into practice, and that's fine. I just needed a place to park a post so I didn't have to open a new thread about it. Because its not that big of a deal. I just find some things annoying and in my own weird way I'm trying to potentially protect other forum members from dishonest people... I can't not call it out when I see it, or at least when I think I'm seeing it.

This is why I keep criticizing signature campaign manager that keep accepting user based on the merit count without considering what thread or board they get most of it.

There’s a lot of this user enrolled on Rollbit campaign that allow new bloods user that obviously farm merit through this board and other mega spam board that merit is flooded either from merit source or their merit circle. If no campaign manager accept this kind of user account farmer through merit will be eliminated because most of this user is low quality poster in gambling board mostly posting about football too obvious discussion based on sports article.

The previous signature campaign standard that only based on post quality and content instead of merit count sometimes much better rather than the current basis that is pro merit farmer.

Newbie posting immediately on thread that has high merit distribution and have a good knowledge is an obvious alt.

Apart from the issues related to the WO thread, the whole merit system system itself could do with some kind of overhaul. Exactly how some posts are merited will always be debatable but to have a two-tier system where some members are (and some are not) merit source, is not healthy as far as community cohesion is concerned.

While some people say that the merit system needs an change and there are others who complain that they don't get merits even on their useful posts. The biggest problem at WO is not that people get merit on worthless posts but the real concern is that there are few peoples who share merits among themselves and those people are only active on WO.

Recently, many new merit sources were introduced on the forum. I wonder if any of them focus on merits only at WO ?

At the beginning when the merit system was new it stopped the account farmers for a while. I'd say the forum gained a couple of spam-free years because of it but since they figured out how to game it, yes that time is over.

By "We" I mean all of us. Everybody can express his opinion here so we can all do something about it by showing our concerns.

And those who farm their merits in local boards or mega threads, they don't get to join quality high paying sig camps so easily as far as I am aware. They do join sig camps with lower pays though and that's because managers need to hire people either way and there is a shortage of good poster supply.

Let's say for a moment campaign manager refused to hire low quality legendary accounts... then they'd have to hire good posters with lower ranks, but the problem is this time, their account rank isn't high enough to display more complicated signatures.

When enough number of good quality posters emerge and get their ranks, those low quality posters with legendary accounts will be driven out of business.

Merit&account rank is only a deciding factor at the moment because the forum lacks the supply of good posters. Maybe it is not the managers' fault too as I originally thought.