Re: Ranking up/down
by on 01/11/2025, 16:36:26 UTC
What you are expected to do (and only if you care about maintaining or growing your rank) is to aim for a long-term merit:post ratio of at least 1:10 (and by that I mean a true merit:post ratio of at least 1:10, not a cheeseball ratio accomplished by deleting your posts, which, BTW, will not confuse the system that I'm proposing).
I believe that this is more than conservative and there should be no issue for anyone who is not a shitposter. My current situation:- These days I have a lot of posts in the gambling sections. Those receive practically no merits because 99.99% of the posts in there are complete shit. Aside from a few people, nobody reads anything there and the users just write whatever they can, no matter how wrong or bland it is.
- I am specifically ignored by a few biased merit sources because they don't like my tone of writing and the CSAM supporting retards in Wall Observer.
- I am specifically ignored by local board sources because I call them out for their shenanigans and local merit farming.
d5000 is at 1:1.06.
stwenhao is at 1: 0.45..
I don't see any significant members having issues keeping a comfortable ratio. The highest quality contributors or merit farmers (like in WO) will converge towards 1 or lower. Most users will probably be in the middle 4-8 and only the worst shitposters will have an issue with this over time. However, since there are contests and other easy way to get some merits they will still have ways to try to fix their situation if they put in some effort. I don't see how anyone reasonable could complain about this proposal. I'd make it much stricter if it was up to me. Even 1:5 would be generous, but there is no chance that the admin would approve of something like that.
This is my post number 666, I guess that's some sort of sign.
