Bitcoin Forum

The trust score numbers are now slightly different:
- The first number is the trust score.
- The second number is the number of unique users who have given that person negative feedback.
- The third number is the number of unique users who have given that person positive feedback.
- The fourth number was removed.

I also completely changed the trust score algorithm to this:

This algorithm is a little slower than the previous one. Post here if you think you see extra slowness due to this change. Maybe I need to add extra caching to compensate.

Also post here if someone has a trust score that seems wrong.

I was going to change it so that everyone with 0 trust had orange trust, but I decided that this looked bad and changed it back.

Interesting. Thanks for clarifying things!

thanks for update, I was worried when I saw weird  trust ratings ;)

update: but there is still something wrong with trust system, sent you a PM, please check

Seems like some trust scores jumped up quite a bit. Hmm, should this still stay?

I also want to say thanks for this improvement, we will see in the next days what the community think about

It looks like this results in most people having higher trust scores. Is there going to be any kind if max score like there was previously (150)? (I don't see it in your formula).

It looks like the revised formula is going to be more resistant to people trading with others multiple times in order to get additional  positive trust ratings. It should also make it easier for someone to have overall negative trust when they execute a long con.

Damn, my trust score changed drastically. With the default settings I now have over 50 points, instead of 30 or so.

Aha, I thought forum got some bug when I saw my trust rating.Anyways thanks for update.

Same here. I saw 24 for myself before and now it's at 100..

Seems like a more straightforward representation of numbers though.

Thanks for the clarification. However, I can see that people have got triple the number of ratings in their account. I can see 13 as my trust score. First number is the trust rating and second number is the negative feedback I've received  ???

Pleasant surprise, thought there was a problem with my trust

I was so freaked when I saw the change in my trust score!
Yeah, keep people at neutral trust in black text. 

Doesn't that mean if someone receives a positive and a negative rating, they'll go negative if the negative is newer?


That seems like quite an extreme decay, ratings after 10 months are worthless? Its going to lead to a lot of reposted ratings to refresh them.

Currently -9999 to 9999

There are some useful changes, but the first score needs to be rescaled. It varies too much if one trust is added or removed. Makes anyone in Default trust much more powerful and those outside it more worthless.

Muhammed Zakir's rating shows as ???

EDIT: It has changed now as the negative feedback became untrusted. This only shows how much it fluctuates.

Yes:

https://i.imgur.com/VZfITNr.png

It is a bug.... theymos can surely fix it.

It became an easy fix, remove LouReed :D

already reported about this ?? ? bug to admin theymos

The code is : if(score < 0)
         return ?? ? (orange)

Hence it returned ?? ?

??? is a valid score in the new algorithm.


If someone has 1 positive and 1 negative, then the time doesn't matter. They'll have a score of -1.

Examples:
Old -> New
+ - : -1
- + : -1
+ + - : ???
+ - + : 0
- + + : 1
+ + + : >=3
- - + : -3
+ - - : -3
- - - : -8


There is no decay. Ratings grow in weight from 1 to 10, then stay at 10 forever. (If the rated person has no negatives.)

Then at least he doesn't have a "negative" trust red score but a pink one http://techforum.it/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/asd.gif... really cool.



Thanks again for the reply.

Ah, I think its not a bug but a new trust symbol

Edit: admin theymos confirmed this, new trust symbol ?? ?

@theymos what is the thinking behind increasing the numbers? It makes changes too much. Was it to increase the strength of DefaultTrust?

Currently, even 1 trade with a DefaultTrust means becoming green soon. Earlier one had to wait a lot of time to become green trusted. It also makes changes abrupt. Muhammed Zakir went from ??? to +5 with one change in feedback.

It looks like no matter what if the last feedback you receive is negative then you will either have a ?? ? Trust score or a negative score. Look at TECSHARE for example, his rating from Vod means he has a question mark rating.

Also TF has a negative 9999 rating lol.

not always
I have seen users who received both positive and negative feedbacks and still has black trust ratings with first number 0


Edit: looks like trust system is not completely done, i have a seen a user who received 2 positive trusts around 6 months ago and few later as well as few negative feedback but still his trust rating is black with first number Zero (0). it should be either green or red because trust ratings are old. also total number of users who sent him trust are higher on his trust page then shown in third number in trust score

I was freaked at first to see the change but then i looked up in Meta to find this.
Though am not disappointed but the previous Algo was better.

Oh derp, I thought "months since rating" would be counting down for some reason.

For example: my trust.

Correct. Your trust network is assumed to consist of people who are basically reasonable. So if any trusted ratings are negative (which means "this person is probably a scammer, watch out!"), then this should be taken very seriously. That's why a single negative rating can easily cause a loss of 100+ trust points in this new algorithm. And if the most recent rating is negative, then this is a strong indicator that the person may have been running a long con which has turned into a full-blown scam.

If anyone is abusing this by reposting negative trust unnecessarily or giving out negative trust too easily, then you should remove them from your trust network.


You'll get used to the larger numbers. DefaultTrust doesn't get any sort of advantage as far as I can tell.

No I don't think:


https://i.imgur.com/HQqEF5k.png

I see you Green

https://i.imgur.com/0EeyU4i.png

yes. you trust is still black while you have 6 months old positive trust ratings

Looks like Tecshare will have something to converse again about :P But all jokes aside, why does his show up as this for me? A bug in the system?

http://i60.tinypic.com/2lwnd53.png

What is the issue with the earlier numbers?

DefaultTrust gets an advantage. Earlier, one default feedback still means 10 months remaining black and slowly increasing number. Now, all one has to do is manage one default feedback and very soon it is green. Similar is the case for moving from light green to dark green.

Advantages of trading with DefaultTrust members went up even more, they are going to get bargains now.

@ redsn0w
@ chronicsky

you see marco's rating green because you left him positive feedbacks also
Me and other users who doesn't left him positive feedbacks see it in black, not green
Trust:   0: -2 / +4

it was already explained here
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1066857.msg11433109#msg11433109

The meaning of having "green" trust is now diminished and will be similar to what was previously the meaning of having black positive trust.  

Theymos cleared it before

---

ohk! first i though that could be it but i never though redsnow left him feedback

@bold: This may lead to an abuse of feedback left by Default Trust members. I can't imagine now how one scammers account will look like with the max limit being 9999.

Is it possible to have a notification when a feedback is left? If not, it would be useful if the feedback system has a time attached to the date. It helps to know when a person was left a feedback if there are many members who have left a  feedback on the same day.

Yes. I think with this new algorithm low positive trust should be shown as black (maybe bold). Light green should be used when reaching some value (at least 5, maybe 10) and dark green when surpassing at least 2x or 3x that first threshold.

Either that or rescale it. Dividing it by 5-10.

@ Quickseller there is a difference. A single trade or activity gives a lot of numbers now, while a lot of trades outside that makes it remain 0. The number increase works for all those with any numbers. For all those with 0 it remains 0, there is no scaling.

a trust score of positive 5 with the new system is the same as a trust score of 0(0)-1(1) under the old system. IMO you really shouldn't be trading just because the other person is on default trust anyway.

with new green feedback system , even proven scammers are having green trust ratings under their username, and they can scam users again using their green trust ratings :(

Like who?

Not exactly, an user should not see only the 'trust score'  ::) but also check the user's history and use always an escrow if he does not trust the other part.

Difference is anyone with a number gets a higher number. Anyone with a 0 is still 0.

If people here didn't do what they shouldn't do there would be no need of the trust system. Thats not how it works, scammers will attempt to trade with DefaultTrust members and wait for a few months to gain a lot of ratings and color.

It makes changes abrupt when the DefaultTrust list changes.

yes we know this but what about new users or newbies who was always trusting green trust users blindly
they think green is symbol of trust

Like this dope (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=964525.msg11431520#msg11431520)

Fooled by the nice color and now out of 0.7 BTC

The scores seem like too much of a drastic jump in my opinion and will make users seem more trusted than they really are or should be. Mine went from 4: -0 / +0 to 22: -0 / +3.

Fair enough on trading with specific people.

However the meaning of having a low trust score now is the same meaning as having black positive trust. Their potential trading partners should take similar precautions with someone with a green trust score of plus 5 now as they would as black trust with one trust rating previously.

Also this is an improvement as previously you could have one successful trade two years ago and would show as having significant amounts of trust. This is fixed by getting a max of 10 points per trade.

You also need to consider that previously the max score you can have was 150 while now the max score is 9999 so having a small positive score would be essentially the same as zero.

this one has black, i have seen scammers in green
now its a lot of work for default trust members to spot the scammers and help the community

It used to take a lot to jump from 3 to 4 (or from one number to the next). You can somewhat equate your current trust rating as being a 2.2 under the old system.

I think the color scheme should probably be reformed as the difference between dark green and light green is much smaller then it was previously.

This happened earlier. I was giving an example how color can fool a newbie. In that case it is even more so as there was very specific rating warning against that very particular trade. Goes to show that they rely mostly on colors and hardly on the text.

God Bless users who trust green feedbacks until default trust users make all the scammers red again

In situations like TECSHARE's, you can (if you trust TECSHARE and disagree with Vod) post an additional positive rating responding to whatever Vod said. This will counteract Vod's negative rating.


Oh, good point. I changed it so that you have dark green trust if your score is 5 and dark green if your score is 15.

:P

What is the problem with rescaling instead? I don't see any benefits with the higher numbers.

I agree that the numbers should be scaled back...I kicked it on default trust only and it seems like everyone has huge scores now. Maybe a scale of -100 - +100 would be better. It seems like being trusted will be easier, and that is not a good thing around here.

Yeah, they're way too high in my opinion. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=343102 That guy only has one feedback from me I left over a year ago and he was 1: -0 / +1 the other day and now he's 10: -0 / +1. What are the question marks all about like here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=320943 ? ??: 1 / +2?

This :

Exactly...It really diminishes the value of having earned a lot trust in my opinion. I see people now with high scores that look really trusted all the sudden.. Honestly I think a scale of 1-25 would be really good. It should take years of being honest to get any sort of good reputation here.

Also Theymos...

Can you make a list of users by trust within the default network? It would be interesting to have a leader board to see as people rise and fall trust wise here.

Quickseller removed from the trust i just saw.

That was before this change happened.

IMO the scale doesn't change anything once we get used to it. It's like pricing everything in cents instead of dollars. Soon enough you'd get used to paying 150 cents for a coke instead of USD 1.5. If anything it makes things more detailed. Because there's no decimals in the trust ratings before 0.2 and 0.4 were both shown as 0. Now 2 and 4 are shown differently.

The important part is that everything gets updated to the new scale, for example light green and dark green (which was already changed by theymos). And we must get used to the new scale.

Makes no difference. Alot of users still respect his opinion. Thusmore, this post is in the wrong section as it does not pretain to the topic.

I disagree since we have a scammer issue here. I think earning even 1 green trust should be a real hassle. It should be rare to see people with green trust around here with all the scams and B.S. Take my score for example on default trust... +196 that to me is just silly. Maybe on a scale of 1-25 I should be a +5 or even lower.

At least darkgreen should be hard to obtain. Getting 15 points is pretty easy with this algorithm.

Now the trust is shown as green only when it's at least 5, not 1 as before, so that will help. But I see your point, probably scaling/rounding down would be helpful, especially for the first point(s). Maybe it would make sense to further increase the thresholds for light and dark green.

Also people shouldn't give positive (and negative) trust so easily, especially those on the default trust. For example I really don't think alcaz (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=343102) deserves a trusted positive trust just for sending first $4.40, even if that didn't make his trust green.

Exactly. Even though my trust list has just 1 person included (that being you), it has jumped with the new changed.
I'm already: 15: -0 / +2
Although others won't see it that way I guess.

It does seem like the green points are too easy to obtain (easy to seem trusted) with this algorithm.

I don't get it. I probably have more negative trust than anybody else on this forum, but my second # is still 0. Are the trust ratings still weighted (sorry if this has already been answered since I didn't actually read the entire thread).

It only counts users from default trust, no? All the negatives you have are in the untrusted list, as far as I can see at least.

It only counts users from people within your trust network.

Ah, ok. Thanks for the explanation :)

After a quick perusal of your trust, I challenge that statement.   :)

I stand corrected. Geez man, people getting platinum mad with your ratings.

I still have way more. Or maybe Bick does, will be close. [BFL "competition"]

Psh, all I got is stupid BA, I need to start outing more scammers.

My trust network has me at a trust rating of -9999...  ???

Most of them are abandoned, throw away accounts.   :)

Can i ask a clear explanation on what does the 'month' do or its effect? I cant understand it clearly

Brand new trust ratings are worth 1 point, rising to 10 after 10 months have passed.

So old trust is worth more than new trust .  I like it.  :)

I'm liking this new trust system, seems to give older scammers a red tag like they deserve. I noticed this on the 'creativex' account, the guy who ran the bASIC-MINING scam now has red trust, and before he didn't.

I also agree with what others said a few pages back though, it doesn't seem right for users with a single positive feedback to have a +10 score after a year of doing nothing, I definitely think it creates a sense of false trust, at least if people don't go and check out the user's actual ratings.

I believe a +10 trust score will eventually even out and not be as much compared to other trust scores. Since the new system basically makes older trust ratings add more value to your trust score. A member with a single trust rating can get a +10 score from that rating alone but nothing more. I do like the new system more, it makes more sense to me and I believe it is easier for others to understand as well. The old algorithm was honestly a pretty big mystery to me that I didn't bother looking into too much.

Thank you, theymos! It looks good now.


I also agree. Something should be done about this.

Good changes staff.  :)  I feel it is a little easier to understand now for newer users.

So in effect, what you are saying is that the trust system is no longer about who trades and who is trusted with what, rather it is now about a popularity contest, and who you can convince to join your own circlejerk club. Can you explain to me why I deserve to be excluded from the entire default trust tree over one rating while Vod can negative rate me (and lots of others) without repercussion negating my entire trust over the fact that he doesn't like what I have to say about him? Every time you "improve" the trust system it becomes more and more arbitrary and able to be manipulated from the top.

Lobbying / popularity getting out the vote is what any system like this based on.

Do what most people do put a ~ next to all those that neg rep you including those on the default list you get your belibers to follow suit presto chango your positive. Hate Vod get everyone of your belibers to neg him he is neg to you and them. US vs. Them vs. Them. Always been this way. If your army is bigger than the default list you have sway. Please keep campaigning I'll join your army tecshare minus negging rep on Vod. I'll just copy your trust setup okay?


Since the change:

 dogie from +63 to -481
 quickseller -20 to -90
 VOD -100 to -2011
 Techshare +100 to ? ? ?
 Bicknellski +63 to +75

I'll see how I can make you positive since I trust you and VOD.

Edit:

Done now you are O.

Techshare Trust:   0: -1 / +42

All I did was put ~Vod.

Seems fair right?

I'm now seeing this for theymos with my trust list:
http://s1.postimg.org/5yivk18hb/image.png

It seems to be caused by a single negative trust from someone in my trust network:
http://s21.postimg.org/40r78katz/image.png

This doesn't seem right to me, that seems too easy for users to lose their score. You can see above theymos has lots of positive from people in my trust network, but the single negative made him lose his green score.

Yes! This is actually bad and removes the so called use of Trust
He says one negative trust can negate 100 positive points

---

I never understood it as well!
This one is quite easy to understand and i don't know why does it matter if 1 trust score can go upto 10 , they still stay light Green unlike before when 5+ meant Dark Green.
Though am not sure yet when it becomes Dark Green because i saw people with 19 as first number ,having Dark GReen too

I don't think it we be possible to trust both Tecshare and Vod's ratings simultaneously with them both showing up as trusted because vod has left negative on Tecshare.


Yeah I think something has to change. I see Tecshare at ? ??: -1 / +8 and he shouldn't lose all his green trust just because of one neg.

Edited my Trust Settings and here are my results now.

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/ee106/PFC4L1FE/vodtechshare_zpsiqotsoyi.png

Conclusion:

You can use the ~ to set whatever trust you want for any user you like really given they have a reasonable number of positive ratings already. If you don't like it get your fans to support you and change it, or if you are dogie use your shill network and attack others that post your dirty laundry in the forums and use the moderator button hard and often to get your enemies banned that is how works and will continue to work as the tweaks have already been made. Heck those with any real ethics, unlike Adam Allcock, should band together and ~ the whole default trust list and rebuild it trust in a more utopian image.

Now if only Techshare and Vod would just shake hands and broker the truce then I can remove the ~Vod and tweak my trust settings more. I hate it when daddy and daddy fight. Basically I want to add ~ to anyone they both marked negative after I review their claims except for Vod's claim against Techshare which should disappear soon enough.

It would be nice to add a link each of the trusted feedbacks that easily lets you remove that user from your trust list, and also add a link to each of the untrusted feedbacks that lets you add a user to your trust list.

The only thing that would change is your and your friend's perspective. Nothing else would change if neither of you are trustworthy.

What do you think about using previous formula with current trust rating style(removing last number)? Previous formula will have to be altered a bit. I didn't like current formula TBH. My rating would be 1: -0 / +4 with old formula which is much better (and looks more accurate) than 8: -0 / +4. Views?

"Minor change"...


I also prefer the old formula, however this doesn't affect me in any way. To old users on the forum it's going to be hard to get to grips with it *since the ratings seem to be immensely high. I see that the dark trust has comes when it's higher. All in all, I still prefer the old system. If you could show the total trust left along with the unique trust that would be great.



*Edit.

I was confused to see why is the fourth number missing in the Trust of people.
Can't get a hold of this  >:(

And why do i see this Question marks with Red ink on this person's profile ?
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=148389
https://i.imgur.com/jJk6AHN.png



He used to appear light green if i remember correct

I assume BayAreaCoins is in your trust list and his rating is new. Hence, you will see that rating. FYI he is still green for me.

No, my trust list is unedited and it's Default Depth 2
But atleast now i know why it is such , but i still don't get HOW ???
I mean he have 6 positive and  1 negative , why is he orange and  ???

He has a orange and ??? trust symbol because the negative trust feedback is having more weight on his trust than the positive feedbacks.

The first number is the trust score.

So the trust score appear if you receive any trust include positive and negative on default trust and out of default trust ?


I think the score will change after a month

That's what I'm curious about. If someone trades someone out of default trust does it still raise the score? Or is the only way to raise the score is to trade with default trust? If so, that does not seem right. I do understand that you shouldn't trade exclusively with default trust nor do I, but if someone has alot of successful trades with other members that are not on default trust, that does not seem right that they would not get some sort of rating increase. That of course if trading outside default trust does not change your rating.

Numbers in trust rating increases only if you get positive feedback from default trust list users.

That's how it has always been , Trade with DF and get Trust else stay Neutral even after 100 Feedbacks ;)

Only ratings from people on your trust network affect how you see other people's trust. For the great majority of users (who don't change any settings) that means only feedback from users on default trust levels up to 2.

If you add or remove people from your trust list you will see everyone's trust differently. The theory is that you don't trust at all users outside of your trust network so their ratings don't matter. The problem is most users never really create their own trust network and just use the  default one.

I can and do understand the reasoning behind this and its purpose, but, idk. Seems like their would be a better solution. Maybe a untrusted feedback ranking score as well.

Untrusted feedback score can easily be manipulated. It won't have any "good" use.

I feel that default trust can be manipulated as well. So I do not think that argument is valid.

I don't agree. A user can simply create alts and leave feedback on himself to bump up their untrusted feedback score. A user cannot create alts that are on defaulttrust.

While that is true, and I do agree with that, but its also true that trust buying goes on here as well. It may not be monetary funds or even cryptocurrency, but the fact does remain trust can be bought. All I'm saying is the system is always ready for improvements. We just have to think about what those improvements could be and implement them to see if the desired effect does work.

That will be no use , as people will always find exploits and use them for their advantage.
It is best to have this limited to Default User's Only , i don't know if anyone is selling trust but this new change as i understand will make it hard for them.
Even if you get 5 Ratings right now from 5 different people , you will need to wait 1 month to turn Light Green , 2 more months to become Dark Green.
And if only 1 person gives you trust again and again , than it will be Light Green and first number as 10 at the max.
So it is actually better and safer to abuse than before.

I still don't see the problem. If you don't like the people on defaulttrust, you can build your own trust list.

I think the default network is pretty solid now. If anyone leaves some questionable feedback it is openly dealt with here in meta. I just think that the scores are too high and will give newbies a false sence of security. If you are new and see some guy with a +10 trust score you assume he is trusted... I think the new formula is alright just the numbers are too high.

+1
Also i think you're the highest one here with 222  Trust Score  along with Ognasty :D
Can't find anyone else :-\

dangit, so close with 213

You would think so but no, it isn't.

What is wrong with it? Disputes seem to get handled well and out in the open.

Well once I add my personal network back I show myself as 444: -0 / +57 and OgNasty being the highest with 479: -0 / +56. I think that with using default only I am probably the highest rated though...not sure.

Remember the nice deals with Marco, which allowed him to remain green? This moron (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=964525.msg11431520#msg11431520) got ripped off after being fooled by the nice color.

Ask yourself - would you've got that amount in advance if you didn't have your Level 2 ability? Cross check with all those he threw out of the campaign.

I think if anything my reputation and good feedback gets me better deals...not being lvl 2 in the trust network. I was getting those "special" deals well before the drama started.

Again, an high dark green trust score doesn't mean that the user is pretty "trusted"... everyone should (always) trade with his own diligence. Now this little modification of the trust system will be evaluated in the next few months/years. If someone 'can' suggest a new better thing I think theymos will modify the system another time.

It does not matter what it should be, it matters how it is. Most people just use default trust and rely on positive trust scores to judge someone here.

'Not exactly' when you register a new account you notice that the trust list contain only the DefaultTrust user (it is an automatic thing). So yes most people use DefaultTrust because they feel 'it' correct but it is not always good... see the few people removed in the last months.

PS: it is matter what theorically should be... I always check the history of an user before trade with him (Also if he has +400 as trust score, it doesn't matter ;).... whne the majority of users will start to think in this way I am sure there will not be scammed users anymore).

Not really sure what that has to do with what I said...

New users have default trust so when they see people with scores of +10 and +20 they will assume they are trusted. The old system that would be sort of correct, but with the new system it can be someone with only a few old positive ratings.

+10 does not make you trustworthy its the comparisson that makes +10 look high and thus trustworthy. With people like you around (+403 on my list) 10 still looks small.

Besides Im not sure I trusted those fancy numbers when I came here, I wonder why this is a common assumption. IMHO it makes more sense to assume that people comeing here to trade take their time to understand the system first.

What is your opinion about re-adding *negative* trust feedback so that user's m trust rating show as ????

Its not a common assumption people, especially newbies, judge what they can see, and if you have a scammer tag, there is a high posibility that they wont trade with you

Interesting.  Since this change has gone into effect my trust score dropped from +2 to 0 apparently.

The scoring changes shouldn't have done that. Chances are the people who left that trust were removed from the default trust list instead. I know some level ones removed members from their lists a few weeks back.

Not entirely sure how I would check that but at least it appears as though I can still access the positive feedback left for me even if it isn't reflected in my score.  Not a big deal honestly was just curious.  I doubt the individuals that left me positive feedback where removed from the Defaulttrust list.  I'll have to take a closer look at that a bit later to see what I can find.

Thanks for the reply though :)

It is only a matter of time before this is exploited regularly. This is also a good reason to start logging trust rating changes.

Regardless of this particular situation, I do think trust ratings should be logged. Because they sit behind a login screen its hard to get a neutral archiver to record something, so someone could delete a rating and go "what rating". It'd be hard to prove to a court that that rating did exist without a neutral archive or server log.

I have also had people remove a rating before and replace it after I left them a negative, basically making it appear as if I negative rated them first after I had made a complaint about it. As a result the only proof I have of the order of events is a predated post describing the rating.

How do you even know what incident I am referring to? That might help if you want to argue what I said was not true. I don't trust bobsag3, I left a trust rating for him because we transacted. Learn the difference. Also, instead of stalking me perhaps you should get treatment for your psychological issues.

My bad. Your oddly worded quote had me somewhat confused. That statement should have been directed at Muhammed.


And I am not stalking you. This thread was added to my watchlist weeks ago.

TBH I didn't understand what you said.

If the latest trusted feedback is negative, user's trust rating will show as ???. So I was asking about others' opinions on re-adding negative feedback to make that happen.

Where did you get your info on ??? ?

In my case, re-doing bobsag3's negative trust was not necessary and -ck's positive entry, posted 4 months later, had no effect.

That is not true. The first negative rating will cause the previous positive ratings to be disregarded if the net trust score would be positive if all positive trust ratings were to be taken into consideration. After the first negative rating, subsequent negative ratings will cause the negative trust score to increase by a factor of an exponent of 2. Any positive trust ratings after the first negative rating will count as normal.

For those who may be interested, here is what changing the depth level can do ..

Default trust depth level 0                                        level 1                                                                 level 2
http://img.techpowerup.org/150621/lv0.jpg http://img.techpowerup.org/150621/lv1.jpg http://img.techpowerup.org/150621/lv2.jpg

level 3                                                                  level 4
http://img.techpowerup.org/150621/lv2.jpg http://img.techpowerup.org/150621/lv4.jpg

You are right. Stupid mistake of mine. Thanks for correcting!


Others won't see in the way you see unless they add you to their trust list. When you view it, your negative feedback is seen as trusted and it affects trust rating but not for us(who haven't added you).

That part is obvious. What isn't is, what is actually causing the question marks to appear.

How do those user's appear to you ?

TECSHARE appears green to me with a score of 124 in the green.

What I don't understand is this:
http://thumbnails105.imagebam.com/41728/0909d3417276146.jpg (http://www.imagebam.com/image/0909d3417276146) http://thumbnails108.imagebam.com/41728/e0958a417276234.jpg (http://www.imagebam.com/image/e0958a417276234)

Why is Luke-Jr sitting at a -1 and cooldgamer sitting at "? ? ?".
Cooldgamer is in my trust list and not default trust, would this have a potential effect?

[According to his particular trust list:]
The consensus on that situation is that Luke is considered untrustworthy with -1/+1. he has no sigifnicaint history and recent evidence of things going wrong, and hence is red with a warning. With cooldgamer the system can't implicitly determine if he is a scammer or not, due to his established positive history, hence ??? = go read the trust ratings.

Is "+50 risked amount = additional count" still in trust algorithm? If yes, do you think it has to do anything with Luke-Jr's trust score?

I am not surprised of a bug in the trust scores, the whole system is a bug and hardly usable ;)

I thought I read somewhere that the "???" trust score basically means the system is unable to help you determine a score so it is up to you to decide whether the user is trustworthy or not. On my end Muhammed Zakir's trusted ratings are all positive and he has a trust score of 9 currently, so I guess it also depends on who you have on your own trust list as it affects other people's trust scores. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong though.

The answer was in first page.



Trust spam. Just below that post, that doubt was cleared.