Bitcoin Forum

Seeing how the debate about whether VOD should be IN the default trust list has heated up over the past week on this thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=915823.0).
I thought there should be a legitimate way for people to nominate themselves to be 'promoted' to the default trust list.
I'm sure the forum owner / government spy (JOKE - follow link to read more (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1068341.0)) or the moderators here wont take this thread seriously but its fun to play our little political voting game.

Rules to be nominated :

10 positive trade streak -
Which means trust score gained by personal grudge/favoritism wont be counted and it's a streak, implying you werent neg'd by someone recently (up to 10 trades in the past)

Minimum Trust Score required : 55
You didnt think 10 was the joining threshold did you ?  8)

No forum cops allowed -
Yeah sorry guys, I am not against the whole vigilance thing and I do think that such users have a definite place in this forum but they shouldnt get 'power' to defame anyone.

Its a poll with no winners -
Dont start whining if you are leading in the poll and still the moderators or the owner havent put you in the default list, like I said this is a fun topic and chances are you will NOT be in the default list because of this thread.

World Cup Host Nation rule
Just like the US got entry into their first World Cup (soccer) because they were the host nation of the 94 WC. SO, this is my idea, my thread, I get a spot on the poll, stop arguing!  ::) Yes this does mean I get to put my name up there bypassing all the other rules.


So if you want your name in the poll & win your virtual elections, simply put up your name in the replies below.

To start with I am putting up a few names.

~UPDATE~

Have explained this point in the replies, but since its too much hard work for most of you to read the full post let alone browse all replies, I'm stating the point here as well.

Lets get thing out in the clear for everyone, I have no interest to get to the default trust depth, right now.

But the fact that people are even considering 'voting' for me or in other case vouching for me - even as a joke - shows how flawed this system really is. The very reason that this topic exists is because I am trying to point out how useless and monopolized the trust system really is.

Gaining trust is so damn easy, all you have to do is suck up to a couple of guys, bust some scams and viola! you are IN the top circle of the trust and all of a sudden you have the power to declare that this person is suspicious, I am a "COP", I have a gun and I'll shoot this bastard down. No I am not comparing guys like Quickie Boy to real cops but stating how things can get out of hands.

There are more than one instance where this theory has failed and has ruined a profile and you know what gives next ? The person simply recreates a another account or even better BUYS A HIGH REP ACCOUNT and the fact that a same IP is allowed to create / own multiple accounts is also appalling. I know banning multiple IP logins isnt fair but at least create a tracking system like Bitlendingclub where similar IP accounts are shown to the public.


We are at the forefront of the Bitcoin revolution on this forum and this forum is riddled with cheap politics like this, WE NEED TO CHANGE.

---

---

Important points that need to be featured :

---

---

You are missing the whole point, this post opposes giving trust points to scam busting. Scam busting is ethically wrong and is a short cut to gain massive amounts of trust without doing anything other than trolling around playing pretend cop.

Users should be encouraged to trade with even the most trusted people like Theymos / John K with one eye opened. The moment you introduce the age old 'reference' system it is a cocktail of disaster because then you are simply encouraging people to blindly trust the 'most trusted' person - who could turn out to be a scammer. Example : Tradefortress.

---

This thread has now deviated from 'Fun poll to show how the trust system is flawed' to 'legendster is probably a scammer' and now to 'Legendster is immoral because he rented his sig space to a probable ponzi scheme'

I've said it numerous times : If the forum takes no responsibility for the ads that they put up, why should I take responsibility for the content of the signature space that I have rented out?
I am not endorsing anything that is in my signature space which is the result of a signature campaign. I'm renting it out to the highest bidder, I have taken the money in advance and I'll see to it that the buyer gets what he has paid for.

I don't see trust scores the same way as you do, so how will I know whether someone has a score of 55+?
It's not like any sensible person would have DefaulTrust in their trust list, anyway ;)

People won't be able to change their vote if someone is added to the list, will they? That doesn't really make sense.

edit: s/10+/55+/

Dude all these whiny posts about vod or quickseller are just from butthurt scammers, i dont even know how anyone would take them seriously, most of them have negative ratings from other important people aswell such as badbear or tomatocage, you name it. They then often try to say that qs is an alt of badbear or that kind of stupid shit, 99.9% of quickseller or vod ratings are accurate, maybe theres a case where they failed, everyone can fail but that doesnt mean they should be gone from the default trust list.

I have nothing to gain with any of the nominations getting added.  So I cosider myself impartial.

I think OgNasty has become very trustworthy.  I mean when you think about escrow his name if who you think of (as least I do).    So if they were going to add someone I don't think they could go wrong with him.

Your rules:



Your trust: http://s5.postimg.org/933xvjbsn/BCT_Trust.jpg


How was your name added? Or did I get something wrong here?

I would nominate MZ in this list as he seems to be a trustworthy member.  :)

I disagree. Trust is not the main factor for being in default trust list. Even highly trusted users, can't be in default trust list. See CITM, for example.

Yup you are right about you getting something wrong. Did you read the full post ? I did mention the World Cup host rule so quit whining.

Like I said this is a FUN post and lets not make it anymore serious than it needs to be.
I guess the MZ reference up there meant Zakir, who has a trust score of 8 as viewed from my account so cant add him.

My point is that any kind of 'Forum police' should not be given the power to defame anyone thats my point of view, I believe in a world without censorship and prejudice, any member who gains 'trust' out of busting scams and policing bad conduct has the potential to become corrupt and in turn defame anyone they 'dont like personally' and since this is the internet I sternly believe that future behavior is not always reflective of past conduct.
Even though I support vigilance I dont support vigilantism. Thats my point of view, no one has to agree to it.

With that and also OP giving himself first position on poll I don't think it was meant to be equal for all. Using alphabetic order would have given i a better shot at looking equal.  OP wan't to be added I think was a big motivator for him doing this thread.

I could be wrong.  I am not always right.

Being in Default trust isn't just about being trustworthy, but a mixture of things. One of them being good judgement.

Seriously, read the entire post, its the world cup host rule.
Putting up a name here does not guarantee a spot in the default trust list, it doesnt even get you any closer either.

And that is why this thread is not to be taken seriously.

But I do believe that in a forum that deals with 'business in cryptography' only those people should get 'high levels of trust score' who have done a high number of honest trades / business here.

Not just any Tom Dick and Jerry (see what I did there ??) should get that privilege.

Really ? How do you know this ? Do you look at each case personally ? Just day before a trusted member ndhnc was accused by Quickseller in the scam accusation, which is likely incorrect . So you are saying ndhnc is a butthurt scammer now ?

I would suggest adding user master-p to the list. He is an escrow here, and has really been helpful. From what I know he doesn't even charge a fees. And is online most of the time.

ndnhc hasn't responded to that accusation. So don't jump to a conclusion now.

I am not jumping to any conclusion. I just said it is likely incorrect, but we will know by next week. I have my own theory on this, which you can read on that thread.

Wanted to, but his rep is 51 hence isnt eligible.

devthedev and OgNasty should have both been added to the list a long long time ago. if the list isnt updated then its pointless

OgNasty is there but devthedev isn't.

Yeah a lot of other people have other names as well, this thread's purpose is to bring out those names & hold it in front of the Mod's faces.

Monbux is kinda trusted and even he is not added in the list. I would recommend Monbux's and Devthedev's name to be added into the list :)

Out of those 7 people in the list. I only know devthedev. I voted and was not surprised that he was ranked first with five votes (including mine). Anyway, I always thought he was in the default trust list.. LoL!

Monbux is now added.

I don't think who is in the default trust network should be up for any kind of vote. Votes/polls here can be easily manipulated and as a result are nearly worthless.

Also who is on default trust should not be a popularity contest, otherwise people will start giving out positive ratings just to get votes, and the same with removing negatives from scammers (allowing them to scam again).

Also most of the people on your poll are already in the default trust network.

If you think someone deserves to be on default trust then you should PM someone on level 1 default trust with your reasons. Or if they respect your opinion they will proactively ask you for suggestions.

.

While there's nothing wrong with the OP having a little fun.  It should be pointed out that being on the default list level 1 means that effectively, you are on Theymos' trust list.  Being on default trust level 2 means you are on someone's trust list who is on theymos' trust list.  There's no real meritocracy here, it's just a matter of who ya know and cetera.  Most of the folks who come and go from default trust are doing so on level 2 as someone on level 1 trusts them (perhaps temporarily).  You can see this with quickseller, he was on there for a moment from Badbear, who then had buyer's remorse.  Tomotocage has readded him, we'll see how long this lasts.  In the end, the people up the chain are more or less responsible for the behavior of the people down the chain.  If you don't vouch for the behavior of someone on your trust list, remove them!  This includes people on default trust.  If you don't like what someone on default trust is doing, put a tilde '~' before their name on your trust list (or remove the default trust list altogether).

I've argued many times that the default trust list is the crutch which people need to get rid of and it just enables people like those trust rangers that OP complains about to rule the forum and cause problems for people who cross them.  The best thing we can do is remove default trust from our lists and build our own lists as we interact with people.  A better thing, which is a long shot, would be to encourage Theymos to change default trust to "opt-in" rather than "opt-out".  This would also encourage people to build their own trust lists based on experience and weaken the abusers of the trust system.  The next best thing would be to change the warning message when someone has negative trust from the misleading and inflammatory "WARNING ... EXTREME CAUTION" to something more descriptive "This user has received negative feedback from someone on your trust list", with a link to your trust settings.  That would, IMO, encourage people to learn about the trust system and how to use it properly.

Just a little correction here
Theymos' Trust list and DefaultTrust List are different.
Theymos Himself is in DefaultTrust List , not the other way around.
Everything else you said does make a point and DefaultTrust user must not be choosen via voting but personally by Theymos :)

I vote Kluge! He's the wittiest member by far  ;D

Xetsr I would trust since he's traded with such sheer volume of BTC.

SaltySpitoon as well since he's always been composed and even-tempered even in his position of power.

Actually surprised that neither of these three are on DT.

Dont vote until your favorite person is in the list. Problem solved.

I always get surprised too by who is and who isn't in default trust.  I have my own personal list of members who I hold in pretty high regard here, and they aren't always on default trust.  If they have never traded with someone on default trust, then they have a pretty low chance of getting there.

Your opinion is duly noted..... and ignored.

Hey its a big place I dont know every one around here. Thats why its a nomination game. Kluge is now on the list.


That is why we all can edit our trust settings and decide for ourselves who trust and whom to not trust.

All three of them are in the default trust network? Salty is on level 1 and the other two are on level 2

Its kinda getting repetitive. World Cup Host Nation Rule!! Read the full post.

I couldnt agree more to what you said, but yes Theymos is IN the Default list and his "Trust List" might have some other people in it but both are not the same thing.
That is why I said, I support vigilance but I do not support Vigilantism.

I figured they weren't, since they were on this list. I try not to keep up with DT drama.  :D

Current Default list :
    theymos (1)
    HostFat (1)
    dooglus (1)
    Maged (1)
    dserrano5 (1)
    OgNasty (1)
    Tomatocage (1)
    SaltySpitoon (1)
    DeaDTerra (1)
    BadBear (1)
    philipma1957 (1)
    escrow.ms (1)
    OldScammerTag (1)


My bad I'll remove Ognasty & Salty

I noticed that Shdvb has traded big amounts of bitcoins and he is not even in Depth 4. That's weird.
Same goes with many others.

The quality of the trade doesnt matter here. The number of trades do.

And what if I tell you that he has done a lot many trades. Go through his thread in currency exchange section dude.

I do not see the point of this thread...anyways the people I would vote for are already in the default list. If you are going off of trust scores than I should be in the list  ;)

1 - Remove DeadTerra
2 - Maybe add some people into trust lvl 2
3 - Not sure we need any more level 1 memebers

Meh, even as one of the people in the poll I don't really see the point in this (and I did previously get highly involved in scambusting and slightly am now, so I don't know if you'd classify me as a "forum cop"). It's a nice idea and I'm definitely not dissing it, but as I'm sure you're aware it's very easy to just create a bunch of new accounts and vote.

Yes it is, hence this is not to be taken seriously.
In the ideal world only Default trustees should be able to vote who gets to that rank. But it'd have to be a strictly monitored business, with this forum becoming more populated every day we do need more people to be trusted, else its just a bunch of guys at the top dumping on the lower ranked people. Not implying that its happening now, but could happen.

Yes your name should be there. I'll consider this as a nomination.

devthedev absolutely 100% but I haven't really spoken to or know any of the other ones in the poll.
I could probably put a few other users forward though, in my honest opinion you could trust the following -

Carra23
inca
macsga
shorena

I'll edit & add some more in if I remember any names lol.

Shorena is in default trust list depth 2.

If I nominate myself, would I be bumped up from level 2 to level 1?

I know a few honest members here that I would add to level 2.   :)

As this is a non serious thread and its been misunderstood by at least half of people, can we get a [non-serious] tag in the title please?

All of those people except Blazedout419 and Bees Brothers have basically-empty trust lists, so adding them to the default trust list would be pointless. Good candidates for addition to the default trust list will bring several additional good, trustworthy people into the default trust network.

Dumb question maybe but what stops people creating socks to leave themselves lots of positive trust?
If it's possible I bet loads of people will have done it?

Their socks would not be on default trust, so their positive trust would mean little.

ohh I opened it, checked first in list, told to myself "who the fuck is legendster" and then I realized that OP.))

I hope that this is some kind of trolling thread to make some special flavor of fun..

This is a joke right?
Most of the people on that list are a joke, including yourself OP. That minimum 55 trust score is ridiculous. You even have negative trust yourself and are a classified scammer.
Picking people based on trust score is wrong. CanaryInTheMine anyone?  ::)

NO ONE.

Dump the default. Let the community set the list. Stop playing games let the community decide who to trust.

And how do you propose we deal with shills?

That's the problem. You can scream for justice and total decentralization but at the end of the day it's extremely hard to properly implement. I haven't really seen an idea that would actually work better than DefaultTrust in implementation, so really it's either DefaultTrust or allow all members above a certain rank to give trusted feedback.

Holy fook? How do you deal with them now?

Let them get on the default trust I guess?

Name all the anonymous members on the Default Trust list please. Are you 100% sure the default list is free of people you wouldn't trust? See Quickseller as an example.

Oh no, I'm not saying DefaultTrust doesn't have corrupt people who use it for their own benefit. I'm very aware of that and I've seen it be used quite heavily as a tool to manipulate and advance personal interests.

But what's the best alternative?

I think this is where your approach has it wrong. Someone said it earlier - IIRC Welsh - the number of trades one does is not as relevant as why and how they leave feedback ratings. The feedback by a known scammer can be valueable.

I believe there is a thread for that Diamond.

Been plenty of suggestions made.

For me my suggestions would be made there not off topic here.

Nope It's not just about number of trades, I can provide you a example here.
Projects https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=52439 (He stole approx 400k USD)
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=393593.0

PS: I would like to see Kludge & Blazedout419 in Default trust list.

Blazedout419 is already in the Tomatocage's trust list, so he is also in the defaultTrust list (depth 2). The same thing for Kluge ( dserrano5, Tomatocage and BadBear's trust list).


If you trust Kluge & Blazedout419 add them to your trust list ;).

They are already in my trust list since trust system was started.

Oh so have you asked to see them in the list of the user DefaultTrust (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=122551)? Sorry I misunderstood  :-X. *basically in the depth 1 (if we have only the DefaultTrust user in our list).

Yeah I am added to Philip and Tomato's lists already so adding me will do not much. I only joked about being added due to the use of trust scores since mine is fairly high. I do think that with public disputes the default trust has gotten much better.

Whats the point of this thread ? Its not as that because of this thread people will be added to the default list .

If this is a fun post, you should consider moving it to off-topic

I can't vote.  It's a radio button instead of a check box, so it allows me to only vote for one person.  And, I am not on the list.

JK
Vote placed, but shouldn't it also be a lottery in that the voters win something.  Get paid to pick the right person?
Or, the voters have to donate 0.xyzBTC to place a vote.

JK Again.

Like I said, if just by HOSTING a world cup an undeserving nation can be a part of that World Cup then why not me ? :D This is a fun / hilarious post, been trumpeting that since the start.

Yes thats right.
Not MOST people because they DO have a bigger dick trust score than you. People that put their trust on those people werent joking around when they added they added the trust points.


Oh really ? Now I didnt have a problem with any of the statements made so far, but I have a problem with this statement so why dont you show me proof / links / evidence where I have scammed even a single penny from anyone on the INTERNET ? (I'm easy to find through google) Go ahead and do it, oh & when you DONT find it then do youself a favor and keep your piehole shut & think twice before slandering anyone.

THIS is the very reason why I dont support the 'Trust system' any random motherfudger can come & create a baseless accusation and the accused would have to spend days trying to repair his image or at least explain to every damn moron that believes the accusation.

THIS is just goes to show what a failure this trust system really is.

A scammer is a scammer even if he stole $1 or $1,000,000 but when it comes to trusting people to do business with over here in this forum the trust system blatantly fails.

This.

You havent got a 55+ TS as seen from my end so you dont qualify.

You dont win anything here, neither do you lose anything. But you can see how 'wrong' the trust system really is.

No baseless accusations has ever endure for long. IRL, you will have to do the same.

You are a Forum Cop, and in a sense you and Tomatocage are the 'pioneer' of this forum policing. The very reason I started this mess here.

Which is good.

But now every other idiot is trying to follow your footsteps to get to that high level of trust on this forum. Which is what I have a problem with.

A typical wanna be Cage / Vod has lower number of trades than a serial trader here on this forum, I just dont get it why that should be the case. I am not saying that either you or cage or anyone that follows your footsteps are underserving of the trust you guys have earned but that just gives all of the new 'forum cops' a new 'short cut' to get to the top & do some major screw job.

I have been accused of living in Dubai, selling stolen cars and scamming people off of their money by creating a loan request on BTCJAM for a long time now AND I'm still enduring it, I dont see it going away anytime soon.
But do any of those guys who accused me of all that crap ever GIVE A CRAP of wiping off those baseless slanders ? No.

Make no mistake those accusations have had no limiting effect on the transactions I have done on this forum but it just is a pain to see how EASILY a moron can turn my green trust into red / orange. Same goes with many other that have faced the same situation.

This.

If someone were to make a baseless accusation then you will not be taken seriously. There are also no baseless accusations that have been made by people on default trust that I can think of off the top of my head (although there are several instances where negative trust was given for inappropriate reasons).

Forum Policing is the ultimate form of practicing 'baseless accusation' its like condemning a criminal even before he even thinks of committing a crime.
It just helps the meak minded to avoid *some scams in the short run while the real scammers device easy work around long cons to get what they want, in the mean while wanna be forum cops (like yourself) gain all the trust you need to potentially turn someone into a saint or a devil and guess what the sheep minded people here WILL take you seriously :)

This isnt personal.

So you would rather be able to pull off a scam first and then receive negative trust so you cannot scam a second time?

The trust system is designed to prevent scams from happening in the first place.

Do you think a police officer would stand by and do nothing if they saw someone wearing a mask and holding a gun walk into a bank?

Funny. You made a baseless accusation about me. You are then deemed not to be taken seriously. Good. I am happy that is clear now.

An anonymous person who has never met me. Done business with me gets to judge me and call me an extortionist?

Really?

I think that is a joke considering I have held over $80,000 USD in escrow for others and returned it when the AVALON chips never shipped. I am an extortionist. Well welcome to the wonderful world of Quickseller justice. How wonderful to be you. What a fooking hypocrite and he gets on a default list are you kidding me.

Agreed dump the default list let it be up to the users to decide who they want to add or not. It is a farce with people like this running around protecting Dogie a known VAT fraud pretending to do what is best for the community while turning a blind eye on his BULLSHIT.

Police Officer ? Is that what you fancy yourself to be ?

-edit-
You should correct your tone again, dont speak as if I am trying to pull off a scam here or anywhere for that matter. Also, if I remember correctly police officers these days in their over zealousness have killed innocent people holding a banana; thinking it was a gun.

It's high time people stop comparing DF members to Police officers. Such a grave insult to the Police Officers. There are some actions of the officer which everyone has condemned one day or the other but still I respect those officers who are honest and don't just imprison anyone who roams on the streets unlike some DF members who consider all those who aren't in that "so called DF list" as potential scammers. There are officers who have given up their life for my country and those who have even risked their lives. Are we seriously comparing the two?

DF members need to stop scams and make members alert of such potential scammers instead of accusing anyone who disagress with them as scammers. They are misusing their power and this is what I dislike about this system. Too much unity among DF members that they leave each other a +ve trust even without dealing with them and then tag other members as suspicious.


DF members need to be responsible and sensible instead of being rude and harsh. I really hope Theymos and BadBear rethink about the default trust system and only the members whom they trust should be added rather than having 4 depths which includes members and their alts as well. No clue how many *REAL* members are on the default trust list as anyone could have more than 1 account on that list. At least a little moderating is required so that the ratings aren't abused.

Reading over this thread, there are a startling amount of misconceptions here. I think I'll spend an hour or two writing up a general informative on how Default trust was supposed to work, how it works, whats wrong with it, and why.

Obviously, people are welcome to ignore what I say as biassed or corrupt or whatever.

Will look forward to it.

Do not forget to vote Blazed in 2015!

 ::)  ::)  ::)

LOOK I got 2 votes !

actually its 3

Lolly fap ! I have 3 votes ::) ::)

If even OP with his negative trust and shady behavior can be nominated and receive votes, then I nominate myself. I have the biggest weight in my trust list, after all.

What shady behavior ? Been on this forum since 2013 so kindly do tell me what I did to warrant such comments ? Not sure if you noticed that the nomination rule is that you must have a minimum of 10 + positive trust streak and a minimum of 55 trust points.

*ahem* 10 months *ahem*

It hasn't affected your reputation.

Cool topic! Just wondering, when was the last time theymos updated the default trust list?

It was kinda funny to see "legendster" in the nomination list. I guess you better work on getting those red marks removed off your trust(not calling you a scammer and I know that you'll tell me that those red marks are bullshit and people who want to trade with you will trade seeing the other feedbacks too), but still as an admin it wont be a good idea for theymos to consider your name even if you lead the polls. You are just in the organising committee, the host is the meta section  :P(P.S : Don't start explaining that you are doing this poll for fun).

Anyways, I voted for Benson Samuel, he's a nice guy, a good moderator, is level headed and is managing Coinsecure well  :) .

Also I think this is a poll to add users to the "trust depth 1" cuz stunna and Benson are already in the default trust list(I define default trust list as the trust list which you get when you signup on the forum or the list that includes people from depth 1 & depth 2).

Hey kid, thanks for sharing your voice here. Dont get in over your head, I cant nominate a "forum section (Meta)" to the default trust list.  When US hosted the world cup, Fifa didnt grant every nation that continent to join the tournament.  ;D  ;D

But in all seriousness, lets get this out of the way, I have no interest to get to the default trust depth, at least not now.

But the fact that people are even considering 'voting' for me or in other case vouching for me - even as a joke - shows how flawed this system really is. The very reason that this topic exists is because I am trying to point out how useless and monopolized the trust system really is.

Gaining trust is so damn easy, all you have to do is suck up to a couple of guys, bust some scams and viola! you are IN the top circle of the trust and all of a sudden you have the power to declare that this person is suspicious, I am a "COP", I have a gun and I'll shoot this bastard down. No I am not comparing guys like Quickie Boy to real cops but stating how things can get out of hands.

There are more than one instance where this theory has failed and has ruined a profile and you know what gives next ? The person simply recreates a another account or even better BUYS A HIGH REP ACCOUNT and the fact that a same IP is allowed to create / own multiple accounts is also appalling. I know banning multiple IP logins isnt fair but at least create a tracking system like Bitlendingclub where similar IP accounts are shown to the public.


We are at the forefront of the Bitcoin revolution on this forum and this forum is riddled with cheap politics like this, WE NEED TO CHANGE.

He removed CITM and added Philip 2-3 months back. I really doubt anyone new will be added any time soon though. I think the default trust is pretty much as good as it can be for now. Public disputes fix most of the issues and default trust is needed for newbies.

Who made this list and why am I not listed???


Also, DiamondCardz????? :P

I agree with the thurst of this post pretty wholeheartedly. I find it quite ironic that there's a trust system where people are jockeying for trust points and others are playing cops-and-robbers with it, meanwhile the "cops" are selling accounts so the whole thing is a kind of nonsense.  Did you guys see the sarcastic thread in meta a few weeks ago where the guy proposed selling trust directly?  People flipped out and didn't get the irony.  "You can't buy and sell trust!" they exclaimed.  But you can buy and sell trusted accounts.  Alas.  People love points and points systems, especially the kind of people who play a lot of video games and hang out on forums.  Anyway, you put these trust points out there, people gonna jockey for them.  There's a lot of nonsense to it but to hear it from the trust rangers, you'd think they were saving the world from evil.

Well it is forum discussion so it does belong in Meta and it's a tad similar to when we had a vote on default trust and tried to replace it this ones just a tad more silly :)

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=914641.0

Since were nominating here is a suggested list now vote for your on call overlords  ;)
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;suggest

And a trusting image
Layered 2015.05.16
 https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7664/17513944370_15dcfebc28_h.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/photos/121870988@N08/17513944370/sizes/o/)


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1062052.msg11388327#msg11388327

Modifying your trust settings to include people is more of a personal thing, doesnt affect the common trader across the forum.

Minimum TRADE streak required : 10. Minimum Trust points required : 55

Reminder; this survey can be manipulated you know that right?
How will you decide that who'll get into def trust?

Service Ann: I'll get you 10 votes for only 0.1 BTC ;D

Yes this survey can be manipulated, hence it is not to be taken seriously.

ahh this is serious:) OP with some default trust bullshit promoting obvious scam in sig. campaign of some fucker with multiple bought accs. amazing.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1074272.0

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1076517.0

you know, when you are talking about trust and this stuff, you should start with yourself.

Monbux, devthedev and Blazedout419. My nominations. They're on mine.

Start with myself for what ? I was with 777 for the last month previously with secondstrade, I even promoted coinharvest for a while but hey look what Tradefortress turned into.

My signature space is for rent and the current tenant has paid IN ADVANCE for 2 weeks. Who am I to say no if someone wants to buy something which is in my possession & I want to sell ??

Sure he maybe running a scam; maybe he isnt; but he hasnt scammed me. I stand by my words. I support trust scores obtained by legitimate trades not by playing pretend cop.

They're already on the poll.

Yeah I know. I could only vote for one and that can be manipulated quite easily, so might as well just state it.

Statement well made :)

Added Deadley to the poll not only because of his awesome trade streak but also because he deserves a spot.

What is this trade streak I keep hearing about exactly?

This concept is rather cheeky.
And i see what you did their OP ;)

Probably,

Hence this thread could really do with a non serious tag:

Had coffee and lunch with a couple of people on this list. I would like to nominate them as after speaking with them for a couple hours I fully trust them.

These people I met and talked with who I nominate are (we met under different names, none of you realized who I was at the time in the past):
-Xetsr
-Blazedout
-SaltySpitoon

People I vote for that I have not met:
-Devthedev

People who should be put on lower tiers of default trust (probationary / see what they do in future):
-Kluge (very young, sometimes jokes around, dont know too much about him)
-Deadley (havent interacted much but seems ok)

People who should NOT be on default trust (with reason):
-Stunna (is unethical and abuses trust in my honest opinion plus has promoted spam on multiple occasions, used to run a complete scam Primedice, after over a year of complaints finally changed provably fair system however server seed are obviously still rigged as awful streaks happen here more often than stastically feasible after simulation done of 10 x 10,000 rolls each)
-Bees Brothers (they own a business but imo are not active enough to need the default trust. Not saying they don't deserve it but honestly, why give default trust to people who won't be really looking for scammers? I mean they'll be busy with their business. Are they trustworthy though? Yes.
-Quickseller (my opinion on this guy should already be quite well known)
-Dogie Guy is probably the most hated guy on the default trust. Multiple examples of negative trusting people he simply doesn't like. Abuses trust, etc. Spams constantly in the past.

People who should be in the ultimate trust level, higher than all the rest and be color coded with GOLD around their name and trust:
-Kingofsports of course

But then the post will lose it's seriousness. The real reason behind holding a 'fun poll' is to promote a 'serious cause' i.e. the failure of the trust score system.

Now stop butt hurting cuz you're not on my list ;)

You are missing the whole point, this post opposes giving trust points to scam busting. Scam busting is ethically wrong and is a short cut to gain massive amounts of trust without doing anything other than trolling around playing pretend cop.

Users should be encouraged to trade with even the most trusted people like Theymos / John K with one eye opened. The moment you introduce the age old 'reference' system it is a cocktail of disaster because then you are simply encouraging people to blindly trust the 'most trusted' person - who could turn out to be a scammer. Example : Tradefortress.

In my opinion default trust should be given to those most active and most trustworthy on the forum. Beesbrothers aren't THAT active here. Are they trustworthy? Yes. But they are not active enough to watch over those they have on their trust list and ultimately have given default trust to if they were on the default trust tier one. That is where I was going with that post.

Well yeah that is a fair point, but they do 'deserve' to showcase their trade experience / seniority here over other members, but that has to be in a way that does not encourage the use of the 'Trust page'.

I absolutely agree with this statement. Just because any user is a scam buster or is known for outing scammers, the user shouldn't be considered trustworthy himself and be blindly trusted. People have been doing this just to earn trust which can prove out to be very dangerous in the coming days. Nobody is selfless to continue doing good without a motive behind and definitely they want something in return for this. After all, cops themselves get arrested if they commit any crime.

Lending money and acting as an escrow are the easiest methods to gain trust on this forum and this gets them added faster to the DF trust system (and then they want to remain there all their life).

After tradefortess, I really hope no other DF trust member turns out to be a scammer.

Some people really very obsessive about default trust. I know many DT member who even did not think when they give feedback to newbie who did even 10$ trade. I saw so many newbie, who always try to trade with those DT members so they will gain so many feedback without doing much or spending time here on forum.

That is why when I was on DT trusted by Escrow.ms later he removed me. I always try to don't give feedback to specially newbie till they won't do 3-4 genuine trade with me, not because when they trade 3-4 times I will give them feedback.

That is why I always prefer we can only allow to give 1 feedback to 1 account it will reduce so much stress from DT. Because they know they can only give 1 feedback so they will give when they will think other guy is really good to get those feedback and respect that feedback.

 

but but boobies !! YOU ARE A GIRL !!!

What do you mean? If/not I am a girl, your mother too is a girl/women? I'm a human and this thing isn't related to your post.

Is that the reason why Escrow.ms has instantly left a feedback for Benson (who acted as an escrow) but none for me ?

That is a very gross misuse of power. I specifically chose to do the deal with him despite getting your offer chronologically first - to get a trade rating from him. But I didnt get it, not even a reference on my rep trade which I have already asked him to do twice.

Maybe he hasnt got the time to do it yet but if he could rep up Benson he could have repped up me as well.

All the more reason I am starting to hate this DT power trippers.
Also doing another trade currently where Ognasty is the escrow, lets see if he does the same thing.


This just goes to show you that how a 'fake' feedback left as a personal grudge from Johniewalker has still affected me from 'smoothly' doing business with people without having to worry about being blamed for scamming or running away. This is despite 2 + years on this forum and more than $2000+ in trade value.

I dont think of my mother when I think of boobies. I just proved that you are not a girl. If all the women in the world were my mothers and sister who'd I choose to procreate with ?

(Its a joke take it likely, your gender is of no interest to me)

I don't know why Escrow.ms did not gave you feedback.

BTW I did not referred Escrow.ms when I talked DT user give feedback without thinking. Even sometime I msg'd the DT user that don't give newbie trust feedback without thinking because they are misusing.

No reason why you should know why Pankaj did or did not do certain thing. The feedback issue was not really of dire importance to me until you mentioned it here. If indeed he hasnt left a rating because of his DT status then it is a sad issue.

@red: Thanks for proving it. But I don't get why was it necessary to waste your 2 cents on an irrelevant fact.

@bold: I don't know how gender becomes a joke.  ::) The forum should have a warning regarding this if it does matter.

If you don't respect any woman as you respect your mom/sister, I don't have any words to say. The least I expect people to respect each other regardless of their gender as they are then called gender biased.

I hope that you hadn't made this a joke and kindly delete your post from here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1065347.0 as it is nowhere related to my thread.

You did not read my next post where I clearly said I did not refer to you about giving freely feedback.

Tell me one thing why you removed me. Either I was/am doing risky business or I was inactive on forum.

Neither I was doing risky business nor I was inactive on forum and that is you know. Because I did not sent you that 30-40 BTC first so you removed me from your trust list after that.

I told you we will doing face to face trade, but you were in hurry and I did not sent that BTC. After that you removed me.
So I was doing risky business or you were doing.

Lol, after removing me from DT did I ever tell you to add me. Nope. I asked you when I was not DT in beginning because I trust you and and you also trust me that is why you put me on your trust list. I do trade on currency exchange so it's easy to mark scammer. and you know this I did sent you always first even you messed up many times. But that was not that big deal.

Everyone put some limit to every trader. No one do unlimited trade blindly even you trust someone at any level.

I told you to not sent first because It was big deal and you told me to come your way or you will find other seller and I told you ok find other seller. So it's not my mistake you show the arrogance by saying that either agree to my TOS or you will find other and I said ok go find other seller.
After that you wrote me message ok I don't trust you don't trust me.

But you can also asked me that I will come to your house and will provide cash but you did not asked me. If you remember you once came to my house so I did not had any problem if you want to come to my house.

[/quote]
You are buying and selling skrill and multiple other currencies which does not allows bitcoin trades or exchanges. [/quote]

lol, If I show you on your trust list who also dealing on skrill or other exchange currency. It's just excuse don't mixup these thing.

You removed me I accepted that it's ok but don't give bullshit excuse.

P.S. We did twice face to face deals and many through bank accounts.

I understand your point. Obviously who you want to trust & not to trust has to be your choice.

But the whole topic of this post here is about people using the trust page (not you) as a tool to show who's boss around here instead of reflecting someone's trade history.

I can like North Korea, have shark fin soups, worship Hitler and create 'Death to America' banners but thats me & my personality which does not warrant the fact that I am here to scam anyone, most people here are using the trust page as a way to express their personal grudge against someone else instead. This is apart from all the other abuse of this system that has happened over the time since the system was implemented.

To me this just makes no sense.

Besides in a trade even if someone was an acting escrow the trade is still between 2 people. No one is obligated to send someone rep points but they should - ethically. But like I said I understand your point as well.

If you are trading with someone and worry about the positive trust you are receiving from them then you are doing something wrong. The reason why you should trade with someone is because you have a need for what they have and they have a need for what you have.

Not only that but we do not have a trade feedback system, we have a trust feedback system. You should receive feedback based on trust not trades. A good portion of the feedback I have received from people I have not traded with. Also it is pretty rare that I leave feedback for someone after a single trade, especially if I risked nothing.

Glad that you admitted that by yourself.
And yes I agree, the way this trust system IS being used is to tell people if someone is trustworthy or not the way it was intended to be used - which was to show who's a genuine trader vs who is not.

The fact that a lot of people who have had NO financial transaction with you have vouched for you and based on that vouch you can paint someone 'trustworthy' or 'untrustworthy' is downright disgusting.

I am not against the way the forum is run, and yes someone might just say if I have so much problem with this place then why dont I leave it. But to those people I'll say very honestly that I LOVE the bitcoin world and I love what this forum has done for me. I would rather want to help the forum members interact here in a positive way with no cheap tricks to gain 'sainthood'.

So yes when I receive a 'trust score' I am furious ~ less furious if it is a green, perhaps even a tad bit happy ~ as to why anyone should be trusted based on someone else's reference ? Similarly when I dont receive a trust score I am furious because I want to know what makes me 'unworthy' or 'unequal' to all the people who have received a trust point.

Hahah I have good laugh.

First of all no one is your personal customer you can say that your known person.
And from your that customer I did trade many times after that. And he did by mistake sent me 10 lac INR(more then 15k $) because of we were dealing through 3rd person and was not doing direct deal and I did deal for 20 BTC trade and he sent me fund for 50 BTC so it was not my mistake.
And after that I returned all his fund because he did not want 20 BTC.

If it was someone else who had any bad intention then try to scam. But I did called him directly and said him show me your account details and give me details I did sent him all funds after that.

P.S. I also don't have any personal issue with you.

I never said that's the main reason, It's one of them. I do know about other users and I do trust them, I know some of them from past 5-6 years. I know if they got any issues in future they will pay from their own pocket but I can't say the same thing about you.
I'm not sure why did you even asked me those questions if you didn't had any issue, I do trust Benson alot but even he is not on my trust list.

Ps: We did only 3 online trades, I've paid you instantly except one case which I'm not sure happened with you or someone else in which I've sent funds to a wrong guy due to nickname issues, It was my mistake and I transferred funds to correct account immediately after I realized it.


Maybe you are sleepy.  I referred him as "my customer" not "my personal or private customer" since I did deals with him when you were not even registered on this forum.
Frankly he wouldn't have done deal with you If I didn't referred him to you, you can still ask him about that. He called me and asked about you before doing first deal.

Anyways I do not want to hijack this thread so I'm out.

@legendster At least have some sanity by removing yourself from your poll list. Wearing the signature of a blatant scam and asking to be on DefaultTrust just can not go hand in hand. I wonder why escrow.ms and other DefaultTrust members are not leaving -ve feedback on you.

@deadly Having tread is not probably a sufficient indicator to be on DefaultTrust. There are lot of developers and other service providers on this forum who are much more desrving candidate to be on DefaultTrust than traders.

@escrow.ms After becoming an employee of a certain cryptocurrency business, your judgement on this forum has changed a lot in last one year. Now most of your feedbacks are driven by your ego and personal gain, not impartial judgement that is expected from DefaultTrust level 1.

Case 1: Ramkumar: That poor chap got hold of a domain that you allowed to expire and then you tried to force him to give that back to you at your decided rate. He did not give in and you left him a -ve feedback.

Case 2: BTCxIndia: They were competitor to your current employer. So, giving an excuse of privacy violation for an issue that you raised, you left them -ve trust.

Case 3: LocalBitcoins: To get a LocalBitcoins case solved at your favour, you left -ve trust on KangosBrothers and later removed.

Case 4: TrestorFoundation: Obviously they are another Alt Coin wannabe. There are so many like that in the forum running even with green trust. But, you left them -ve feedback just because they criticised your employer.

you don't need to trade with someone to know how trustworthy they are. I have observed how many people trade and conduct themselves on here and can have a pretty good idea as to how much they should be trusted. There are plenty of people on here when I would say it would absolutely not be safe to trade with despite the fact they technically have not scammed or attempted to scam yet.

If someone wants to vouch or me or claim that I am a scammer they are free to do that. If they are wrong then their reputation is on the line. If you witness someone return funds when theft would have been possible then it should be reasonable to say they are trustworthy, the same goes with several examples.

@Reckless.6
My judgement didn't changed, I'm still the same guy. Also please stop involving company name with me, I'm just working in it, It's not my company.

I do not owe any explaination to you ( A newly made account)  about my trust ratings which I believe are 100% correct and valid.
Lol, do you think kangas was afraid of a trust rating ?  do you even know what was the issue?
Or what I wrote in that rating?

It's the quickseller public masterbation post of the day!  He just can't keep it in his pants.  And it seems that no matter how many times I keep calling him out for "tooting his own horn" (so to speak) in public rather than allowing someone else to offer a compliment, he just doesn't get it.

Yup, and the fact that you've been ostentatiously wrong on that so many times is the reason that no one could keep you on their trust list for longer than a week or two.  And the masterbation (above) isn't going to convince anyone.  You need to settle down and think before you act if you want to regain your own broken reputation.Like what happened to you?

Interesting that in an attempt to cover up his mess, escrow.ms is now deleting his previous posts. To preserve them, I'm quoting deadly who quoted him...


...and the part about you is requoted against before your response, so that you can not delete those as well...

I deleted that before I even read your messages not because there's something to hide, because I did not wanted to clutter up this thread with replies related to personal issues or problems. I wrote them for deadley and he already saw those messages and replied.

Second thing, you are a fool.

No. Your reply first appeared in page 8 and then went back to page 7... oh ya... trust feedback by a DefaultTrust level 1 is now a personal issue. Anyone out of DefaultTrust knows why I'm talking to you from a newbie account, because we know how you guys handle it. If that makes me fool... yes I am.

FFS its a joke & take it like one dont turn this into a feminist battle you boob holder.

@Legendster, your immaturity especially with the sexiest comments immediately has me voting against you becoming on default trust. Seriously, joking or not, you're acting like a Narcissist and sexiest pig.

You do mean 'SEXIST'; right ?? Although I wont mind you calling me 'the sexiest' person here.  ;D ;D

Give it a rest first learn to spell, I dont mean to be rude, I am seriously giving you a suggestion.

If anyone wants to NOT vote me now cuz I am a grammar nazi; feel free to do so.

Lol again, First you said you edit list because there were some inactive or doing risky business.

I countered that I was neither inactive nor doing risky business. Even in your list there is inactive guys too.

Then you said I was doing currency exchanges like skrill and other.

I countered that in your list who are doing same trading like me.

Now you posted again bullshit reason I can pay with my own pocket or not if some issue come.

Everything you realised after 1 day denying to sending those 30-40 BTC first to you. Then you suddenly thought I am very risky guy. How you can say that how strong or bad financial position I am. It will decide when I will face condition like this.

Even you can't say this with your list who will pay with their own pocket or not if something miss happened. So don't give bullshit reason.

I am on this forum last 2 years and doing trading like 1 and half year. No single complaint against me about any issue.




Hahah big joke, you messed up by sending fund and even did not picked next day my call and replied to whatsapp and paid me back after 4-5 days and you are saying you paid immediately.


Big lies here, I got his number because of that middleman who were messed up deal and that guy sent me 10 lac(15k $) to my bank account. When I sent back his fund to his account he got enough trust on me and did deal with me .

It is joke of the day for me. That you sent your customer to your competitor. lol.


I did asked all these question because you started by saying you edit your list inactive or doing risky business.

P.S. don't give bullshit reason, I had so much respect for you but you lost it by saying all these stupid reason. You removed me, it was ok but giving stupid reason like this make you more stupid in this forum.
It was clear you removed me after that incident when I did not sent you those BTC and you realised everything after that day.

coolest thing I heard
if you don't trade with a guy for 6 - 7 months remove them form trust list
nice  ;D

btw why we didn't traded is the fact that you delayed payments and didn't picked my phone calls and you still wanted me to send btc upfront

as for trust list I m fine with it its u r choice (ego issues I guess ???)

Are you kidding dude? I didn't picked your calls and delayed your payment? What was the longest time you had to wait for a payment?? Please tell me, and It was you who asked me to send funds first. I do not have any ego issues you had. And it's also not like I never send you btc or funds first.

Let it be dont wanna pull up old stuff

I was just wondering on your reply
" I have removed ashish also since I didn't made any deal with him from past 6-7 months. "
does it really make sense  ???

Feel free to call him and ask and again you are having issues while reading my post, I said I paid you immediately when I realized funds are sent to wrong account and It didn't took 4-5 days either. I do not not remember what happened that day but It's not like I wouldnt have picked your call. As for your financial status, I do not care about it,  I do not trust you at all. If you have any problem with that feel free to cry about it.

Ps: You are not my competitor, you are not even close.

Yes it makes sense because accounts are getting bought and sold daily, you were not even in contact with me, no messages no calls. I've trusted axorb and few other guys and they ended up scamming after doing several successful deals.

One more thing, If you under my trust it won't make your profile look better it will just make your given feedback appear as trusted.

I have all whatsapp chat details, we did trade on 18th and you paid back me 21st night so don't lie. And you did realized something happened but you were so stupid don't want to accept that fact.

You said that you don't trust will I pay back or not that is why I posted I am financially strong or not you will never know.
Same thing with you, I will never know you are enough financially strong or not if some big trade gone wrong way and you will pay back or not with your own pocket.

P.S. I really did not know you spying on me how much I trade so you know I am your competitior or not.

P.P.S. You even don't know how much volume I do.

Axorb scammed but you still did not gave him red mark. lol. He still have many positive feedback from you.

How about you guys take a breath and relax.

escrow.ms = trusted
deadley = trusted
devthedev = trusted
Cooldgamer = trusted
LouReed = trusted
.
.
and so on.

Theymos set his DT level 1 a long time ago. People have come along after that are much more trustworthy and deserving of level 1 but arent on DT at all.

And so what. If Theymos won't reset the list, create your own list.  That is what we are supposed to do.

I do agree however that a DT1 cleaning out their closet every 6 months makes no sense and is detrimental to the forum. The older trusted members have left feedback which is now 'somewhat diminished' while a newer member is 'promoted' simply because a deal has been done in previous 6 months.

Of the list above, if you think it's sensible that only one of those has DT power, while the others are plain fodder, then you will have your trust setting set to default trust. If you don't,  set your own list.

sorry to interrupt you conversation.

Well, nothing against anyone, but was wondering the same thing, that is it 'nice' to remove someone from the trust list just cuz you didn't trade with them for a past few months?  IMO ashish deserved to be in the trust list since he had done a lot of successful deals with escrow.ms, and I don't think Ashish was ever involved into any kind of wrong business or had any scam accusation against him, so yes, he deserved to be in your trust list.


P.S : escrow.ms , I guess you also went missing in action(almost for a few months), but theymos didn't remove you from the trust depth 1(no offence), so IMO you should have done the same thing with Ashish and should not have removed him just cuz its been some time since you both did a deal.

It should be "I didn't pick" and not "I didn't picked".

Thanks

Becsuse he already had a negative feedback that time. It's a old issue and I don't need to know how much trades you do or not.  If you think you are a big trader ok, it's good for you. I do not want to get involved in your cheap comptetior shit also you are the one who is crying here and digging old stuff not me, so please use your brain and find out who is being stupid here.

Nice Thought  ;)

Theymos is keeping his list upto date and LouReed is not in default trust list anymore.

Becsuse he already had a negative feedback that time. It's a old issue and I don't need to know how much trades you do or not.  If you think you are a big trader ok, it's good for you. I do not want to get involved in your cheap comptetior shit also you are the one who is crying here and digging old stuff not me, so please use your brain and find out who is being stupid here.

If dooglus is DT level 1, then stunna should also be DT1.
They both run exceptionally trusted sites in an area known for scams.

Hahahah, I did not cried, you cry by saying why you edit your list. Because you don't have reason so you giving stupid reason.

So be happy and enjoy your life with your stupidity.

Well it's theymos's decision so I can't say anything. I guess main reason is, If he will remove me, It will affect several other users who are on my trust list and feedbacks given by them and it's not like deadley and ashish12 are not in trust network, they are but under someone whom I trust, not directly under mine.

http://i.gyazo.com/52ecb3b720f072e051d4c9d4ed4e938f.png

Sure no problem you can do the same.

MZ what you smoking dude?

I definitely do not agree that he is keeping it up to date.

Re Lou, my point exactly, he and the others (except e.ms) are no longer on it, doesn't reflect the true state in my books. All those guys could just as easily be on DT1.

Unlike Stunna, Dooglus has people on his trust list. It is not worth adding a user who uses default trust list.


LouReed abused his power. Default trust list is for people who leave feedback correctly, and that is the main thing. Even highly trusted users can be excluded from default trust list.

Yes, well done on quoting theymos, we all read his post above.

Doesn't mean he can't create a list if added to DT1 (assuming he doesn't have one).

I dont think that is a sensible selection criteria, having a list or not.

It is a sensible selection criteria. If you have missed: depth 1 and depth 2 members have same power except depth 1 can add users to default trust list. Depth 1 members' ratings have equal value to depth 2 members. If Stunna doesn't have a custom trust list, it tells he is not willing to have a custom trust list and he may not have time to moderate his own trust list.

I kinda agree but also obviously if they don't add people it's largely pointless but at the same time many likely would start to add people to their trust list if they were given the position. The only reason I haven't added people to mine is all the ones I trust are already on Default and I like to see trust scores as the majority of other users using Defaulttust see them as (and lets face it most do just stick to default trust).

And this post right here shows why you are on staff: you have your own thoughts and you are sensible.

Sorry to interrupt but I noticed that you dint want to leave the OP a trust rating and then decided to leave one after he asked for it. Isn't this trust abuse? I feel that you still don't trust him enough without using an escrow and you left the rating after being asked.

You are on DT 1 level and leaving a feedback after using an escrow for a deal doesn't sound reasonable. I too have used escrow but I din't expect to be trusted or have a rating for just that purpose as escrow is to make a trade safe and it doesn't prove either parties are trustworthy.

It was my personal decision and after knowing more about him, I left a feedback and included benson's name and It didn't affected his Negative feedback left by johnniewalker. I'm not sure why do you have any problem with my decision.
Frankly some of you guys need to calm down and get over this DT trust drama. First decide what you wanna argue about.  Default trust list?, My trust list? or my ratings?

As for trust abuse, 50-60% of total given ratings are trust abuse.

I don't have a problem with you or anyone else on this forum and I just said what I felt. I don't know what made you so angry when I just asked one question? I haven't ever replied to your posts before.

I have an issue with the DT ratings of other users as well and not with yours only. Anyways, I feel that I have no right to ask any question on this forum as I'm an ordinary member.

Awesome. Now you just made to look a scammer trusted, who is promoting a blatant scam in his sig. Just because he bought BTC from you in higher than market rate (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1071591.0). Interestingly, only you and your employer are the only two trusted people who trust this scammer and you expect us not to talk about your employer while you are now constantly abusing DT (even you said this) to get business for your employer. Forget about being on DT1, if a new user did something like this, he would have earned red mark by now.

I wish theymos/badbear is reading this and the four cases I listed about you two pages back and take informed decission.

1. He is not a scammer. I did not find any single thread in which he tried to scam or did scam. Johnnywalker accused him for running a scam which is a different thing.
2. If you have some issues with signature campaign, talk to theymos, It's not related to my rating at all.
3. What is your problem if he offered more than market rate? If I didn't have done deal with him, He would have done that with someone else.
4. Who are you by the way? Why are you not posting from your real account? Anyways You are on my Ignore list now.
 



I'm not angry at all and If you have issues with ratings, or If you feel you can provide better ratings to others or add better people in trust network , Feel free to make a suggestions thread in Meta. Right now you are just targeting users who are on default trust list, instead of building your own trust network and getting listed on DT.

Well, if Ashish is in someone's trust list who is in your trust list then he will be shown in trust depth 3, and his feedbacks will be shown as untrusted for a normal user who usually sets his trust depth to 2 and trusts given by Ashish wont affect the trust score of someone. And you'll have to agree that being in trust depth 2, improves your status/stature on the forum.

And as theymos rightly decided not to remove you from DT1 just cuz the users in your trust list will be affected and the feedbacks given by them will become ineffective, in the same way when you removed Ashish from your trust list, the trust given by him also started to show up as untrusted hence affecting the trust score of users.
And now as you know that ashish12's account wasn't sold/compromised, I guess there shouldn't be any problem in adding him back to your trust list. Or if you are still unsure whether his account was  sold/compromised then you can simply talk to him on gmail and clarify things.

Thanks.

@bold: How can you say this and you have even read my earlier posts? Do I only target DT members? I haven't targetted users here and you are making a false accusation on me. I have only being critical of users who I find are abusing their power and it may be a DT member or not, it doesn't matter. I have also been critical of the forum rules and scams taking place here.

You seem to have a problem with me now for just asking you a question? I don't want to build my own trust network nor do I give anyone a trust rating no matter how much they are trustworthy (but that's just me). I am sorry as even now talking to DT members means I am committing a crime. I can't imagine that people have so many issues even if I ask them why they left a particular rating. You had already answered my question in the previous post and I don't want to keep arguing about that.

I again repeat that I have no problem with the DT members but do not want them to abuse the ratings. I won't bother now even aksing any DT member any question as they don't want to answer. Sorry for asking you a question.

I am seriously not interested in getting on the DT list.

I have been slowly adding more people into my trust network and recommend someone from DT1 consider adding some of these guys into DT2.


guitarplinker - tons of trades + he does escrows
monkeynuts - Mr reliable when trading - trusted this guy with plenty multiple times as have others
master-P - multiple trades + escrows
devthedev - trades + escrows
djjacket - traded tons of times and is very reliable

I think any of the those guys would be good additions to DT2. Rather than trying to get new people into DT1 (pointless to ask imo) maybe we should focus on good users that should be in DT2? I think DT2 does need a few more people added - only ones that have proven multiple times that they are reliable of course.

As I add more people into my network I will update here for the DT1 guys to consider.

How do you know he even wanted to remove me? You are just playing with my own words. Maybe he thought I'm good or trusted enough to be on the DT list. Reason can be anything and only he can tell it.
Theymos removed CanaryInTheMine too and it affected several users. But you didn't said anything about him, maybe because it didn't affected your ratings.
If ashish was on my trust list, your profile would have improved right?



Technically it's correct, A new user who haven't done any deal will be not able to see his feedback as "Trusted", but those users who have added me or Benson Samuel (Right now he's not on my trust list) directly on his trust list , will be able to see ashish's ratings as "trusted"
http://i.gyazo.com/63deb514c285bf511198b4b0ecec204e.png

I never said that he wanted to remove you, and yes, you are trusted enough to be on DT1, absolutely no doubt in that.  And you know it, CITM was abusing the trust system, you aren't.

As you removed Ashish because  the trade relations between you two became inactive, so in the same way theymos could have also removed you from the DT1(for you inactivity), but he didn't cuz inactivity wasn't a reason for him to remove you, and cuz you were trusted and  you had good people in your list, he didn't remove you and  imo you are supposed to be in DT1,  but in the same way you also shouldn't have removed Ashish from you list cuz inactivity of trade wasn't really a reason to remove him from the list, you've already had good trades with him  and once you have trusted him enough to put him in your list, so there wasn't really a solid reason to throw him out cuz he was still doing legit trades and good deals and didn't scam anyone and as his account is still intact with him, so he again deserves to be in your trust list. And yes, his being in dt2 will improve my profile but this ain't the alone reason for why I am backing him up, its also that I genuinely feel that ashish's removal was not so justified and maybe you can consider adding him back to the list(cuz you know that his account wasn't compromised/sold and he didn't scam anyone). Just a suggestion, I have confidence in your wit.

Thanks.

Thread 1: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=202979.0

Thread 2: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=954169.0

I have no issues with signature campaigns. I have issues with the specific one he is promoting, which is a confirmed scam. Reference: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1074272.0


I have no problem if he sold you at double of the market rate. But, I have problem leaving you +ve trust for that. Do you leave +ve trust on everyone who trades with you ? And if you can not back up the reason of this +ve trust and say it is just your personal wish whom to be left +ve trust, then I think, it is high time theymos needs to think whether you should be in DefaultTrust or not.


I have your real name, phone no., address, tax evasion details. Am I posting those here ? We are discussing your credibility to be on BitcoinTalk DefaultTrust, which does not require your or my identity to be discussed. Ignoring me will only flare up the issue. You need to explain the cases I listed about you and back up why you left +ve feedback to neutralize the trust rating of a marked scammer.

Both are not scam dispute thread.

As far as I can see he's not the only one who signed up for that signature campaign, Owner of that signature campaign already got several negative feedbacks, So I can't help you. If you have personal problem with legendster, and everyone else who signed up for that signature campaign, make a list and forward it to theymos, but again It's not my issue.


Are you telling me I should ask theymos everytime, whom should I give feedback or not? I guess you do have a personal problem.


Thanks, You can make it public, I do not have anything to hide, as for taxes I've paid full tax and in fact My CA can help you to pay your Taxes and he accepts bitcoins.  :)
I have not neutralized his ratings, my feedback won't make any effect on the negative rating he received from jhonnywalker.
This is my last message to you, If you still have any problem with legendster's ratings. I will advice you to contact every single guy who gave ratings to him and ask them to remove it and stop bitching about it to me.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=93844
devthedev
thebitcoinquiz.com
deadley
Benson Samuel
sublime5447

Here I am just telling BitcoinDistributor to correct his spelling mistake and he simply decides to take a dump at my trust score stating that I have agreed to do business with him.

This just goes to show how ineffective the trust system really is. Yes I am aware that there is no way for 'Bitcointalk' the forum to track trades/transactions, in that case I'd say its time for bitcointalk to EVOLVE beyond 'just a forum'.

But seriously, until something radical happens, is there anything I can do to 'delete' this fake trust from that idiot ? NO. I'll have to live with that.

Dedicated thread for this issue (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1080374.0).

Nope, I've got fake trust from a couple of idiots on mine.  One from a scammer about 2 years ago.  The other QUICKSELLER and his alt just a few months ago echoing what the scammer said.  Unfortunately, there's nothing to be done but let it be.

Which IS the whole issue that I am raising here.

 escrow.ms >> 100% agree that he has EGO and he is rude dumb asshole. still he is a looser.

proof thread >> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=720068.0

Still i am afraid to transfer my Bitcoins to coinsecure just because of him. he is in part of team and i don't want to be stolen my bitcoins. i trust Benson Samuel but still hesitate to use it.

LOL quit your sob story. The only reason why people dont sympathize with you is because of your rash decisions and immature behavior. Pankaj is a reasonable guy and if you maintained your composure like a serious trader he'd have taken you seriously.


What would you say about THESE comments :
"You are an Idiot. Read before post in public forum. Check my justification thread to know the real. Fuck you. "

"SCAMMER selling others products. DON'T BUY / SELL. YOU DESERVED IT. DON'T TRY TO SCAM ANYONE. BEWARE ! BEWARE ! BEWARE ! BEWARE ! BEWARE ! BEWARE ! BEWARE ! BEWARE ! BEWARE ! BEWARE ! BEWARE ! BEWARE ! "


You know why this ineffective trust system exists ? Its because of idiots like you.

None of them have any proof.

If you have show it and blame me as a scammer, if you can't proof then shutup and dig the forum.

BTW: just read yours...


you are selling others products but i try to sell mine...  ROFL.....

I ignored both and keep away. i don't have time to play :P

See what I meant by 'idiots like you' ??
You are asking me to dig the forum but when its your turn you simply choose to 'ROFL'

You are such a moron that you didnt even recognize your own grudge reviews that you left on my profile after I reported you.

"You are an Idiot. Read before post in public forum. Check my justification thread to know the real. Fuck you. "  ... "SCAMMER selling others products. DON'T BUY / SELL. YOU DESERVED IT. DON'T TRY TO SCAM ANYONE. BEWARE ! BEWARE ! BEWARE ! BEWARE ! BEWARE ! BEWARE ! BEWARE ! BEWARE ! BEWARE ! BEWARE ! BEWARE ! BEWARE ! "  These are your words about me lol

This just goes to show that you dont even THINK before you type.

You exhibit all the behaviors of a typical scammer and to prevent people like you from succeeding at ripping other people off - this ineffective trust system was introduced. In the end the fallout is on innocent people.

Legendster you act like the biggest child here. Your immaturity speaks words of why you should not be on the default trust list.

LoL

Still no one gives a crap about what you have to say.
Make no mistake, even though it might seem that I am speaking for people with red trust, actually I am not. I am speaking for a minority of the people who have been wrongfully red painted ~ you are not one of them.

Cool story bro!

Awww are you butt hurting now ? Please dont cry, just die.

You are calling me immature for making a boob joke. Why dont you start by explaining the reason behind your blatant lie ?

Um...no I'm not butthurt. I really couldn't care less. If you were to look into my account, please red trust this 10000x to make it the redded account ever. It would be awesome! This is my throwaway account.

It isn't about the boob joke but afterwords you continue to insult the female race and just act very immature all together.

@OP: I am ashamed to even know a person like you who disrespects females to this extent. It's below my dignity to even talk to you and my education doesn't allow me to stoop to your level. You have even proved to be a racist and abuser earlier and it's shocking that the forum allows such comments here.

You should learn to respect women in the first place and you aren't doing that by talking such abusive words. My avatar and the message is added for people like you.


@BitcoinDistributor: I'm glad that you respect females. I respect you for respecting others and most people in this world disrespect women and hence there are crimes that take place daily and especially in my country, India, it's a common case.

@theymos & @badbear: Does this forum allow such members to insult and abuse other members to this extent? I've reported such posts and they aren't deleted. Why does this forum allow members to be racist/abuses/gender biased? The little I expect from this forum members is respect but I guess it's too much to ask for. A loaf of bread isn't important for me more than a loaf of respect.

Freedom of speech. If this forum allows scams and such, what makes you think they are gonna censor the women haters and racists?  :D

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=703657.msg11225713#msg11225713

And you're right. When this forum can allow thieves, allowing such low class comments will be allowed to. What can I do when someone isn't educated enough to respect others? They will get what they give others.

Not sure what your point is? I see:


Or did I miss the posts which were nothing but racist?

OP dint post a racist comment for me but he did it earlier.

Also, he is just making a personal attack for me claiming to be a female. If it isn't considered a personal attack, I don't know what it is called then. May be the red part will be considered right.

Didn't see that post but from what I've seen elsewhere here, being against the rules or not most personal attacks are not deleted. Just look at all those against quickseller and vod lol

I'll never understand why men in certain countries treat their women so bad. Different religions I guess..

Lol yup. It seems to be somewhat of a hobby for some people.


Anyway I nominate myself.

I have seen people crossing their limit in those threads and even cursing them to an extent that they have threatened and prayed for their death. It's sick and I do feel bad when members stoop so low.

More people should be added to the default trust list (level 1), just my opinion.

Most are just trolling. If not, they must live a sad life to be wishing death or praying some gets hurt over negative trust.

I've nominated Blazedout as I've done several trades with him and he's always been very professional. Also comes across as a keen and knowledgeable Bitcoin enthusiast.

I really don't see the point of this thread when most of the members, if not all except legendster of course, in the poll are already on the default trust list. Or are you taking about default level 1? If so, I shouldn't be on this list because I haven't added anyone to my trust list and don't plan on doing so. I still use the default list and check out the people I trade with myself, like most should.

^^^The man has no shame.  He was crying inside, waiting as pages and pages of this thread and no one nominated him, finally, he couldn't take it, "I nominate myself", he says!


I don't think there was a real point.  In the end, it was a confusing thread which perhaps showed us (once again) how weird this whole trust thing is.  The main thing I took away from this thread is how little the common user knows about the trust system and how people get on default trust (or how they get off default trust, in Quicktemper's case)---just look at how many times in this thread someone had to be told "hey, this poll isn't serious, it's not actually how things work".

Who? Only people who constantly watch their trust list should be added to trust depth 1. Is there any user who does this and whose judgements can be trusted?

Blazedout419 or devthedev could be potential candidates.

Blazedout419's sent feedbacks are good and has a custom trust list. Adding him to trust depth 1 is debatable. devthedev is using default trust list. So there is no point to add him to trust depth 1.

Results are in: it is a 36 way deadheat.

As from Monday, the following members will be the new default trust list depth 1:

dooglus
TECSHARE
dserrano5
OgNasty
ajareselde
Vod
Tomatocage
SaltySpitoon
BadBear
Blazr
DiamondCardz
J.Socal
TheButterZone
DannyHamilton
philipma1957
b!z
KWH
escrow.ms
sublime5447
cooldgamer
Stunna
Wardrick
master-P
deadley
xetsr
TookDk
Mitchełł
monbux
Blazedout419
devthedev
ahmedjadoon
hedgy73
hilariousandco
kingscrown
Quickseller
Equinoxx





Disclaimer: I have absolutely NO authority on this forum and the above list is NOT the new depth 1 list. It's just my list and i like it  ;D

It would be an easy debate. There'd be only one side. Lol

I'd put $5 Blazedout419 gets added to depth 1 before too long.
Not once have I seen or read anything contrary to what a depth 1 member should be...imo.

I'd nominate Blazedout419 for trust level 1 as well. Really solid trader, I've done a few trades with him and things have always gone smoothly and he's stayed to his word with everything. I think it's safe to say he's traded hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of things here, and has always been reliable.

Hey moron, first get your facts straight, there is a difference between being a scammer and being tagged as a scammer by other morons (like you).

The blowout between Quickieboy & me started with my decision to buy a reputable faucet which I turned into a loan request on BTCJAM and created a thread here to promote my listing here on the forum. But apparently according to Quickieboy I should have 'consulted' with him or 'sent a collateral to all the numerous people who contributed in my crowdfund loan request' ~ which is impossible. Besides I had a clean record of repaying all my loans on Jam since 2013 and my loan request even if it was 'too ambitious' was based on that clean record. Besides I dont see its written anywhere where I have to provide any form of collateral to be eligible to take a loan on JAM..
(let me know if you find such a providence)

When I ask for a loan and where I ask for a loan should be MY concern and not anybody else's if I take a loan and dont repay then start stomping your feet but ruining someone's business opportunity because 'you thought I am a scammer' is down right idiotic.


The Blowout between Johnie & me started way way back when I was new here, I dont need to re explain anything here because all that drama is still present in that locked thread where I was ridiculed for being an Indian, criticized because I had a good plan with a poor execution and almost ostracized by Tomatocage / Vod as a scammer - even though I didnt do a single penny's worth of transaction let alone 'scam' anyone. I mean seriously how the hell could I scam anyone if I didnt take their money ?
My argument was : People in the BTC world are rich and can afford luxury cars, I have a friend who deals with such people, why dont I serve as the connector here & earn something in return ? it made sense to me back then and it does even now, but I wasnt taken seriously because I was a noob and noobs here (like yourself) have a tendency to turn out into scammers, so by default I was treated like one.

Despite this I stayed here, despite all the ridicule I got a few people who dealt with me and there was a point in 2014 where Tomatocage even gave me a positive trust and removed me from his dreaded list ~ which he promptly removed later on for whatever reasons.

I am a guy who does things by the book and thats why people have dealt with me and continue to deal with me. So next time you want to quote a FAKE ACCUSATION thread which was made against me remember to quote my reputation thread here as well : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=955343.0


As for my signature, I am not promoting anything, I have rented out my signature space just like everyone else here. I am paid in advance. If you are butt-hurting and have a problem with the content that is being promoted by the signature campaign host then go take it up with the host or the people in charge of monitoring such things on this forum.

Otherwise it would be the same situation where you want to kill an actor for portraying the role of Hitler in a movie.

Are you seriously a trifling double dipped moron ? If you are then atleast try to not make it so damn easy for everyone of us to consider you as one.

I bought BTC from Escrow.ms at LOWER THAN MARKET RATE. Who the hell ever told you that I paid higher ? I even had a simultaneous thread opened at the same time. In both of those posts I stated explicitly stated 'I was looking for lower than market rates only' and I explained to someone that I even had offers when Escrow / Deadley sent their offers to me.
LINK to other buy post: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1072098.0

and Benson has known me since the first day I when I made my first post here, I have spoken to his wife and spoken to him numerous times over skype and phone, I have an account with Coinsecure where I have put up my passport, pan card and my land telephone bill basically everything anyone would need to reach me if I turned out to be a 'scammer'.

And please enlighten me how the hell does dealing with pankaj outside of CS actually generate any kind of profit or revenue for Benson or his website ?

While you are at it, also tell whose alt account you are.

You are not going to be on my list. My rules exclude forum cops ( I feel like I have already said this more than once to you)

Are you kidding me ? Since when is loathing about boobs considered a personal attack ? Every woman on this planet has boobs, small boobs, big boobs medium boobs, hey I even like some women with no boobs.

And if anyone is so stupid to take my joke and turn this thread around and make it an issue about them then I dont know what to think about that person other than if they were any more stupid, they'd have to be watered twice a week.

Come to think of it this is what most women do all the time, so either Eric Boshop is trying way too hard to be validated as a woman or he is a woman.. maybe even a gay guy lol

If anything THIS is the most racist quote here. This moron just made the female gender an entirely different race.

(@reckless Do you even know where you can find a dictionary??)

Okay then I nominate ACCTseller :D

I think your list is pretty pointless anyway as your criteria is arbitrary and not a criteria that is followed by the forum, nor the community in general.

Plus you are nominated, and it should be pretty clear that you are not a good fit to be anywhere near default trust, primarily because you don't understand how the trust system works.

Also please avoid posting 4 times in a row for your signature payout.

I admit the boob joke might have offended some people but it was a joke, just like the poll on this thread but I am not apologetic about any of these. If you cant deal with people then stay inside a closed box.

I respect women of all age equally, I have cousins that I love as my own sisters and I have the best mom in the world, I respect and admire the shit that women put up with everyday not only in my country but everywhere on this planet.

But I also like boobs and that is me so if I see a stranger with a boob I will stare at them, that stranger is not my mother or my cousin or my long lost sister in Kumbh ka mela and the boob joke was made in that spirit if you cant deal with it then DONT FUDGING GET INTO THAT CONVERSATION.


Seriously Eric Bishop, if you are a woman I would seriously hope you dont get a chance to procreate and spread your stupidity in the Indian genepool.

Not your signature campaign and if I remember correctly you denied me an entry into your campaign because of the unjust red trust on my profile.

So try not to be a hypocrite I am simply replying to all people here.

I am not required to make any amount of posts for my payout, I have been paid in advance, so whatever you see here is NOT because of a signature payout.

lol. Stop acting as if you manage all the signature campaigns on the forum.
Lets focus more on making the topic more readable rather than just having "money in your mind", and imo breaking the post and posting 4 times in a row makes things more readable.

ACCTSeller is just your own alt and you use it to back yourself up almost like giving a head to yourself.

And I'd like to disagree to that statement of me not understanding what this is. Actually I understand very well what your ploy is and the fact that I have made it so damn clear for the 5000+ readers is just gnawing at you. Admit it, you want to give me a red trust RIGHT NOW but you cant because people will know you for what you really are which is = A trifling moron.

@Eric Bishop ^ that is a personal attack.

@OP:

Continue dear as you love using this language. I don't wish to argue with you and get abusive now. It's your wish to start getting abusive and do the same. Good luck!


I too don't want to breathe in the air where people use such words which I haven't been taught by my parents. I'm proud of having a mother who is a Criminal Lawyer and dealt with murderers and the worst criminals and made them suffer in jail. Even those criminals never used such words with her and saluted her for being an educated woman. I can talk to them as they know when and where to use abusive language and to whom.

I hope I don't get a reply from you. Save your words for someone else.

And for anyone else wanting to use the Johnie rep against me, here is his message which he sent to me.


http://i57.tinypic.com/2afaiqa.png

I being the stubborn asshole that I am, aptly turned his offer down cuz I was fucking annoyed at him!!, then I changed my mind but then HE changed his mind and swore his undying opposition against me. I'm cool with that. People can see that even the most 'trusted' guy can have such a blatantly wrong judgement.

Its only human.

Criminal lawyer ? Oh good my mom has a huge criminal law firm here in Kolkata, if your mom ever runs out of cases come to my mom I'll hook her up. I m generous that way :) I'll also make her sign an agreement where you would be lobotomized and then brainwashed with Vim Liquid.

If you knew anything about criminals and how they 'speak' you wouldnt make that statement you trifling MORON.

This can easily be faked.


There is no need for a split in his posts. He is replying to one post in two (or more) posts and it is not long. One post for replying is enough.

Oh cut the crap you!

You are now saying I am faking an inbox message that I received ? Seriously how dumb can you people be ? or how dumb do you think I am ?

If I had to lie I'd rather device a story that would be more than just a photoshop hoax.

Stop doubting anything and everything someone says and similarly stop believing everything you see as well.
I dont have to prove anything to anyone this message is IN my INBOX have a moderator / admin / owner check it if its that important to you, if not, then simply ask Johnie himself. (I even notified rather humorously on a thread of his as well)

Last I remember you & I had decent interactions with each other, since when did you start attacking me ? Or put to put in another way, since when did you become such a tool ?


Also, it is my account, I can make 1000 posts as long as its substantial and as long as I deem it is necessary to do so.

I just said it can easily be faked and that rating Johnie left is still there.

I still have no problem with you. There was a discussion earlier about this type posts. Your replies don't meet the criteria to split them into two or more posts. it's better to avoid it to avoid a probable ban. :)

So you're saying if I make multiple posts I'd be gagged ? lol that would be a censorship issue. My posts are substantial and they're not worthless. But I stopped all my renders just for you so I can quill this 'that can be faked' bullshit which you started & recorded this screencap.

(wait for upload)
http://youtu.be/D_9MhESKvJY

Probably.

https://archive.is/d9Xip

No need of archiving it. Check now.

24 hour bumps. Don't think they ban often for it but who knows... might be different when you have a paid sig (don't think it matters if it's pay per post or not) and a few people here are reporting you for thread bumping simply because they don't agree with you  ;)

You should take what they are saying as a good thing. Sounds like they are trying to help you out a little otherwise they would let you continue to make multiple posts / bumps in a row and just report them until the staff gets fed up.

I appreciate the thought of sincerity and care for me, but to be honest its just hostility.
Some of the sig campaigns need you to make 50 - 100 posts per week if the 24 hour bump was applied to them then no one would make the cut lol

Besides my responses are not bumps. There is a difference between replying to each person separately and mindlessly bumping a thread.

Other than that, seriously I appreciate it that some of these people actually care about me (ROFL)

Guys, could we please move the drama to another topic?  From what I believe, this topic was originally just supposed to be a fun little election that no one would care about, but now... it's turning into a blood bath!!!  :-\

Not a bloodbath, people were only interested to create a 'drama' here as long as they believed that I was a scammer who was tagged by Quickie, the moment that was debunked by me posting a video grab of johnie's standpoint on his review on my profile everyone went quiet.

The issue was 'the trust system is flawed' which turned into 'legendster is probably a scammer' LMAO

I really hope, that this legendster stupid never reach default trust list. after who he showed us here in this thread and discussion here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1015897.0 it is just impossible..

 ::) ::) ::)

You're the moron here if you think this post has anything to do with getting to the default trust list. Get it ? An utterly numbskulled moron.

He has shown himself to have very little moral character. I doubt that he'll ever make default trust.

may I just ask you, why you are permanently insulting everybody around? I checked random threads and post, and it is not just me...

I'm sorry since when has been 'providing the service for which you have taken money' considered immoral ?

Check again, most of then were numbnutts. Why havent you checked the people who said good things about me ? lol

Seriously! stop making this thread about me and my signature space. If the forum wont take responsibility for an ad that they are putting up why should I ?

When you accept money to advertise what is pretty clearly a scam.

They might be a scam, but the campaign host hasnt scammed me. I'm a man of my word and I'll see to it that the buyer gets the exact thing which he has bought from me whether it be Cryptocurrency/Security service/a book/a dirt shovel/an animated video etc etc ~ in this case exposure..

To me it would be immoral if I took the money and didnt deliver what I was supposed to.

You are advertising a Ponzi scam, but the forum is not. Why should the forum take responsibility for your immorality and lack of character?

Notice how I said that you accepted money to advertise. This was to imply that you never should have taken money in the first place.

Then you pretty much painted yourself into a corner. Maybe you should have done some research before you committed yourself to a scam. Can't say that I really feel sorry for you though. In the immortal words of Forest Gump, "Stupid is as stupid does."

You are mistaken if you think I didnt see the scam accusations before I entered the campaign. I am well aware of it.
But hey, the forum allows for scammers to host sig campaigns who am I to say no to free money ?
If the host wants to re enter for another contract I'd be happy to rent him my sig space.

The other correction in your comment would be about my commitment ? I am not committed to them, I do not endorse them, I am concerned with who pays me and whether I can give that person the exact thing for which they are paying me.

Hey if I started to worry about what is a scam and what is not, then I would not have associated with BTC itself, 2 years ago people were calling it a ponzi scheme as well.


Is this right ?
No, the forum should stop every company / organization from hosting a sig campaign who have a scam accusation against them. But before that the forum should thoroughly screen who they allow to advertise on this forum through their adspace.


If memory serves well, the forum regularly advertised Gox banners.

So you knowingly entered into an agreement to advertise for a scammer? I think this takes away your argument that you need to deliver services that you were paid for. 

I knew there were scam accusations. Hence I asked for advance payment and the guy has paid. What more should I ask for ?

You tagged me as a scammer but have I scammed anyone ?

so you think that serious advertising companies are promoting obvious scams because they are payed in advance? there are words like morale, reputation, common sense...ahh nevermind

I stand corrected, so let me rephrase that. The forum doesn't knowingly advertise for scammers, whereas you do.

They would if they were legally allowed to.
Some serious advertising companies would even advertise porn and gambling sites, in countries where its downright illegal to promote such things.

I have a reputation which is based on actual trades, I dont have time to suckle up to someone to get on their trust list, if I trade with someone I ask for a rep score for the honest trade that took place.

Common sense ? My common sense tells me not to rip people off of their money and to provide the service for which I have advertised (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=950151.0) for.

My common sense also tells me that any idiot who sees an advertisement and blindly puts in their money into whatever that ad is promoting is just asking to be ripped off of their money.

My morale currently is positive. Not sure why you talk of it or what it has to do with anything.

Gox always had scam accusations for the lack of transparency. Every one knew it was run by some kid in his basement, was forced to change their bankers from within US to Japan because they were legally notified to provide some data about the nature of their business.

We can go round and round on this carousel.


Also, knowenly is not a word.

I think my negative trust comment and the reference link explain pretty well as to why I think you are a scammer. IMO the evidence is clear.

Ever noticed the pattern in my behavior where I display serious form of discontent against anyone who think they can dictate what I can or cant do ?

OMFG! That statement just has me stunned. How does one respond to someone with absolutely no moral compass? I'm flabbergasted.

It flabbergasts me when someone is aware of the word flabbergast and has no clue that they screwed up their grammar with "How does I respond".  Just saying ...

and you dont have to be flabbergasted. My moral compass has only one direction and that is to be honest. Which I am, that is all that matters to me. Its also none of your business about who I choose to trade with, also this is not the topic of this thread but whatever..

Let me start by fixing your quotes. Feel free to troll around.

Thank you for pointing out my error. I have corrected it. Now, if we could only get you to discover your own errors and correct them.

Reference link ?? What reference link ? Cross your heart and tell me you even remembered what you tagged me with LMAO.. (no peeking!!)

Yes. I make mistakes. Maybe it's because I'm typing too fast on my iPhone, or maybe it's something else, but one thing is for sure. I don't knowingly promote scams. Can you say the same thing?

you are just wasting time with him. he will promote this fucking scam until they disappear from this forum..

Yes I can. But then you'd have to buy a dictionary / thesaurus etc  where you understand the meaning and difference of promoting a scam and selling ad space.

Since you obviously lack that knowledge try turning on the TV at late nights. See how the TV claims no responsibility to legibility of the claims made by that 'ab crunching machine' / 'diet pills' / 'religion lockets'

If you ask me those guys are clearly ripping you people off lol

Who's telling you what to do?  All I see is people telling you that you're a scumbag for promoting scam.  And that scumbags like you aren't to be dealt with.  Seems fair to me :-\

Or when the contract between me and the campaign host expires.

Hello,
Its nice to meet you, why dont you start by introducing yourself ? As in whose alternate account are you ? :)

hmmm, it seems that I must have forgotten to include one. Anyway here it is
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=952197.0

To clarify, you were trying to take out a 60 btc no collateral loan for what you claimed was to purchase a faucet that was not worth anywhere near that much (probably not even 1%). This was without any kind of reputation, ability to repay or any history of successful repaying similarly sized loans.

Yes, I was trying to purchase a faucet, the price was determined by the seller, not by me. I had proof that the site owner had received payouts from an ad company (adword??)
But your 'report' said I wasnt providing a collateral, which is stupid, there is no way to ask for a collateral on JAM.
Also, the amount of loan one could ask for in Jam is decided by JAM not you.

I have 100% repayment track record to this day on Jam and I invest on multiple loans. Clearly you were power tripping, still are, thankfully you arent on the default trust list - hence the existence of this thread.

Off course you are entitled to your opinion, but you could potentially ruin my chances of dealing fair & square with someone with your idiotic trust comment.

I'm a guy from the internet, Anon. Unless you're making plans to suck my dick, let's dispense with getting acquainted for now, k?

Hello Gay from the internet, Anon.
Judging by your comments you sound like someone I have pissed off on the forum in the past.
Could you be bold enough to tell everyone who you are ? I think gay guys also have balls of men.. unless you forgot them somewhere.

Judging by your comment, you sound like one of those in the closet men  :P its 2015.. It's okay to be gay lol

No I m not. But calling someone gay who isnt a gay is still an insult nonetheless.

I am not sure if you are serious with this argument or not. You obviously do not buy something if it is more then it is worth. If a platform does not allow you to offer collateral, but it would be appropriate to offer such collateral then you probably shouldn't use such platform.

I am very serious and I am not sure if you clearly understand what you are saying here.

I was asking for a 60 BTC loan, on a platform where reaching 70% would fund the campaign. Which was essentially 42 BTC.

I had proof in the form of screenshots that the site owner was receiving substantial amount of income from the ad agency.

My loan was in BTC JAM, I made a post here promoting my listing there, I wasnt asking any single guy to lend me 42 btc.

Not sure if you are aware of it but BTCJAM is a form of crowdfunding (sarcasm  I know you know)
How do you provide collateral or security to the potential hundreds of people that would invest in a crowdfunding loan for varying amounts ?

The loan I asked there was based off of my reputation and the connections I made since 2013.


You want me to consult you ? Before I create a listing on JAM ? Seriously ? I understand that my decision of purchasing the faucet could have been bad (hence I retracted later on) which could have been explained to me by someone who was genuinely willing to help people out.

You on the other hand are here to play pretend cop and gain trust of the people, you arent here to help anyone but yourself. Your end game could be absolutely anything.

Same goes for any other pretend cops here.

Stop brooding about my balls, Anon, they're not for you. Let's keep this impersonal: I'm here to explain to you why you're a scumbag, in hopes that you'll stop being a foulmouthed little faggot and stop promoting scams.

Advertising scam is promoting scam, that's what advertising is: promotion. Taking money to promote a scam is what's colloquially known as whoring. You whoring for trivial amounts of money makes you a cheap whore, repulsive to normal folks, and certainly not someone to be trusted. Please understand that I don't wish to offend, only to edify.

P.S. the reason I'm not using my main account is I don't wish to be associated with this sort of thing. Weak of me, I know, but the thought of my friends seeing me arguing with a two-dollar whore... I hope you understand.

Hello,
Bitcoindistributor / McFÖiL / King Of Sports / Ian - the retard.
How are you, you little scammer ? :)

I may be wrong, however I don't this this is KoS.  I think it is someone who doesn't want their main identity associated with trolling you.

If you agree that BitcoinDistributor is Kos then these alts of the same person.

Admit what ? That I enjoy beating up people ? Its a part of my job description IRL.

ohh really? you had in job description "beating people"? you enjoy it? tell us please more..

Well I would, but seeing how that is grossly irrelevant here, I'd pass.

Oh come now, OP, you brought it up! I know you're dying to tell us about your dungeon adventures, 'bout punishing other boys with your big hard ...fist, that's it, fist.
Now stop acting coy and tell us.

I am surprised they even let you get into the campaign in the first place. Their rules clearly states that no negative trusted member will be allowed to participate.

This threads gone to shit and should be closed, its just turned in to a bitch fight.

Agreed.

There is a difference between scammers who are severely red trusted and people like me who are wrongly red trusted. Was part of Secondstrade / 777coin with my current rep status.

Why is everyone(except Legendster), trying to derail the main topic? I just read like 2 pages talking about Legendster's signature and his honesty.
I don't think the thread was started for this cause. if you guys have a problem with Legendster promoting a scam/ getting involved in scams, then better start a different topic and spread the fud there, but stop trolling this thread.

This is a troll thread. Why do you think Legendster listed himself on the poll? Most are just boosting their post count to get paid from some sig campaign. Me? I'm just trolling the troll  ;)

I tried to keep it on topic...some threads just go to shit though  :P

Maybe as he pointed out a lot lot of times before, he wanted to point out the ineffectiveness and flawed nature of the trust system, thus making it a non-troll oriented thread, but who the fuck cares? Everyone is here just to increase the post count.

Man i go away for a couple days and you go and start accusing other people who hate you of being me? Have you ever stopped to consider that maybe just maybe others hate your arrogance and immaturity just as I do?

You both have hurt my feelings. I asked you guys to get lunch sometime and you guys didn't even respond with a no thank you or even a response...  :'( :'( :'(

Because I m trying to show everyone that even me who isnt the most active trader here gets 7% of the vote. Trust in this forum has no value its given to anyone for anything.

I said it on another thread in response to a reply to Quickseller; that people on this forum cant distinguish between the roles of a janitor and a cop. The fact that any random Joe can come here, bust a few scams and become a 'trusted individual' : is pathetically manipulative. Its easier than rigging a poll.

Its like giving a cop's badge to a janitor.

Actually no, I love the fact that there are certain individuals that hate me, what I do and what I stand for, that just proves that I stood up for something I believed in, which is not what I can say for individuals like yourself.

Maybe you have enemies because you are standing up for the scam that you are promoting.

You are a scammer.

I find solace in this statement as I can see how I'm getting under your skin now. You are simply ranting about my signature space to divert attention from the long con you are trying to pull.
Keep the hate flowing quikie boy & I swear I'd expose you for the entire community to see what you really are.

Alright. Good luck with that  :D

Woah, was gonna post about nominating master-p, but just noticed something about all my feedback.

Everyone assumes everyone else on this forum is a guy. Hell, even my feedback to other people assumes they are other guys. Interesting how we do that... Imagine if I started leaving feedback using 'her' all the time--it just feels weird.

http://www.copypress.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/on-the-internet-nobody-knows-youre-a-dog-meme.jpg

In English, "masculine" pronouns are actually gender-neutral. It is appropriate to use "he" when you don't know the person's gender.

Actually it depends on the style of writing and the venue.  Using "he" for gender-neutral is no longer appropriate in my field.  It's actually more typical to use "she" or "the person" or to vary the pronoun each time so that you're not emphasizing masculinity.  Note as well that "they" is the gender-neutral pronoun in spoken English.  Many language mavens love to hate on this, but they'll be dead soon and people will still be saying "they" when they don't know the gender.  Gender-neutral "they" goes back to middle English:



And Shakespeare


Just sayin', in my observations, using "he" as gender-neutral is going the way of the Dodo, it's basically old white people that do it now, and they'll be dead soon.

Cheers!

--TSP

Except when people find it inappropriate, haha. I guess they aren't wrong, either, since the rules of English aren't exactly set in stone... I find it interesting how the way we communicate changes significantly over generations. /tangent

But... enough philosophy. My nomination for master-p still stands! I've had many excellent trades with this dude (for both physical and digital goods), and great communication. I think he'd be a good addition to top-level default trust. Just my two cents.

Except when you disclose you're a dog.

My opinion is basically this.

The obvious requirements of stellar trading/lending/contract history, sound security protocols, and significant time spent in the community (how users who have been here less than a year are on Default Trust is completely beyond me) should be obvious.

Beyond that, what is clear to me is that if the default web of trust seen by the entire community is going to basically conform to this group's opinions, that their reputations should be staked on it. What I mean by that is, anonymous users should not be on default trust; they have nothing to lose by gaming it, and we as a community have everything to lose by trusting them.

If you cannot risk associating your real identity with your forum account, then you have absolutely no business governing the default web of trust that the community sees. And you have no business being trusted with large sums of money. Because at the end of the day, one can do a hell of a lot more damage than his/her anonymous forum account is worth, no matter how green the trust rating.

Jerry, I do believe this is the third post I have ever seen that is well put and parsimonious - while using a signature campaign.

As a ghost user on these sub-forums, I can happily say you are part of the 1%.  So, I thank you.  This is one of the few times I'm not being facetious outside of business.

People who are in default trust list are the people whose judgements can be trusted. You shouldn't trust your money with them just because they are in default trust list or they have green trust score or anybody else who you don't feel confident with.

And asking for their IRL identity if they want to be in default trust list is absolutely not a good idea.

Nobody is asking for anyone's IRL identity; nobody should be asking to be on the Default Trust list in the first place. This shouldn't be treated like an "in" list and anyone that "wants" to be on it should be viewed with suspicion.

I think that a Default Trust user extending trust to someone because they "trust their judgment" rather than on the basis of trustworthiness is a misuse of the system. Same as those that leave negative trust over petty flame wars rather than trading experience. Opinions, often backed by nothing, should not determine what is essentially your trading reputation. I want to trade with people whose reputations are built on trust as it relates to money/value.

What you're saying isn't really in line with how things work in practice. People do, in fact, trust others with money because they are on Default Trust or have green trust. And that's absolutely going to continue. Who do you think people are going to trust to escrow trades, IPOs, group buys, signature campaigns? People looking for an escrow service aren't necessarily regulars, nor do they necessarily have a firm grasp on how to avoid getting scammed. Enter: the green trust score. (Or in other cases of trust abuse, the red trust score).

I'm not sure that your response shows a good understanding of how confidence scamming works. I'm saying that people that maintain anonymity while trying to build a strong rating via the Default Trust system should be viewed with a healthy skepticism. For example, ask yourself why someone might go from escrow to escrow (all of whom are at Depth 1-2) from one trade to the next. Really just think about it. And yes, it's happening. If you don't see why this poses a problem, then I can't help you.

My (admittedly limited) dealings with noobs on this forum lead me to believe they don't research reputation deeply at all. But they love dat green trust. I'm fully in favor of abolishing the Default Trust system and letting users build their own webs of trust, without artificial weighting that is often plagued with personal vendettas and double standards.

If that were to happen, it would still be quite obvious who the limited number of truly trustworthy people on this forum are.

@JerryCurlzzz: Do you know what default trust list is? It is a list of people whose judgments can be trusted. Trusting your money with them is a different thing. Someone who does not have any trade history most probably will not be in default trust list.


New users don't know whom to trust and whom not to. Such users need a temporary list and that is what default trust list is. Once you know more about it, you can start adding or removing users from your trust list but we should not be forcing them to change trust list.

P.S. JerryCurlzzz, please see this post by Shorena --
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1100872.msg11725703#msg11725703.

"Do you know what default trust list is?"

That's just patronizing. I am well aware of how the system works and was not asking for a tutorial. I was commenting on how it is flawed, how and why people are gaming it, why people get scammed because of it, and how it's going to lead to some epic confidence scams.

New users need a temporary list? This forum existed for a long damn time before the trust system did.

I'm not sure that you read what I wrote very closely. Actually, I'm sure that you didn't. I explained that this is about how the system works in practice, not how you think it should work. 99% of users will never bother to understand how it works, how to alter the list or why they should. In that context, whether they can change their trust lists is irrelevant.

I just want to add a big second to JerryCurlzzz's opinions here.  Having done absolutely no trading here I still ended up on the receiving end of just one of the personal vendettas he's talking about.  And it just happened to be perpetrated by a person who was struggling to get onto the default trust list (and who was on it for a time when he pulled the vendetta), and the person happens to be one who maintains anonymity.  I basically have lived the experiences he warns against.  I also think there's a growing concensus that the trust sytem as it stands (with default trust lists) causes more problems than it prevents.  What's more, expressing that opinion in public got me even more negative trust from an alt account of that special someone who was going after me for a while.

Default trust is a broken way to:

1) provide newbies with a false sense of security
2) allow vendettas and personal issues to cloud the reputations of people who actually just want trade information
3) under/overvaluation of bitcointalk accounts and account trading based on market manipulation of the trust ratings by those who are both on default trust and who buy/sell/escrow account trades.

Many good ideas have been put forward for improving the system from where it stands currently, but none have been implemented.   One, tiny, incremental improvement which would help a lot would be to change the warning text from the inflammatory "TRADE WITH EXTREME CAUTION" to the more descriptive "this person has received negative feedback from someone in your trust list". Making this simple change would encourage people to say, "huh, my trust list?  I have a trust list?"  and to start figuring out who they want to be on that list and who they don't.

Can you sum those good ideas here or give me links to those posts?


Yes, the current warning text should be changed.

All of them related to decentralizing and de-reifying the default trust list and encouraging people to build their own lists.  One of them is the one you quote just below.  Saltyspitoon has said he'd be for it.  I haven't heard anyone say they'd be against it, but it hasn't been implemented or even commented on by Theymos.
I'm glad you agree.

One think I'm going to do is remove default trust from my trust list altogether.  I think I will start a thread in meta to see if I can popularize the idea and bring more attention to it.

EDIT: here it is: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1103508.msg11746372#msg11746372

You would have been in with a chance of the $900M Power Ball http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-35272548 if you'd had @Master-P in that lottery list...

Good thing nobody listens to me!  :D