Bitcoin Forum

This came across my mind just after seeing another member given red trust complain on the forum. It's obvious that red trust is ugly, and basically f*cks up your forum profile and reduces your trust to dust. But, do people who got red trust actually deserve it? I feel as if red trust is given out too easily. I see no point in marking a newbie asking for a loan, a scammer. It's too easy to assume they will run-off. Funny, because people refer to bitcointalk as a great place to get a loan, so why not make an account and ask for a loan if you actually need one?

The point is, how many people who have red trust would scam you if they could. I see red trust for any reason nowadays, whether it's selling illegal items, a potential alt, or even for selling disagreeable items like Microsoft keys. It makes me wonder, what % of red trust users are scammers? My guess: 70%. What's your guess?

Newbies who get red trust from loan requests aren't using collateral, which means one of two things:
1. They plan to run off with the money they're given,
2. They are incapable of reading the guidelines which say specifically not to request a loan without collateral.
Neither of these things look particularly good on a user, do they?

It's up to the person giving the red trust as to if it's justified, but if several higher members disagreed with the person leaving the trust, said person would be removed from DT (making their ratings not show straight away by default). Because of this, you can conclude that they must be doing something right.

I must agree that in my opinion, not all red trust is completely deserved... Especially the ones given by untrusted members. But, in case of a DT member leaving red trust it's almost always justified in some way.
This does not mean the member receiving -ve is a sure scammer, but it does mean that he did something like ignoring rules, displaying scamlike behaviour, selling/buying questionable goods...

I think about 5-10% of the -ve given by DT is not really deserved (mostly -ve given for account sales, or sales of goods that are in the "grey area" like MS keys). At least 30% of the red trust given by untrusted members is not deserved (in my opinion)

Most accounts that have red trust unfortunately have it deservedly in my experience. DT members don't tend to hand out negative trust for no reason.

The only time I've seen an 'unfair negative trust' was when tspacepilot was involved in a row with Quickseller. That obviously resolved itself when QS was removed from DT.

Some of them are actually scammers, and some are just accused of being a scammer but it is not certain that they are.

Most DT members are trusted enough to hand out negative or positive trust.

Good thing is with DT membersis that trust feedback means something, usually negative to scammers.

Usually the only people moaning about negative trust are scammers and people that have bough accounts and are trying to scam.

I have no feelings for members that are red (negative) trusted for whatever reason unless they prove their innocence which is very, very rare.

99% of times people marked as scammers are or dissapear or dont prove otherwise.

In bitcoin, it's better to be called a scammer when you aren't, then to not be called a scammer when you are.

There are no second chances with irreversible currency, so it's best to err on the side of caution.

Vod whats licking your own boob like, I've always wondered as I cant myself?

From what I've seen, red trust is usually deserved, even that left by Vod and others for loan requests with no collateral.  There are so many scammers on this forum it's unbelievable.  I basically only look at red trust from DT members and those accusations that have references.  All else is BS.

Same as praying to yourself and believing someone else is listening.  :)

The enjoyment is only in your head.

Ha ha like it :D. You're a star in my eyes. Long live vod ;D.

Glad to see I'm the 1%

I am too. I feel special.

I've always wondered what it felt like to lick your boobs. ;) ;) ;)

That's strongly debatable ;).

Sike, I'd trust you KLYE, but if anyone else had those trusts I might not say the same.

I'm red trusted and I'm not a scammer...

if Vod had got 1 or 2 negative trusts for nothing...and then taken for a scammer...now he would not talk so.

But it is true... i prefer have red trust for my honnesty than be at the place of my 2 negative truster...
I could not peacely asleep if I were at their place...I would be ashamed and I would certainly not be here now...

I'm even ashamed for them...(lol)

and to be very honest...it is possible that Vod is a scammer,but I have not proof...
If I follow Vod's opinion...i shoud untrust him...what i do...because I do not agree his opinion who accuses honnest people.
I'm sorry...in France we prefer guily people in freedom that innocent one in jail...
Vod would jail every one (lol)

That's why I don't engage in business on this forum.  So there is never any need to view me as a possible scammer.

Vod's definitely not a scammer. The only grey area he's in is his loosely-given red trusts which are very controversial and affect the forum greatly. Other than that I think Vod is a great and trusted guy, who is a level above all of us.

it's my touch of humour...I respect of course Vod's opinion...even if i do not agree...
Never say never...
I was almost same...my business on the net asked never more than few cents...and often it was earnt cash on my own sites...
But since i'm on the forum and in contact with bitcoin...i have up the possibility to invest a little more...
And this gave me the reputation of a scammer...and now I have this bullet at my foot.

I believe they are red because someone doesn't trust them... it doesn't mean they are a scammer. People can read for themselves and establish whether they are a scammer or someone they would want to trade with.




It all makes sense now... you've been trying to shutdown scammers to eliminate the "competition" of your own scamming through an alt that you probably purchased from one of the glorious account scalpers!  :o  ;)

I have red for promoting a HYIP Ponzi, I lost my money playing it, and lost my trust  ;)
Trade here I do not do, to many here will scam you.

That actually describes Quickseller.   ;)

I have only one account, and I dislike the sale and use of alternate accounts.  To me there is no reason other than to eventually scam.

No No & No.The main problem and drama with the ratings is just for the signature campaign ,if one gets a red tag he cannot participate & that too if his post quality is average.Many very old users here dont trade because they think green ugly ..lol it's just perception.The only gain from the tree is that you can ask users to go first and without escrow but after the master-p drama i doubt about that too.
Take a look at doog, all of his trust (which was built in years) is vanished,why ? because there is some drama with clams ..lol but he returned 60k btc to investors ?
Trust doesn't works that way and here it is more like a vouch copy.

Yes for both of them.Majority of the people given red trust have proven themselves scammers.It is given readily cause once the coins are released there is nothing to reverse them,No charge backs etc. and so being a bit judgmental is wrong but safe (not talking bout drama/extortion feedbacks).

More than 90% are scammers.

Of course not, if he was using it to extort or run escrow scams it means he was given privileges to do so and it doesn't means every one should/will do that ?
many people are happy to make 10 coins a year rather to pull of a 15 coins scam.People who are into it for the Green Tree should be noticed.

best is to trust noboddy...we are all potential scammers (lol)

Same here, I've only ever had this account. There is no reason to have more than one account. The only reason people have more than one account is to either build it up and sell it, scam or spam the forum because of a signature campaign.

Bot accounts are sensible because it separate automated activities (information scraping, APIs, campaign moderating bots etc) away from human activities. Or "official" accounts like BITMAIN, which is an entity rather than a person. Other than that I really can't think of a legitimate use/need for "alt" accounts.


Answering this thread, the answer is red trust users don't need to be scammers to go red. They're red because they're untrustworthy to the point that trading should be avoided with them, because there's an unnecessarily high chance of something going wrong during the transaction.

Untrustworthy me, you don't know me to call me that, and the person who gave me red does not know me, ffs I played a ponzi game.
Your logic is flawed.

Ummm, what do you call this:

• Official PICISI (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=513876) - despite it currently having zero posts, it was used to impersonate Armis's PICISI project
• Offical PICISI (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=513834)
• pickissy (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=513899)

---

Making a controversial statement that might negatively impact the reputation of the person making such statement. Being able to insulate yourself when someone you have done business with attempts to extort you and damage your reputation.

---

---

To answer the question in the OP - some people with negative/red trust were not able to actually scam from others, but instead attempted to do so, for example someone asking for a no collateral loan with a throwaway account, offering a too-good-to-be-true offer, but refusing escrow and insisting the other party to go first, ect..

There are also some accounts who are an alt of a scammer, or of someone who attempted to scam, and since the same person is behind such account, it would be logical that it be appropriate for the alt accounts to have such negative reputation.

There seem to be a growing number of instances in which negative trust is left for no reason other then the person disagrees with the account he is leaving negative trust for. For example one person likes to leave negative trust for those who sell MSDN keys despite the risks of buying such keys is disclosed, and a few people like to leave negative trust for anyone who believe that a site/company might not be a scam when the person leaving such trust believes that it is a scam. 

Ummm, I would call those accounts I gave away to another person before I went sailing.  He was supposed to continue the fight against Armis' scam, but I guess he didn't.  Look at their last login date - I have no control over over those accounts anymore and haven't for months.

In full disclosure, you should also add WhatsUpEdmonton (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=392911) to your "list".  I created that account when my account was hacked and I needed to communicate with Theymos.  See the last login date?

Hope this clears it up for you.  I have only one account.  :)

I'm not surprised Quickseller posted here. He has not scammed. Let's see the rule again:

    Negative - You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer.

The odds of Quickseller scamming are slim to none. Same goes for the red trust given to users like dooglus... it makes no sense.

Are you another one of his alt accounts?   ;)

this is just to show their control..cliques dont Grow Up.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1310197.msg13499022#msg13499022

The odds of that statement being true are slim to none. Your logic to me sometimes make no sense, while other times your logic astounds everyone with how you came to the conclusion. I feel like sometimes you just post with your fingers. That goes for alot of defaulttrust users. There's a problem. Just because I am standing for something that's right, it doesn't mean I'm on his team, or I am Quickseller. Odds are I am a bystander who's giving the honest opinion.

Everybody wants to be right, not everyone can. Chances are't that I'm Quickseller's alt. I look down on users who like to fight and cause a havoc. Don't be the police officer that has to shoot innocent people dead because they won't listen, just do your job and stay calm, and be smart. It seems like most users here have a struggle doing so, especially the default trust users. I'm not insulting, but rather pinpointing the exact problem. Your post said it all for me.

Yes, I realize that was an inappropriate post, so I edited it earlier.  :)   It was a knee-jerk post caused by the reaction that someone still thinks QS didn't scam.

Ahh that's better.

Just to add-on to this topic, the fact that trust is not moderated is a joke. I've seen scammers spam other users profiles with red to make them look bad. Example: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=487418

Funny how people can get away with putting any trust they want, and "trust abuse" is not against any rule here. It's asking for straight corruption.

We've been promised a new trust system and a new forum for years now.

we have been promised to see god but r we seeing ? because we motherfuckers dont unite and deserve this.

bitcoin is shit and satoshy sold his  majority of the shit while the price was highest and now only thermosy,jonny,suchmoony can profit from it and no one else. fuckk

this trust is just made to destroy the profiles of people who dont agree to them and to improve their own shits.It will be like this forever. scam scam scam & scam.

what a troll DT has turned into ,i cant control myself maidak ..master p ..vod  etc..etc.,how much more fucking with the population ?


Vod be prepared to get removed. I first thought i could let this go but i need to do this for others newbies whom u want to fuck out of no where,u troll.

All of them but me ;)

seriously though it's hard to say it is used as a weapon a lot here.

And i also think it's Trust rating system.
NOT a scammer rating system. (look at the topic title = comments)

Seems to me people just think it is what ever they want it to be.. regardless of reality.
Such as a "Troll rating System" or "High School Popularity Contest" rating system etc

Trust ?

Who has confirmed violated it in the crypto scene ?

I would prefer that than a staff member removing everything that they didn't like. Not that any of the current staff would.

And they can have any actual trust spam removed by contacting theymos about it. In past times where I have been spammed with negatives I had them removed in a matter of hours. However, multiple negative feedbacks != spam.

No one should care about untrusted feedback that doesn't leave proof anyway.

See my above point. Trust spam is against the rules.

Please point out where these promises were made. All I know about a new trust system is that theymos did a survey about a new implementation, and the majority voted to keep the current system.

Then stop using it if you find it so shitty. No one is asking or forcing you to be here.
Also Satoshi didn't sell anything, he left. I've profited thousands of dollars from Bitcoin, where do I fit into this equation?

No. Default trust was made to protect people.
Vod is a nice guy, PM him in a month or two and he will probably remove the feedback for you as long as you've contributed in some way.

The examples you have pointed out are either invalid (Vod isn't a scammer) or can happen in any sort of system. Next please.

Vod won't be removed. He's annoyed a lot of newbies by posting negative feedback before; one that professes how shitty Bitcoin is isn't going to have him removed from default trust. Stop crying because you got a negative feedback and work it out with Vod to fix it.

The two can be linked, but you're right.

Most of them probably are not. Lots of people leave negative feedback for things like requesting a no collateral loan, or running a ponzi website.

And newbies asking for loans do not know it is wrong by forum rules, they are not given a chance.
It would be best when someone signs up for an account to read  some rules ( threads) ,stipulating certain conditions loans etc) what they must do/or do not concerning the forum.

Agree to the said rules under a written warning, ticks agree then continues on.

In my opinion.
http://cdn.xl.thumbs.canstockphoto.com/canstock4017808.jpg

+1 to this Vod. The sales and trading of accounts pisses me the fuck off.

Not sure if all red users deserve their trust rating. I know personally I think that my red trust ratings are fine the way they are until I get my site fully launched and investors dividends rolling out at a fair rate.

I see the only people moaning here are those left with negative trust for asking for no collateral loans or other shady practices. So surprise really ::).

But your account was registered in February?

Same old shit different day supposed newbies with years of forum experience ::).

I have an alt with some negative trust. It was gifted to me by a scammer. I tried to give it to Vod once. He didn't want it.  :D

*waves*

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1057133.0