Bitcoin Forum

Is there any threads or something like that on here for to see users reputations or feedback etc.?

Only thing we have here is who's a scammer and who isn't.

The best indicator we have is the ignore link highlight. It's not perfect, since ignores aren't always for rational reasons, but it's a fairly good indicator of a poster's signal to noise ratio. More noise, more yellow.

Ah I see, not really great options. It be good if users had like a feedback/rating on there profile for people to leave  comments and feedback, and have a like the feedback number visible on the thread profile so you get a better idea how positve a rep they have. Even if it was just put on profiles of people trading/selling/buying as it would be good to see if the user has made reliable transactions before.

Ah, now, for buying and selling there is a method of rating users, but it's a third-party site:
http://bitcoin-otc.com/viewratingdetail.php?nick=Myrkul

It doesn't show on your user profile, though.

Reputation shouldn't be summed up in a single number. You need to look at the individual ratings, and who rated them. Like you won't care about -50 from Supa's sockpuppets.

it would be a good indication of what the users overall trading rep and history is.everyone starts at 0, everytime you deal with a user you leave either add a positive +1 or negative feedback -1, the more positive or negative a total a user has would help users when trying to decide whether or not to trade with someone. Its a fair system for everyone.

The problem is that kind of system can be easily abused.

well the number would be just an overall rating, the users full profile could have a detailed more history showing who gave the feedback and any comments? It wouldnt be too hard to have it in such a way that only users can only leave feedback once for each trade. And an option to dispute feedback you get if you think its unfair. That would stop pretty most abuse and make the feedback relevent.
I see what you mean, but I'm just describing the system used in a few particular trading sites for some time now and its worked great.

Another issue with rating systems is that they quickly turn into popularity contests, I think a better indicator than ignore would be good though. How about instead of ratings each user profile has a review system? This was you can tell if they are getting up votes from the same users (friends), and you can also find out problems people have faced dealing with them.

I may be wrong on a few assumptions here, but here's my thoughts:

The forum isn't really intended to be a trading site, so it's kind of out of scope to have that here.  If there were a rating system like that then the it puts a lot more responsibility on the forum/staff to make sure that's not abused.

Plus there is at least one site that is setup for this purpose, bitcoin-otc.com (http://www.bitcoin-otc.com).  There are probably some others as well, but I don't know of them off the top of my head.

Your points make sense and are the probably the better "dont fix whats not broken" way of thinking. And as you actually work for the forum I assume you probably have a more practical approach to these than me.  :D

With staffing, would something like that really take much manpower? It could be mostly look after itself as it really just another feature on your profile, like a user influenced version of the coin rating thing? with a comment list under a users full profile.So youd only need someone to take a look at any disputes people have with feedback they consider to be unfair right?

I know its not meant to be trading site, but people do trade here, and forums are always a good spot to chat and trade with users. The way it is now neednt be changed, the feedback system could just be a something for people to see generally how a users previous deals went,and used soley at a users own risk. Obviously it would be silly to assume the feedback is a perfect reflection of someones reputation, as with anything. I dont suggest it as a major feature to be put in and change everyting, just as a small suggestion.

Im just making assumptions for converstaion so I'm not saying I'm right and the site needs it, just a thought I wanted to share with everyone  ;D

Having to look over 100k members to make sure they're not "repping" each other up would be a pain in the ass.  There were already a slew of ripple-bots earlier, I think this would be an easily programmable way for newbs to get rep.  It's automated trust, and it defeats the purpose of "trust".  Considering the mods already have to take care of the rest of the forum, a system like that is just begging for abuse.

Why do people always say "I don't want this reputation issue to turn into a popularity contest..."?

Reputation *is* a popularity contest.

Agreed. Except when your escrow is "dank".

Well he is jesus so I think that is in exchange for immortality LMAO

Not really, although maybe we see popularity as two different things. An active user who is friendly and who comes across genuine in posts is different from a snide user making fun of other newer users yet who is popular among their a clique of friends. I have not encountered this on these forums but I would not trust all popular people in that sense lol.

It is true though, think about it. If 1 person thinks you're a murderer (when you really are), and 100 people only know you as a good tennis player, your reputation will be good! Reputation is relative and is absolutely influenced by quantity over quality, hence popularity contest.

For example: john the dog (a moderator) sucks.  Most people seem to like him, but he is pretty much the reason I quit logging in everyday.  I would love to be able to vote him down in a way besides just ignoring him and then blanking out what he says.

One person made you lose interest in the forums?  I'd like to hear that story.

Are you one of the spammers I kept banning?  :o
That's pretty much the people I think I've angered.

I can only remember getting in a keyboard fight with MysteryMiner over deleting his dank-suiciding-egging posts (but I don't think we are in hostile terms  ;) ), furry coat and his scammer alts, and countless spammers I banned/deleted posts/sent warnings. I like to think I'm pretty reasonable.  ;D

I thought you were Global Janitor? What happened; is Global Troll-buster a promotion?  ;D

=P I 'promoted' myself. It's a changeable title.  ;D

You could keep the Ignore button and only have an "upvote" button (like Reddit). You are limited to 1 upvote for each other user than yourself. That way, the relation between 1 user and another 1 can be of these 3 states:
-Neutral
-Upvoted
-Ignored

The Ignore button works pretty well and the Upvote button could balance the current system. You can even use the same formula as the Ignore button. Put an Upvote button above, and the more people click it, the greener it is.

That's an interesting idea.

I bet there would be people with very dark yellow ignore links and very dark green upvote links.

Popular doesn't equal trustworthy and if you want to see the problem with reputation systems, look at the history of the people who were associated with the pirate fiasco - they were some of the most "reputable" members on these forums.

Generally, if there's an issue with a certain person's behaviour in Marketplace, Lending or Securities, a thread will pop up in the scam accusations forum (even if it's not technically a scam) or those with unresolved issues will troll their current threads.

Hell, I'd like to see "Hero member" renamed to "too much free time" because I'm not sure all newbies realise it goes solely on post count or that VIP member is a bought status.

A reputation system won't help against long cons like Pirate, but what does? There isn't much the forum can do, even requiring ID to register an account wouldn't do much good. There's always a bonding system of some sort, but that's better left to third parties who are setup and have the time for it.

But just because a reputation system doesn't help against those types of cases, shouldn't rule it out entirely. I think it would be extremely helpful for the newbies that get scammed by disposable accounts with two or three months aged and 5 posts, or the pm scammers. Will be more difficult to make disposable scammer accounts en masse, because someone gaming the rep system on a large scale will be noticed, and the rep system could adapt to compensate.

I had different idea, mentioned it twice, but perhaps in the wrong place so there was no answer. This thread looks like the right one :-].
I do not know how "simple machines forum" works and what it allows, but...
Would it be possible to add personalized tags to other users? This do not work as reputation as you would be the only one seeing this tags. Current possibility to Ignore/Unignore user is too crude. What if ignored person posts something reasonable in the future?

For example: Someone has may Ignores and therefore coloured ignore. But I read his posts and conclude that he does not deserve it. So I will make a personal remark for this person "Ignored because he dare asks questions that only a few dare ask". Or I would like a tag "writes long texts but worth reading" or "has been scammed by MtGox, hates them" (so everything he/she writes about exchanges in the future, I can take it with the right perspective).
And I want to see this my remark beside every post he makes. Nobody else would see this even the person who is taged. (This way it will not turn into popularity contest.)

Simpler way to make this is to enhance possibilities for ignore. For example "show all posts from this person in gray color 8pt font" - So I know I can probably ignore it, but wont miss one sentence answers. Or "Allways show this thumb up/thumb down icon besides this person posts" - So I do not get confused by users with the same generic avatar. I know that Such thing could probably be made with some script hacking like GreaseMonkey, but official functionality would be better.

tysat:

I have a problem with Tomatocage's "solution" to spamming which consists of trolling all transactions.  What he *used* to do is comment on every transaction current on any particular day trash like "escrow that shit or I will come back and laugh at your stupid ass."  I think we can agree that this type of comment does not come from a good or constructive place--he did this all the time.  There are several other members who noticed this and complained as well.  I got into several arguments with him over this and as a result, admittedly he has gotten better--but John's handling of the situation was abysmal.  I don't think getting a gold star pinned on your chest and thread pinned on the forum is a good response to what started out simply as justification of disruptive behavior. 

I have had all good transactions on the forums and aside from spats with (dicks) like tecshare and charliecontent I've been on fairly good behavior the entire time I've been here and resent being called a spammer by someone who (obviously) won't bother to do a quick search on my name.  I'd love to see some progress in the way we handle things here, we need stronger mods but we also need effective and good ones or the point is moot.

The forum policy allows freedom of speech posts like he did. You may notice that we're lax on post deletion front - virtually only spam posts are deleted. As for what tomatocage did - he's been reducing the scamming reports by a ton after he started posting warnings. You won't imagine how much reports I was getting daily before tomatocage started to give his warnings proactively - at one point I myself started to place warnings on painfully obvious threads simply to prevent noobs from being scammed. So far I've been mostly only getting reports from scammers against him so I think he's doing a pretty good job there.

Also, we'd ban MPOE-PR or even Micon first if the forum went with your suggestion - they're bigger 'trolls' following your definition than tomatocage. However, they're indeed helping the community in a way by policing the businesses and voicing their warnings. We're thankful for that.