Bitcoin Forum

Trust is not moderated, but trust spam with no intentions other than spamming is forbidden:

What's the best way to report this kind of spam? I want to report trust spam left by Moseas79 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1714509) on my profile:
19 trust left, 81 lines each. Total: 1,539 lines of fake trust  ::)
2,430 lines of trust spam now (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3039025.msg31524743#msg31524743)

Edit:
Also Buzzlieve1992 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=740675), who left trust spam to other users (and probably to me too very soon as I'm leaving negative trust to him now).

---

Also, I think there should be some limits regarding trust, something like for example:

• Not more than 1 trust left on an account per account and IP per day (I know this can be fouled, but it could help a little at least). At the moment it seems newbies have much more limits on posts and PMs than on leaving trust
• Not more than 300 chars per feedback at most. Not more than 5 new lines. If more is required, a post on Reputation (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=129.0) can be opened and linked on the reference

Trust should be informative and readable, not intrusive.
While less annoying than Moseas79, several other users intentionally add extra blank lines or leave spammy "previous versions" of left trust with repeated information with the sole intention of making it longer and use more real estate, like TheButterZone (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=60600) or Engg.Chaks (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=524421) did on my profile.

Or at least when trust is added from newbie and junior account (since for members now you have to post quality content and I doubt scammers will want to give their time for that) for instance to color it differently from black, green and red trust that is given out. As spammers usually create new accounts to give this "fake trust" they might be even selling it to other people who knows.

I think using that many colors would be confusing and wouldn't help.
Adding some limits would be better, especially to newbies and junior members.

Thanks for bringing this up. I'm used to getting retaliatory negative feedback at this point, but this is just obnoxious. Looks like you got it even worse than I did unfortunately. I know untrusted feedback doesn't really count for much, but it's still nice to have a clean record of previous deals, when most of them haven't been with DT members. Hopefully this will be addressed.

Would you prefer I revise history, like you have perpetrated against me? Sites like archive.is can't access trust pages as they're behind registration wall, forcing reliance on forge-able screenshots/printing to PDF, but at least your revisionist ("instead of") history is easily disproved by looking at my sent negative ratings upon "those who are scammers or untrustworthy".


Having an idea of how little you & your lynch mob think of clearly-violating fair-warned binding terms, I don't expect much, but...
If you GPG-clearsign your consent, forfeit rating reciprocation on any/every platform, and agree to pay me BTC12.5 if you renege, I'll change my rating upon your Bitcointalk trust page to a 300 character max negative.

 ;D

Agreed. Fortunately untrusted feedback goes mostly ignored, and I'm used to getting a lot of untrusted fake feedback, but 1,539 lines (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=1714509) left by the same newbie in just a few minutes is just ridiculous.

Bump and update:

Te trust spammer Moseas79 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1714509) has added 11 more trust entries with 81 lines each.
The total is now 30 entries of 81 lines each, totaling 2,430 lines of trust spam (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=1714509) on my profile.
Plus, Buzzlieve1992 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=740675) has left 6,411 lines of trust spam (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=740675), 426 of those on my profile.

I'm still waiting for:

• Trust left by Moseas79 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1714509) and Buzzlieve1992 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=740675) to be removed and, hopefully, their accounts to be banned
• An admin to tell me what's the best way to report this. I don't think creating a new thread should be required
• Some comments regarding my suggestion (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3039025.msg31271591#msg31271591) about setting some limits when leaving too many or too long trust, especially for newbies

Based on a similar encounter (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1608026.0) (to an extent), creating a thread on "Reputation" board was/is the solution.

Great suggestions, would like to add another one:

• How about not allowing users below "Member" rank to have the ability to leave a feedback (since most users with such behavior are usually within those ranks)? An exception can be made for "Copper Members" (it won't solve everything but it also adds another layer).

Something should be done about blatant abuses but nothing likely will. Theymos is probably too busy to investigate and I don't think cyrus has the powers to remove it (though I could be wrong, but he'll also likely be too busy to do so). I've suggested before some restrictions should be put in place like maybe a user can only leave one feedback per day on a user (or maybe even longer - week, month etc). They can still edit the feedback with any additional updates but there's probably not many good reasons why people should be able to spam a users trust. I've had one on my hilariousandco account who went on a spamming spree in the past removed but the huge feedback from steamproject advertising his scammy torrent invites sales is still there despite requesting it to be removed. Other such instances like yours should also be removed but I doubt it's a priority for the admins right now sadly.

I'm having the same issue with member Buzzlieve1992, who left several VERY long, consecutive, negative trusts on my page.

I'm all for being able to leave trust as you see fit, but this is just abuse.  He's obviously trying to obscure the rest of my trust page with these unnecessary trusts, and his is retaliatory feedback, plain & simple.  I left him a neg for being an account dealer.

So from what I gather, there's no good way to report these jackoffs?

Somewhat off topic here, however while we are making technical changes to the trust system, I think we should allow those that have received trust to write a rebuttal/response to any trust rating they receive. It is generally considered unethical among journalists to not solicit and publish (in pertinent part) a response to accusations against the subject of a (news) report. I don't see any reason why someone should not be able to directly respond to trust ratings, especially those negative in nature posted to their trust profile.

You can try report them to theymos but it's probably a waste of both yours and his' time.


I've suggested this before as well. People should be able to offer up comment on their side of the story in defence.

Any reason why no other staff member can do that? I guess you asked that already. At least global moderator should be able to delete obvious spam. Logs can be enabled if theymos can make sure there was no abuse at some point, and I guess he fully trusts you

Same here. Someone left about 50 trust entries from several accounts (of one single person) and they got removed immediately. I didn't even complain. I guess I was just lucky that time

I agree, absolutely. You didn't get any reply on that?

---

Yes I saw he sent thousands of lines of trust spam to several users including you and me. It seems there's no official way to report that at the moment. It's just about being lucky that theymos sees it and has time to remove it

---

It does make sense. I would support that

You would have to ask theymos that. The feedback system is meant to be unmoderated so there's that and I agree we shouldn't be removing every little bit of tit for tat feedback but people shouldn't be allowed to spam it or advertise their services there as per the rules, but as with a lot of things on the forum there's not enough staff to handle certain issues and a hands off approach is taken but it's this laissez faire attitude that often causes the most issues and frustrations amongst users (accounts not getting recovered, trust issues, sig spam etc).


There was one guy ages ago who was spamming dozens of users including staff and I contacted theymos about it and he probably just blanket removed them all that the user sent. Maybe that was the same guy.


Probably not, but maybe theymos never saw it. I can't remember whether I posted it or PMd him it (or maybe both). I should probably bring it up again though.

Exactly the same problem here, with the same moron. If this is not solved and is considered legal, I'll start spamming the trust rating as well just to counter the ones who invented this dirty trick.

No need to stoop to his level. Seeing as he spammed a bunch of us, I wouldn't be surprised if his sent feedback gets wiped once an admin notices this topic. Theymos has wiped trust spam in the past. Honestly, I wouldn't worry about it too much. At this point I have tons of negatives from idiots who get mad that I called them out on their shadiness, you get used to it.

Not to bump an old thread, but has there been any progress with this? Any methods to report spam of trust?

According to EcuaMobi's trust wall - no.

---

I suppose you are asking this because GP left tons of negative feedback on your wall, well look at it from bright side - they also left you positive feedback  ;D
I can't tell that we didn't warn you somewhere in that thread that everything you say GP will use against you  ;)

I don't think OP should worry about untrusted feedback. It will not reflect on your trust rating unless they become DT. However OP question is good, it will very difficult to moderate trust system. There is no easy way except investigation. Only admin could remove or delete left feedback so obviously he is busy too much. I don't think there is other way to report about left feedback except open thread on meta.

LOL yea that positive one was kind of a laugh; granted he's probably going to remove it now.

Naw I get what you're saying (even though GP tried to spin it that you were calling me a spammer which I know you weren't); I'm just not entirely sure if it's worth letting him go on his tirade on this forum unchecked.

I just think it's kind of insane that there aren't limits on the amount of trust you can send to 1 user. Realistically, 1 trust left per user should be enough to show the consensus of whether or not you believe the member is to be trusted. Anything more is a waste IMO.

Yes, I wouldn't worry about untrusted feedback. This joker, Tanglemymind, (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=883641) gave me negative feedback for spreading a fictitious disease. His feedback to others was also dubious.  :D

Edit: After actually examining the OPs situation, I can see were it presents more than a mild nuisance.

The problem with this is that it is difficult to pressure someone to remove the rating long after they give the rating if they are later included in the DT network. Also, if someone not in DT starting leaving questionable ratings that do not receive pushback, then someone in DT might start leaving similar questionable ratings.

Yea, I'm surprised mods don't have more abilities here with this. It took me wayyyy longer than it should have to scroll down his trust feedback.

Exactly. The problem is the spam. I know all of them are not DT and never will but their spam makes my trust page unusable, at least everything shown below "Untrusted feedback".

That's not really my point here, just the spam. If someone who is not DT leaves a totally incorrect, lying comment on my feedback then I know they'll never be DT so I can ignore it. But if a single user leaves 2,430 lines of spam in my profile as I mention in OP (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3039025.msg31271591#msg31271591) then I would expect an admin to remove it.

DT system should not be like this at all. You seem to care way too much about DT (not the trust system itself but *Default Trust list*). Earlier you were totally fine with Vod abusing his DT position against me, and now you're so vocal about the importance of what's shown on "trusted" and "untrusted" feedback. What would you do if someone on DT left a totally unjust shitty lying rating on you?

I'd be happy if the whole Default Trust list was removed. It should merely be a list of "unlikely to scam" people, but not represent any higher amount of trust in any case. Right now it seems to be "reserved" for spam fighters etc, which is not the focus or only use of DT. Everyone should make their own lists, and if they did, you nobody would need to care about these things as everyone's trust list was their own.

Read again what I posted and try to understand this time. You totally missed it. As I've posted in my previous post and OP I care about the spam, not DT. It's not OK for someone to leave 2,430 lines of trust spam.

And no, I'm not OK with Vod or anyone else abusing anything. Do not lie again about me.
However of course we may have different opinions about whether a specific case is an abuse or no.

This thread is to discuss trust spam. Please keep it on topic.

Blackmailing/threatening and resulting red trust when blackmail was unsuccessful doesn't count as abuse? That's what Vod did to me. I recall you commenting this and siding with Vod, seeing it not as abuse, who knows why. I might be wrong and maybe it was not you, but I am pretty sure it was you. Which way is it?

Of course by-default trusted/untrusted, so DT feedback, is related to trust spam. It changes the way the whole trust system is used. If it was more like a real trust network, these spam cases and other total bullshit ratings wouldn't matter to anyone at all. DT's do shitpost ratings too, just like Vod did. Spam and shitposting are alike as we're talking about the effects of those ratings that should carry no value.
Trust spam wouldn't be any different from regular spam at all if it's untrusted, right? So apply the same rules as forum applies on regular spam.


I agree. Same policies should apply to that as applies to other spam.

It's useless to discuss with you so I prefer not to. I'll just tell you I haven't even posted here (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4415201.0) if that's what you mean.

And I repeat: This thread is to discuss trust spam (not "shitpost ratings" as you apparently call feedback you disagree with). Please keep it on topic.

OK. Then I probably remember it wrong, sorry for that. How is it "useless to discuss" with me?
Again, a feedback given as a result of blackmailing attempt (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3869593.msg37486761#msg37486761) is not me "disagreeing" (which I obviously also do) but it's also blatant abuse. Washing it as "disagreeing with a rating" is not cool. It would be the same as calling your received untrusted feedback as something you just "apparently disagree with" and now want deleted.

My posts are on-topic. The DT system significantly affects the whole trust system. If it was a real trust network, all untrusted feedback could be ignored 100% whether it was spam or not. In a real trust network, ratings that have *any* value are in your trusted feedback section. Right now it doesn't work like that because of DT twisting how this trust system in practice is used.

It's not just that simple to go remove ratings based on them being spam. I would agree that removing them is an OK solution but I understand the reasons to not touch any ratings. You can simply exclude them off your trust network. See #bitcoin-otc Web of Trust for example.

They are not on topic, you are ranting around about perfectly valid -ve you received from Vod while this topic is all about trust spam.

Read again this https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3039025.0 and this https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3039025.msg31524743#msg31524743 and then click here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=1714509 and after that click here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=740675.

Perfectly valid? Is it perfectly valid to blackmail/threaten and then leave a negative rating when blackmailing fails?


Ok. Maybe slightly off-topic, yes. My point was to describe how all these problems (this kind of spam you linked) as well as other obviously wrong rating activity could be possibly dismissed. (That would be promoting use of trust system that makes "untrusted feedback" completely irrelevant.)