Title: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: coinlocket$ on December 05, 2018, 04:53:34 PM CONSIDERATIONS
DT1 LIST
DT2 LIST NUMERICAL ORDER
Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working? Post by: coinlocket$ on December 05, 2018, 04:53:51 PM THE REMOVED & ESCLUDED DT2 LIST
Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working? Post by: coinlocket$ on December 05, 2018, 04:54:07 PM DT2 LAST FEEDBACK SENT ORDER
Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working? Post by: coinlocket$ on December 05, 2018, 04:54:15 PM
Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Lauda on December 05, 2018, 05:09:22 PM For some random reason, theymos doesn't seem fond of removing inactive users (which are liabilities). It took forever to kick out DeadTerra for example.
I wonder whether this will cause flame-wars again or have people grown tired of them. It is a bit weird that a lot of people on dt are getting positive and negative trust. Don't question the establishment and no negatives will be sent your way. ::)Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: jackg on December 05, 2018, 05:09:28 PM I’m surprised Sirius isn’t dt1, afaik he’s still holding the domain for this site.
A lot of the people removed from dt2 were re over for food reason. I think Taf was taken off for security reasons. Atriz scammed people in icos. It is a bit weird that a lot of people on dt are getting positive and negative trust. theymos even got a negative recently too... Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: The Sceptical Chymist on December 05, 2018, 05:11:20 PM People have called me a nincompoop, unintelligent, ignorant, and lots of other things and to an extent I can see how I can come off that way when discussing certain things--and man do I feel completely stupid for not knowing a lot of these things posted above, like that TMAN & owlcatz were removed from DT2 or that nullius and aTriz were even on it.
I also didn't fully realize how small the DT1 list is. I know I've seen it before, but for some reason I had the impression that it had a lot more members on it than it apparently does. If a DT1 member trusts someone for whatever reason, I think the DT1 member is fully justified in adding the member to his trust list, thereby making that member a DT2 member. It shouldn't matter in the least if the newly-anointed DT2 member is active or leaves a lot of feedback or anything else. The point is that the DT2 member can be trusted. He's not required to be a scam buster or to use his DT status for anything if he doesn't want to. Hell, I don't recognize half the DT2 members on that list, but I wouldn't argue that they should be removed just because they're inactive. What I worry about is inactive accounts getting hacked or sold. If you could get your hands on a DT2 account, you could probably work a decent scam and make a good chunk of change before you got caught. Wasn't there some allegation that the Master-P account was sold or something? I know it wasn't that long ago that he pulled his exit scam, but I forget the details. I like this thread. Thanks for posting all of this data, coinlocket$. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Lauda on December 05, 2018, 05:13:35 PM What I worry about is inactive accounts getting hacked or sold. For some random reason, theymos doesn't seem fond of removing inactive users (which are liabilities). It took forever to kick out DeadTerra for example. ^this. I had to bring this case up several times.Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: jackg on December 05, 2018, 05:22:45 PM What I worry about is inactive accounts getting hacked or sold. For some random reason, theymos doesn't seem fond of removing inactive users (which are liabilities). It took forever to kick out DeadTerra for example. ^this. I had to bring this case up several times.Maybe there should be some sort of secban in place for people who don’t log in for 30 days. Then get an automated system that validates a signed message for a stamped address from a given post id. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: ibminer on December 05, 2018, 05:23:00 PM
Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: coinlocket$ on December 05, 2018, 05:28:11 PM The Pharmacist touched on this, but if someone is excluded, it doesn't necessarily mean they were once included. I believe there are some DT1 members that have excluded accounts whom have never been included, I assume to avoid them getting easily included in the future. Got it, fixing the posts n°1&2. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: tmfp on December 05, 2018, 06:08:56 PM The most recent thoughts of our Esteemed Leader that I could find about DT were in reply to a proposal to include Level 3 by default setting (as I vaguely recall it being in the Old Days).
I've thought about that, but I tend to think that it'd be better to make it broader rather than deeper. Well, the only logical way to do that would be to promote selected level D2's to D1, they in turn would bring their currently included DT3's into Level 2. It seems reasonable to think that, if you believe the overall system has value and integrity, that is the only way that any sort of quality control could be maintained. How to select which current DT2 members for upgrade from the current 200 odd is another matter. Two choices that I can see: either those currently included by the most DT1's, or by centralized dictat. For some random reason, theymos doesn't seem fond of removing inactive users (which are liabilities). Yes. Apart from the hijack/hack danger, trust is dynamic not static. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Coin-1 on December 05, 2018, 06:15:58 PM I recently analyzed the Marketplace Trust (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=211858.0) network and created this thread:
[TOP-200] The most trusted members (DT1, DT2, DT3) (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5047060.0) I am sure that the Default Trust system is still working. I am also astonished by how many inactive members are in the DT2 list.
As far as I know, the last account added to the DT2 list is iluvbitcoins. Anyways, good work, @OP. By the way, I need to update my thread, although there are no significant changes. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: coinlocket$ on December 05, 2018, 06:45:53 PM As far as I know, the last account added to the DT2 list is iluvbitcoins. Anyways, good work, @OP. ~ I meant the last account created and added on the DT list (id not in base of the temporal line), so far no accounts above the account n=881377 as been added on the DT list, we have only u=1294878 loshia1974 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1294878), but reading feedbacks Here (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=1294878) is only an alt account Code: his original account was hacked. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: eddie13 on December 05, 2018, 11:18:48 PM not required to be a scam buster I think DT is more for placing valid scammer tags and the only sure avenu to becoming DT is to become a scambuster and leave a lot of valid negative feedback. DT positive is very conservative because you are basically staking your reputation to vouch for someone, or risking the reputation of your judgment for not much gain. Moreso adding someone to DT2 because then you are staking your judgment on them not only not to scam, but on their judgment of others not to scam. It's just much easier and safer not to, and their isn't much upside. Negatives are much more common and easier because you just prove a fact and that's it, and can't really be undone or later disproved while deserving a positive vouch can easily be undone in the future by a fact of bad action. It is widely accepted that one shouldn't leave a positive just for any successful trade because blah blah risk not proof etc. Negatives are 99.9% provable fact and positives are a judgement call, the way feedback is used. I think it also has a lot to do with benefit to the community. Scambusters and negative tags are very beneficial to the community to warn others and stop bad actors while positives are only good for what?, saving some traders some escrow fees and slight complexity in trading? Positives don't really help a person much while negatives have a massive impact. It is a lot less risky and more beneficial to add someone to DT2 that places a lot of valid scammer tags than it is to add someone who places a lot of positive feedback. This site has turned more into a place for service gigs like advertising in one form or another, work you don't really need to be trusted to do, and less p2p trading where trust between parties is key and positive feedback is beneficial. From what I see, not that I completely agree, not directed at TP, just my 2C. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: jackg on December 05, 2018, 11:29:16 PM @eddie, I don’t like that sort of system as we have now.
I don’t think scam busters should be on dt merely for being scam busters and it’s why quite a few have gone on to scam and also why mdayonliner got negative trust too. A system in which verifiable trades get chives positive trust in return, is as I see it, a much better system. Call me old fashioned, I like people to only give trust when they’ve had something at stake and it’s paid off. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: eddie13 on December 06, 2018, 01:38:08 AM @eddie, I don’t like that sort of system as we have now. I don’t think scam busters should be on dt merely for being scam busters and it’s why quite a few have gone on to scam and also why mdayonliner got negative trust too. A system in which verifiable trades get chives positive trust in return, is as I see it, a much better system. Call me old fashioned, I like people to only give trust when they’ve had something at stake and it’s paid off. It could be worse. The system we have isn't perfect but what system is? I am suspicious of users "Gunning for DT", I think we all should be, we need to keep an eye on them, and even they should understand that and be open to it. The merit system has made it a bit worse, or should I say increased that activity, because the same avenue is also an outstanding path to a lot of merits. But you can't just hate them. I can't blame a guy for being ambitious and some of them have turned out pretty good. But this is crypto, and the internet, and we should be suspicious of everything and keep in mind their ultimate motives. I don't think a person should be added to DT only for having left a lot of valid feedback, but should also display very good judgment in complex cases, and also be trustworthy enough not to be setting up for a long con. But leaving valid feedback is a good reason to add them. It's not like DT=Trusted escrow though. I'm not sure I would trust half of them just to not screw up and lose my coins, and be willing and able to reimburse me if they did. I understand the ideas behind wanting to leave positive feedback for all successful trades, or only trades where you took a risk, or only to those you would vouch for, or be against positive feedback left in the absence of any trade, or for it, or for or against leaving a negative with no trade. They all have pros and cons. I'm generally for anybody doing whatever they think is the right thing to do even if their ideas are not parallel. As long as they have good intentions mostly in line with my view Satoshi's vision of liberty I guess. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Lauda on December 06, 2018, 05:26:09 AM A system in which verifiable trades get chives positive trust in return, is as I see it, a much better system. All cheer for trust farming via 0.01 BTC trades. ::)https://media.giphy.com/media/26uf2JHNV0Tq3ugkE/giphy.gif For some random reason, theymos doesn't seem fond of removing inactive users (which are liabilities). Yes. Apart from the hijack/hack danger, trust is dynamic not static.Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: LoyceV on December 06, 2018, 09:05:23 AM I meant the last account created and added on the DT list (id not in base of the temporal line), so far no accounts above the account n=881377 as been added on the DT list, we have only u=1294878 loshia1974 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1294878), but reading feedbacks Here (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=1294878) is only an alt account This surprised me too after seeing your sorted list. I didn't expect DT to be filled with mainly old members. The newest DT1 is more than 5 years old (I'm ignoring OldScammerTag here), and about 90% of DT2 is more than 4 years old.I would guess many of the current DT-members were much less than 4 years old when they were added, which would mean getting on DT is harder now than it was 4 years ago. Of course it doesn't help that so many new users are spammers, but the number of decent posters went up too when Bitcoin gained popularity. I think DT is more for placing valid scammer tags and the only sure avenu to becoming DT is to become a scambuster and leave a lot of valid negative feedback. I was put on DT without leaving a lot of negatives. But when I do, I try to be thorough.Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: jackg on December 06, 2018, 08:55:51 PM Quick seller got caught out, why won’t others @lauda.
@loycev, I’m not surprised by that at all. Generally, like gaining merit, users seem to want to focus on others’ history. It goes without saying mid you’ve been here longer you have more history and more references than someone who has been here for a much shorter amount of time. Nullius gaining so much trust makes me think he’s a known alt of someone too. There as a core dev or at least someone around bitcoin a few years ago who went by a similar name. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: theymos on December 06, 2018, 10:40:40 PM I don't like how the current system is working at all. It was never intended to be a top-down "decision-making body". Everyone is supposed to set a custom list, and DefaultTrust is supposed to just be a stepping stone for newbies.
But what do you propose to fix it? Keep in mind that: - The #1 thing to be avoided is someone keeping illegitimate positive trust for long, since that facilitates scamming. - It's kind of OK for someone to get illegitimate negative trust, but if it's wrong then it should be removed eventually. - Other than that, it's best to have as many ratings trusted as possible. Some possibilities which have come to my mind: Force custom lists Display an annoying message instead of a trust score next to every post until the person sets a custom list with the assistance of the set initial trust (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;suggest) page. Pros: - No remnant of top-down decision-making remains. Cons: - Newbies will often choose poorly, especially since the suggested list is possibly manipulable. - I've been thinking that I might want to enable trust for non-users, and that'd be impossible with this. Athenian democracy Every month, pick ~30 random users from the set of users who meet certain fairly strict criteria. Those users are DT1 for the month. As a special exception to the normal trust network construction algorithm, distrusts in DT1 will also affect DT1; ie. if a user on DT1 has -1 or less net trusters on DT1, then they will not be considered to be on DT1 anymore. Pros: - I think that it'd end up being fairly accurate on average. - It strongly encourages people to maintain good trust lists at all times. - Since it'd be erratic, it'd encourage people to not use DefaultTrust, which I don't want people to be doing. - It's not very top-down, though in some cases major failures might require manual adjustment. - It can be used by non-users. Cons: - The stability everyone has gotten used to with DT will be gone. - Some degree of abuse is inevitable. There will be constant battles to get things working reasonably. Voting I'm not a fan of voting, especially in an environment like this where sockpuppets are impossible to prevent, but maybe it could be made to work with sufficient layers and oversight. For a while I was thinking about a complicated system in which users would self-assign themselves to "tribes", elect tribal leaders, and then the leaders would construct DT1 (plus some other stuff). I think I've decided that this particular method would be overly complicated and not sufficiently useful, though. Alternatives are possible. Algorithmic Maybe there's some algorithmic way of looking at the universal trust graph and pulling out a DT1 which would guarantee several important properties, even in the face of manipulation. I thought about it for a while, but I couldn't figure anything out. If you have specific suggestions for alterations to the current DT1 list, then make a topic about it. I think that the system is structurally flawed as it is now, though. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: suchmoon on December 07, 2018, 12:38:47 AM I don't see anything particularly bad about forcing custom lists. Yes, some users will choose poorly but the other options are potentially as much or more dangerous - e.g. if there's a flaw or loophole in the algorithm it would impose wrong choices on users without their knowledge or input.
Other than that - some combination of "Athenian" + "Voting" perhaps, where a certain set of users can vote? Random sounds a bit scary. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: jackg on December 07, 2018, 12:43:29 AM Maybe start with the annoying message once people reach member status or even full member. With a hint that if they don’t know who to add, then dot add anyone.
DT seems to be overvalued and seems to be made a rank in itself for some reason... Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: OgNasty on December 07, 2018, 12:53:16 AM I've always thought the trust system worked pretty well. Even in cases where users have positive trust that I don't agree with, it seemed to take community opinion over a "top-down" approach. However, I'm always open to seeing improvements.
Every month, pick ~30 random users from the set of users who meet certain fairly strict criteria. It sounds like the benefit of this approach would be more DT1 users, but also a rotating approach that could help point out users with poor networks who could use adjusting. Over time, I could see this being great, but would likely involve a more hands on approach from the users being selected and random is a bit scary. Why not expand the current DT1 system? It sounds like most of the complaints about it are that people aren't included. Why not take a look at how expanding the current DT1 members to 30 would effect the system and perhaps moving to a random rotating approach if that goes well? Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Anduck on December 07, 2018, 01:09:27 AM I’m surprised Sirius isn’t dt1, afaik he’s still holding the domain for this site. He's not holding the domain. If a DT1 member trusts someone for whatever reason, I think the DT1 member is fully justified in adding the member to his trust list, thereby making that member a DT2 member. This is how it should be, but in practice hasn't been like that for years. It shouldn't matter in the least if the newly-anointed DT2 member is active or leaves a lot of feedback or anything else. The point is that the DT2 member can be trusted. He's not required to be a scam buster or to use his DT status for anything if he doesn't want to. Hell, I don't recognize half the DT2 members on that list, but I wouldn't argue that they should be removed just because they're inactive. I agree. Sadly, DT1 members do not agree with us. I've talked recently with few DT1 members (who I could contact, several of them are unresponsive or inactive) and how they describe DT is very far from your view. not required to be a scam buster I think DT is more for placing valid scammer tags and the only sure avenu to becoming DT is to become a scambuster and leave a lot of valid negative feedback. DT positive is very conservative because you are basically staking your reputation to vouch for someone, or risking the reputation of your judgment for not much gain. Moreso adding someone to DT2 because then you are staking your judgment on them not only not to scam, but on their judgment of others not to scam. It's just much easier and safer not to, and their isn't much upside. I disagree. DT should be a list of people who are unlikely to scam others. Nothing else. It should not be used as some "ultimately trusted people" -list, as that's as real as unicorns. There have been plenty of scammers in DT. And I can tell you that scammers know their way in to that list, no matter how curated or small you want to keep it. So DT, if it has to exist, should merely act as a list of people unlikely to scam others. People should in general form their own trust networks, so I find the whole DT list largely unneeded. Negatives are 99.9% provable fact and positives are a judgement call, the way feedback is used. Untrue. Negatives are largely based on pure opinions and incompetence. E.g. look at my trust rating received from SaltySpitoon (a DT1 member). He rated me red, because I did a vendor bid on my auction ~3 years ago. I had not stated that the auction was without reserve, as it was not without reserve. (E.g. the U.S. law states that auctions are by default with reserve and all no reserve is a special rule.) So I did this vendor bid, which is a sort of a concealed reserve price. SaltySpitoon is lying that I didn't honor the auction. I didn't back then know about the Bitcointalk auction standard, which is quite vague and not specified anywhere, but is something one just has to know. I didn't know back then that vendor bids are not cool in here. They're very commonly done in my country. In any case, vendor bids are not scamming, unethical or anything like that. So this rating by SaltySpitoon is wrecking my trust score and is listed in "trusted rating" page for all the people who trust DT, and it's based on SaltySpitoon's incompetent opinion. It's unfair, unjust and shows incredibly bad judgement, but there's nothing anyone can do about it except theymos. Nobody will go against a DT1 member publicly, Believe me, cliques and what not exist around DT. Scambusters and negative tags are very beneficial to the community to warn others and stop bad actors while positives are only good for what?, saving some traders some escrow fees and slight complexity in trading? Positives don't really help a person much while negatives have a massive impact. Agree. And when negatives are used poorly, like they are... There have been various cases where DT members are misusing or abusing the system to boost their ego or whatever. In even more cases, the negative and positive ratings are given without proper basis. E.g. Vod rated me because I told him privately that I don't specifically trust him. Ego got hurt and shows. @eddie, I don’t like that sort of system as we have now. I don’t think scam busters should be on dt merely for being scam busters and it’s why quite a few have gone on to scam and also why mdayonliner got negative trust too. A system in which verifiable trades get chives positive trust in return, is as I see it, a much better system. Call me old fashioned, I like people to only give trust when they’ve had something at stake and it’s paid off. This also highlights one of the issues about DT: people have very different views about what it should be. And people in DT positions have different views too, and use them according to their own view. This makes it a bad thing. DT list should be removed completely. Right now it's acting as a "elite", "trusted people" list while that's only the perception of it. Reality may be totally different. There have been very nasty scammers on the DT list, even on DT1. It took a long time until the worst ones got removed. There are still untrustworthy people who do their shit only occasionally, so they are not removed. My point is that it's not a list I would suggest trusting. It has objectively not worked very well at protecting big scams from happening. It has and is only working to protect newbies from getting scammed in some ridiculous way. So it should be used for that purpose only. Best would be to remove the DT completely -- it would encourage people to make their own lists just like trust networks are supposed to work. Of course there's some steep curve in the beginning, but isn't there always? Also, DT1's who have added people to DT2 may have been completely inactive for years, so who will remove them? Curating is not working properly and it's in the hands of a couple people. Not good. I would guess many of the current DT-members were much less than 4 years old when they were added, which would mean getting on DT is harder now than it was 4 years ago. Of course it doesn't help that so many new users are spammers, but the number of decent posters went up too when Bitcoin gained popularity. I asked to be included in the DT list. I've been here for years, and around the scene for years. I've also traded a lot, and so on. I've also acted as "a judge" on various cases as I've moderated e.g. Bitcoin IRC channels for years. I received mainly three kinds of responses from DT members: 1) Adding anyone who has a negative from some other DT is not possible without insane drama. This is where DT has evolved. There are tons of drama always around and obviously some people (DT1) get the heat. 2) I don't post enough positive or negative feedbacks. (one of this came from someone who is a lot less active regarding feedbacks than me, so I wonder this a little...) 3) I've rated positively someone they don't like. (and the person I have rated positively has dozens of positive ratings from various other people too, also from people on DT) Some possibilities which have come to my mind: Force custom lists Display an annoying message instead of a trust score next to every post until the person sets a custom list with the assistance of the set initial trust (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;suggest) page. Pros: - No remnant of top-down decision-making remains. Cons: - Newbies will often choose poorly, especially since the suggested list is possibly manipulable. - I've been thinking that I might want to enable trust for non-users, and that'd be impossible with this. I think this is the best option. They will anyway rely on using DT (with the current system) and this is a step forward where there's no real DT, but still something (individual) that acts as such. Also new users would need to pick the users themselves, so they'd acknowledge it at that very point that they have chosen those "trusted" users themselves, and nobody did it for them. If you have specific suggestions for alterations to the current DT1 list, then make a topic about it. I think that the system is structurally flawed as it is now, though. Here's mine: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5081293.new#new (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5081293.new#new) Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Cashi on December 07, 2018, 02:40:46 AM Improving the DT system is a good idea, but we should consider the consequences if we remove someone from DT or make a weak system changing every month. Don't forget about the bounty cheaters which will see a chance of getting their account rid of a red tag. When Lauda was removed from DT2 many tagged accounts were untagged. Imagine if some more DT2 are removed, the spam would go to moon ::)
Adding more members to DT1 or DT2 is inevitable in my opinion. There are so many accounts not tagged yet for bounty abuse although the proof is obvious. The few DT members tagging them are too busy and it's just unfair if most of the recently reported cheaters can still escape. I provided a proof of hacked or sold accounts abusing bounties (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5055472) and they are still not tagged. There are so many reports not reviewed. If all the cheaters will be tagged the spam would be reduced a lot. Therefore I would increase the DT1 members up to 30 by adding trustworthy DT2 members. This will keep the existing ratings intact and fix some issues we have right now (not enough DT to tag already reported cheaters). Edit: @OP, the link to dserrano5 is wrong, correct version is here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=17768 Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: r1s2g3 on December 07, 2018, 08:23:17 AM Best way is to use your own brain and judgement while dealing with others and you do not need any custom list/forum supplied list/ or more people in DT.
Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Findingnemo on December 07, 2018, 08:40:47 AM Lot of cheaters aren't getting tagged due to unavailability of DT members on this forum and only few members were constantly finding cheaters and negging them so we need to add more DT members for the system to work with full potential I believe.
Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: coinlocket$ on December 07, 2018, 09:45:00 AM I think the idea of the current DT system is working in a good way the only problem is that is the that the list of Dt1 is stopped at 5 years ago and the list dt2 is stopped a couple of years ago.
Maybe you just have to expand this list and add a couple of trusted people to the list dt1 (without shady past) and a dozen active people to the list dt2. Also, you could add to the list dt2 some people who "are taking care of the forum" and who punish the people who are abusing the forum and not only people who managing the marketplace. Or creating a new DT2 rank with any name and doing this kind of work, it's unpleasant to see that a large part of people here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2544574.new#new and here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4695194.msg42378900#msg42378900 are not tagged for abusing since a year, since almost nobody of DT cares about them. Finally, I do not believe that a dynamic dt1 is a great idea, in the end it could be a goot trust network, but for the first months we would have trustworth people with negative rep for revenge and vice versa scammers with positive rep. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Vod on December 07, 2018, 06:16:02 PM Default Trust has done a pretty good job of holding scammers at bay.
I believe without the system, the amount of scams would be several times higher. I'm OK with pushing custom lists (I don't use them) but removing the trust system completely would be a mistake of epic proportions. People would run ponzis, promote paypal, bid on their own auctions, post fake facts, etc. etc. Personally I have tagged over 1,300! untrustworthy people. My actions have led to the majority of scammers thinking twice about pulling a common scam. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: yahoo62278 on December 07, 2018, 11:42:30 PM I think the idea of the current DT system is working in a good way the only problem is that is the that the list of Dt1 is stopped at 5 years ago and the list dt2 is stopped a couple of years ago. The current dt2 list did not stop 2 years ago. Marlboroza and the pharmacist were recently added within the last 6 months. Maybe you just have to expand this list and add a couple of trusted people to the list dt1 (without shady past) and a dozen active people to the list dt2. Also, you could add to the list dt2 some people who "are taking care of the forum" and who punish the people who are abusing the forum and not only people who managing the marketplace. Or creating a new DT2 rank with any name and doing this kind of work, it's unpleasant to see that a large part of people here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2544574.new#new and here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4695194.msg42378900#msg42378900 are not tagged for abusing since a year, since almost nobody of DT cares about them. Finally, I do not believe that a dynamic dt1 is a great idea, in the end it could be a goot trust network, but for the first months we would have trustworth people with negative rep for revenge and vice versa scammers with positive rep. Regardless, it does feel like a good ol boys club at times and more people need to be added to dt1 so the current lists can increase and more users have a valuable opinion as far as who is or who isnt a scammer. Right now with all the scam icos going around, you can never have enough eyes protecting the community. Doesnt matter what is done, some people will be pissed off while some will obviously be pleased. There will always be users who just do not get along. Only thing I would like to see is people consider the drama train that will arise when deciding on whom to add to either list. Choose users who can have an unbiased opinion and help the forum vs assholes who will go on a power trip. There really is no reason to create a new list every month or whatnot. The users that made dt1 have earned that prestige. They have proven they belong on the list. I do agree however that inactives or scammers should be immediately removed. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Quickseller on December 08, 2018, 03:49:10 AM I tried using my own custom trust list, but was fairly quick to find problems with trust ratings within my trust network, and frequently had to research why certain people whose ratings I didn't agree with was in my trust network, and excluding many who either gave many ratings I disagreed with, or who included many people who I didn't want in my trust network.
I suspect the root cause reason why so many do not use custom trust lists is because so many people are bad at creating maintaining a custom list, and cannot be bothered to keep it updated. It only takes a small number of people whose ratings/list is 'trusted' that maintains a bad trust list to cause problems in the entire trust network. I want to think about this topic some more....more to come on this subject Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: The Cryptovator on December 08, 2018, 01:39:08 PM I don't like how the current system is working at all. Trust system is working fine, but DT list should refresh. I have made a thread about inactive DT member list, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5025480.msg45474059#msg45474059 . There are lots if DT inactive. Especially on DT1. So if DT1 is inactive who will add new DT2? And I think there is more people's who deserve DT member's. I think list has not updated from long time. I believe list need to refresh. More DT could be add due many are inactive.I'm not a fan of voting, You can get suggestion from existing DT member's if you don't trust on voting. However current trust system should be continue due to prevent scam from forum. Just need improve with time. I think it's possible upgrade few members from DT2 to DT1 so DT1 could expand thier trust network.Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: jackg on December 08, 2018, 02:37:59 PM I sense cryptocvators idea is essentially what theymos has already shunned (making dt3 viewable like 1 and 2 are).
If it goes ahead, a lot of moderation of inaccurate forefinger ,Igbo be required as dt3 members might have given some negs where a dt2 would have given a neutral for example. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: eddie13 on December 08, 2018, 05:01:53 PM I don't like how the current system is working at all. I don't mind the current DT system however centralized it may be because I trust and have great respect for the vast majority of those currently enlisted. I think they check eachother pretty well also when their are disagreements everyone comes together to make sense of the situation, even non-DT have a voice, and usually everyone steps away with continuing mutual respect. Everyone misunderstands or is wrong sometimes. But, if you really don't like it for being a "top down" structure I think you could scrap the appointed positions of power part and rather use an algorithm to calculate the weight of everyones sent feedback to be summed to each accounts final trust score. Something like.. [(Activity/1000)Rank](Trust/20) = Weight of left feedback Variables for "Rank" could be something like Legendary=1 Hero=0.75 Sr.=0.5 Full=0.25 with all lower ranks zero and "Trust" would be the feedback leavers current trust score. If the solution is negative (negative summed trust) weight=0 (Abuse resistance) For a 900 activity hero with a trust score of 50 leaving a positive trust [(900/1000)0.75](50/20)=1.6875 round to 2 decimals would give the feedback receiver +1.69 to their trust score. For a (very trusted old member) legendary with 2000 activity and 200 trust score giving a positive [(2000/1000)1](200/20)= 20 would leave +20 So the more established and trusted a member is, the harder their trust hits (more weight), and you would have to be atleast a full member, with net positive trust, for your feedback to carry any weight at all. A persons Trust score would be the sum of all received feedback. Negative left feedback would just be negative in the sum and subtract from the final score with equal weight. In the risked BTC column you could give the option to enter a modifier from 0 to 1 so a person could reduce the weight of their feedback if they want. He could type in "1.25 #0.5" so the legendary example above could leave only +10, or type "1.25 #0.1" to leave only +2. (for 1.25 risked BTC example) [(Activity/1000)Rank](Trust/20)(user modifier) So a person could tone down the weight of the feedback they leave if they feel it is appropriate so they wouldn't have to be so conservative with every feedback they leave which is the case now. Maybe leave it continually editable for later changes. If you wanted to keep the Time part you could add [(Activity/1000)Rank](Trust/20)(Time)(user modifier) where each month equals 0.1 maxing out in 10 months as 1 so it would grow throughout 10 months to its full strength. I'm no mathematician and I just chose my numbers to try to get a reasonably ranged result. I don't much like to make suggestions because I am just a nobody and not a genius but I think a system like this would be cool to see. I don't think this should be done but rather should be considered and brainstormed upon unless their are serious flaws in my logic I am not seeing. I would probably just leave it alone because it is a lot better than nothing. Maybe an algorithmic system like this could be implemented in parallel with the current system at first so the old system doesn't have to get completely scrapped while working out the bugs and adjusting to the new system. I don't consider this "a suggestion for alteration to the current DT1 list" so won't make an OP about it. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Vod on December 08, 2018, 06:24:41 PM Variables for "Rank" could be something like Legendary=1 Hero=0.75 Sr.=0.5 Full=0.25 with all lower ranks zero and "Trust" would be the feedback leavers current trust score. If the solution is negative (negative summed trust) weight=0 (Abuse resistance) This forum stands out by not tying a person's trustworthiness to how often they post. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: coinlocket$ on December 10, 2018, 10:39:21 AM ~ I do agree however that inactives or scammers should be immediately removed. In the end, I agree with what you say and I don't think we need to change the DT system (but they can do, is not a big deal to me if it will be a better version of this one), we just need to add few DT1 and some DT2 with them. I think that with only adding very active people it can change the forum in a better place. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Anduck on December 19, 2018, 06:01:19 PM Any updates regarding this?
Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: LoyceV on December 19, 2018, 10:30:20 PM Any updates regarding this? There's this suggestion:With the introduction of reporting badges on the horizon we should consider introducing badges for other things. Most importantly I think looking at the possibly of rewarding a badge for setting a custom trust list. The trust system is wholeheartedly broken and theymos has even said himself its not working as intended. We are not sure of the positive effects that badges bring at the moment. But this is why reporting statistics should be released before the implementation of the badges and then after an initial period (3 months) we should look to see if this has increased the number of reports being made. I think it's a very good idea! A shiny badge under a name will be something others notice, and if clicking it brings you to your trust settings, more users can be encouraged to make their own list.(I haven't made my own list yet, because I want to be able to see trust the way most users see it) Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: suchmoon on December 19, 2018, 11:54:54 PM Or we could airdrop
Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Anduck on December 20, 2018, 12:02:29 AM I think it's a very good idea! A shiny badge under a name will be something others notice, and if clicking it brings you to your trust settings, more users can be encouraged to make their own list. (I haven't made my own list yet, because I want to be able to see trust the way most users see it) I agree. The link should lead to that 'suggest' page, so the custom list would really get made. Or we could airdrop Actually not even that bad idea, as I am sure it would work quite nicely. But it's a bit silly... no real need for new shitcoins & it would cause loads of problems for the future to have such a bag to carry. I think that force is the best way. Just remove DT and people have no other choice than to use the 'suggest' page to make their trust list. A "personal DT" would be much better, because users would know that the list is formed by their own choices, by their hand-picked users. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: coinlocket$ on December 25, 2018, 09:45:05 PM I'm starting to have a big number of feedback sent, does it have a limit in numbers?
Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Vod on December 25, 2018, 11:10:20 PM I'm starting to have a big number of feedback sent, does it have a limit in numbers? You have just over 500 neg trust sent. The highest person is The Pharmacist, with almost 2,500. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: The Sceptical Chymist on December 26, 2018, 09:20:01 AM You have just over 500 neg trust sent. The highest person is The Pharmacist, with almost 2,500. So I guess that makes me the alpha negger on bitcointalk--that actually surprises me, because this is a statistic that I've never even thought about before. If you'd asked me to guess who'd given out the most negs, I would have said either you or Lauda. Interesting.If I'm not mistaken, I think most of the red trust I've given out has been for account selling or buying, so this just goes to show how bad that particular problem is on the forum. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: LoyceV on December 26, 2018, 11:03:06 AM I'm starting to have a big number of feedback sent, does it have a limit in numbers? If I remember correctly, there used to be problems loading the trust page if it was too big. That's why the trust page no longer shows the status of the tagged/tagging user.Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Quickseller on December 27, 2018, 01:56:16 AM I'm starting to have a big number of feedback sent, does it have a limit in numbers? If I remember correctly, there used to be problems loading the trust page if it was too big. That's why the trust page no longer shows the status of the tagged/tagging user.I don’t necessarily think it is a good thing to have sent a lot of negative ratings. Above all, it is important to have accurate ratings, including those that meet the definition of the description of the type of rating you are giving and that third parties are not in disagreement with. Another useful metric would include the number of people that openly dispute your ratings, although it should be acknowledged that some people will simply be unreasonable and will refuse to accept their behavior indicates they are either a scammer or will try to scam in the future. Also, uncovering a difficult to detect scam that has gone unnoticed by others is better than tagging many low hanging fruits and/or tagging after checking others’ work. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: raveron on December 27, 2018, 11:31:15 AM I am totally schoked. I have never imagine that a forum can have such a fucked up trust system.
Maybe because it is so big and going for such a long time? Maybe because corruption and image is more important? This is bad, nice for sharing this info! You have some merit from me Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: coinlocket$ on December 29, 2018, 07:46:57 PM I'm starting to think that we need an additional system that works in parallel with the actual system, I've reported over 600 accounts for abusing from newbies to legendary, only 20 has been tagged from
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4695194.msg42378900#msg42378900 Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: raveron on December 29, 2018, 08:38:34 PM I'm starting to think that we need an additional system that works in parallel with the actual system, I've reported over 600 accounts for abusing from newbies to legendary, only 20 has been tagged from https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4695194.msg42378900#msg42378900 Not really, I think what we should do is stop tagging for usefull reasons. That might be a first. Second, having a DT system based on activity and trading Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Vod on December 29, 2018, 09:26:59 PM I am totally schoked. I have never imagine that a forum can have such a fucked up trust system. It worked well in your case - prevented you from scamming an innocent user. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: raveron on December 29, 2018, 09:36:25 PM I am totally schoked. I have never imagine that a forum can have such a fucked up trust system. It worked well in your case - prevented you from scamming an innocent user. Yes, I am totally agree with you. You're at this moment a reason why I think the system is wrong. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Vod on December 29, 2018, 10:07:50 PM I am totally schoked. I have never imagine that a forum can have such a fucked up trust system. It worked well in your case - prevented you from scamming an innocent user. Yes, I am totally agree with you. You're at this moment a reason why I think the system is wrong. Ok, so you would prefer a system where new users could not be prevented from scamming? Do you think that would help the forum community, or just the scammers? Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: raveron on December 29, 2018, 10:18:18 PM I am totally schoked. I have never imagine that a forum can have such a fucked up trust system. It worked well in your case - prevented you from scamming an innocent user. Yes, I am totally agree with you. You're at this moment a reason why I think the system is wrong. Ok, so you would prefer a system where new users could not be prevented from scamming? Do you think that would help the forum community, or just the scammers? Oh no, obviously not. God fuck the scammers, but where is the case of scamming with a collateral? A collateral may not be valid for you, it might be valid to someone else. I just saw you red trusted someone willing to have as Collateral CRGO coin. This is so stupid and wrong, I have no idea if you are a person that understands crypto or someone with a lot of free time Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Vod on December 29, 2018, 10:21:29 PM Oh no, obviously not. God fuck the scammers, but where is the case of scamming with a collateral? A collateral may not be valid for you, it might be valid to someone else. My definition of collateral is pretty clear. Collateral is something that can easily be resold to cover the loan value plus interest (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=577765.msg6311902#msg6311902) Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: The Sceptical Chymist on December 29, 2018, 10:38:52 PM A collateral may not be valid for you, it might be valid to someone else. Here's the problem: it would be a scammer's tactic to ask for a loan with a shitcoin or token that he knows can't be sold and therefore is worthless for him to hold. In your lending thread, it looked exactly like you were just waiting for a sucker to take the bait. People were explaining to you that your token might be unsalable, and you basically kept responding "yeah well, everyone can make up their own mind". This forum is rife with examples of loan scamming where people put up either worthless collateral or collateral that they're simultaneously trying to sell. That's why you got tagged. However, I'm not calling you a scammer outright, just pointing out that there were huge red flags in your lending thread. Maybe you have too much faith in the future of GRVS, and maybe you intended to just pay back the loan honestly. Who knows? Vod called it as he saw it, and while it might seem pretty strict of him to tag you, there isn't much you can do about it unless you work out an arrangement with him. Vod is reasonable, but you have to understand that he's seen so many scams and attempted scams here that his position is to take no chances, especially with relative newbies. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: mikeywith on December 29, 2018, 11:06:15 PM there is a good chance that you are an honest person and you were actually going to repay the loan, but honestly using a shitcoin that is not even on CMC as a collateral is as bad as going to the pawn shop with your underwear as a collateral, while you may think it worth a lot, to most people it's useless and have 0 value. and given the amount of scammers around, the smallest thing you do puts you on the scammers side. so before you try to buy/sell/lend/load you need to think 10 times before you become a scam suspect. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: raveron on December 29, 2018, 11:11:55 PM Hmm very interesting point of view..I can say that at that moment I had faith in grvs, for now I still have as things are changing for good again. Scammers scammers scammers, this doesn't help, this makes people to scam. You have to stop saying this around all time because this is what creates. Whatsoever, you can look at logs, I have closed the thread before receiving any kind of trust feedback from the people, it was not my intent at all to care at least about scaming. I can't take serious someone like the description licking boobs, even if I am a very big fan of family guy. More or less, many things as this has to be changed soon enough
Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: suchmoon on December 30, 2018, 12:27:08 AM Scammers scammers scammers, this doesn't help, this makes people to scam. It doesn't work that way. Look at Vod's received feedback: https://meem.link/i/a/kJxXGg.jpg Edited 2020-11-30 to fix a broken image Has it made him scam? Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: mikeywith on December 30, 2018, 12:42:09 AM I can't take serious someone like the description licking boobs who doesn't like licking boobs ? ??? i sometimes's stop and stare at that profile picture, it actually has a tongue moving. ;D . anyway if you plan to trade again on the forum, just be extra careful, offer a valid collateral if you need a loan. Good luck. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: raveron on December 30, 2018, 01:23:48 AM @suchmoon, that's different, it's a mental problem there.
@mikeywith I don't like boobs, I like nipples as fact lol Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: fonship on December 31, 2018, 11:13:54 PM Well, this is a feature which majority don't care and understand. I think very less attention given to this topic.
Even after years, I don't understand how this trust system works. I think we need more transparency in this. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: S_Therapist on January 01, 2019, 03:14:41 AM Even after years, I don't understand how this trust system works. I have tried my best to explain both the trust system and DT. Hope you will find it worthy. Feel free to ask question. I will happily try to help you understanding the system.I think we need more transparency in this. [Explained] How Trust Score is calculated (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5069647.msg47920887#msg47920887) and [Explained] How DT system works (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5072734.msg48081277#msg48081277) Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: fonship on January 04, 2019, 05:33:51 AM I went through both link, simple and very good explanation. Thank you for that. Now I don't understand why despite that I have 4 ratings, they are not showing up on my profile? Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: TryNinja on January 04, 2019, 05:35:09 AM I went through both link, simple and very good explanation. Thank you for that. Because they are coming from untrusted users (from the default trust point of view). Read the second thread again (How DT system works).Now I don't understand why despite that I have 4 ratings, they are not showing up on my profile? Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: S_Therapist on January 04, 2019, 01:17:36 PM I went through both link, simple and very good explanation. Thank you for that. TryNinja has already said that they are from untrusted networks. Now, if you go to your trust setting and include the name of those persons from whom you got feedback, you can see those in your profile. No one else will see as long as they will also be included in their trust list. For example, if I add sparkweb (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=995726) in my trust list, I will see the feedback. I have just added sparkweb in my trust list for showing you.Now I don't understand why despite that I have 4 ratings, they are not showing up on my profile? https://i.ibb.co/KycFMLr/Capture.png Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: fonship on January 06, 2019, 06:21:45 AM Now this makes sense. Got it now.
So until I get trust from some very big level it won't be visible enough. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: S_Therapist on January 06, 2019, 06:45:50 AM Now this makes sense. Got it now. There is nothing called big level although we have some members called DT. If everyone uses a custom trust list, the DT member will not be big level anymore. If you have included someone in your trust list, you will be able to see his feedback to other's profile or in your profile.So until I get trust from some very big level it won't be visible enough. I think you should again read the two threads earlier I suggested (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5080581.msg48990363#msg48990363) and try to understand how it works. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: fonship on January 07, 2019, 01:22:03 AM Yeah I have read it.
Problem is majority users are not aware of how to use trust system and merit system So mostly for trust, its big level what i was referring to is having trust from one DT person, bcoz that will be visible to everyone. I think forum moderators can see how many poeple have custom trust setting, i assumption is that they should be very very few. May be BT should start some area to educate or some weekly email to users with these details, or whoever sign-up few should get somehow to use this platform effectively. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: S_Therapist on January 07, 2019, 02:24:56 AM Yeah I have read it. It's true that custom trust list is used by only a few people. I personally am not using custom list because I trust most of the DT people and I want to see feedback from them by default.Problem is majority users are not aware of how to use trust system and merit system So mostly for trust, its big level what i was referring to is having trust from one DT person, bcoz that will be visible to everyone. I think forum moderators can see how many poeple have custom trust setting, i assumption is that they should be very very few. May be BT should start some area to educate or some weekly email to users with these details, or whoever sign-up few should get somehow to use this platform effectively. Theymos is promoting/encouraging people to use custom trust list by the forum ads slot. Check the 60th number text in factoid slots (https://bitcointalk.org/adrotate.php?adinfo). Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: yahoo62278 on January 07, 2019, 04:27:23 AM Now this makes sense. Got it now. So until I get trust from some very big level it won't be visible enough. Trust score may not increase when you get feedbacks from users who are not DT, but it is still good to receive positive feedbacks from those users. Users read your feedbacks(Most should anyways) and get a sense of how reliable you are to make trades with, hire, or trust period. Another thing, when you leave feedback on others try to make sure to include a reference link so that the action or transaction has merit and cannot be viewed as a fake feedback. Hopefully others that leave you feedback do the same. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: LoyceV on January 07, 2019, 07:12:45 AM I think forum moderators can see how many poeple have custom trust setting, i assumption is that they should be very very few. Trust is public, you can see it too:https://bitcointalk.org/trust.txt.xz I count 3890 users with a custom trust list:I made it so that'll update every Saturday at 02:52 UTC. -> is "trusts", and -/> is "excludes". Only people with at least 1 post are included. If someone has never touched their trust list, then their trust in DefaultTrust is not shown. Code: theymos Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Anduck on January 07, 2019, 12:07:51 PM I count 3890 users with a custom trust list This is very bad, worse then I thought. DT needs to go, so people can finally start using the trust system as it's intended. Either completely remove DT and start healing trust system slowly, or dilute DT which encourages people to make their own lists. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: OgNasty on January 08, 2019, 12:33:41 AM I count 3890 users with a custom trust list This is very bad, worse then I thought. DT needs to go, so people can finally start using the trust system as it's intended. Either completely remove DT and start healing trust system slowly, or dilute DT which encourages people to make their own lists. That list also includes people who have Default Trust included on their trust lists. It is actually a good sign and shows that thousands of people are augmenting DT with their own alterations as advised. I'd disagree with your interpretation and say this is better than I'd thought. I wonder what sort of growth is happening with users augmenting their lists? Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: marlboroza on January 08, 2019, 01:59:24 AM This is very bad, worse then I thought. DT needs to go, so people can finally start using the trust system as it's intended. Either completely remove DT and start healing trust system slowly, or dilute DT which encourages people to make their own lists. DT should be removed. This is one of the reasons why DT should be removed completely. The problem is that DT exists. Just remove DT https://i.imgur.com/mylfpg8.png :D ~ Can you exclude accounts who have DT in their trust network and make a list of accounts with only custom list? Just to see how many people have removed DT from the list. How can I see someone's trust list without including them to my trust list? Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: S_Therapist on January 08, 2019, 02:19:35 AM How can I see someone's trust list without including them to my trust list? It's not possible. Don't know what can you get by digging here- https://bitcointalk.org/trust.txt.xz (I never tried)I got a same kinda thread from 2015 and theymos has shared this link only. Here you go- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1175364.0 Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Anduck on January 08, 2019, 02:21:43 AM I count 3890 users with a custom trust list This is very bad, worse then I thought. DT needs to go, so people can finally start using the trust system as it's intended. Either completely remove DT and start healing trust system slowly, or dilute DT which encourages people to make their own lists. That list also includes people who have Default Trust included on their trust lists. It is actually a good sign and shows that thousands of people are augmenting DT with their own alterations as advised. I'd disagree with your interpretation and say this is better than I'd thought. I wonder what sort of growth is happening with users augmenting their lists? I have DT in my trust list, and I use custom trust list, and I am heavily against DT. Fact is that a really really small portion of forum users have a custom trust list. Quite small amount of users know about the trust system in the first place, but even when that is so, 4000 users having customized their trust list means that users aware of the trust system are clearly not customizing their trust lists. The heaviest reason to include DT in the customized list is that there's no real reason to remove it as it was there by default. Another reason is that people want to have some sort of overview about what the view is for most of the users. People should use custom lists and they should be encouraged and incentivized to do so. There should not be a structure like DT as it skews the whole trust system. Of course people who get something out of it tend to not find any reasons to object it, that's largely human nature. It's exactly the same thing as can be seen in the politics, but maybe by acknowledging it we can be better than that? DT list is an anomaly in the trust system/network. Such should not exist, because eventually it builds up to be like any other top-down hierarchy as the time passes. I'm happy to see that the one (also being the only one) who can truly change this DT thing doesn't like how it works either. I am against DT and I also have DT on my custom trust list. It appears that you don't get why it is so. Maybe I or others can help you out? Feel free to PM me. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: cryptohunter on January 08, 2019, 02:34:02 AM I count 3890 users with a custom trust list This is very bad, worse then I thought. DT needs to go, so people can finally start using the trust system as it's intended. Either completely remove DT and start healing trust system slowly, or dilute DT which encourages people to make their own lists. That list also includes people who have Default Trust included on their trust lists. It is actually a good sign and shows that thousands of people are augmenting DT with their own alterations as advised. I'd disagree with your interpretation and say this is better than I'd thought. I wonder what sort of growth is happening with users augmenting their lists? I have DT in my trust list, and I use custom trust list, and I am heavily against DT. Fact is that a really really small portion of forum users have a custom trust list. Quite small amount of users know about the trust system in the first place, but even when that is so, 4000 users having customized their trust list means that users aware of the trust system are clearly not customizing their trust lists. The heaviest reason to include DT in the customized list is that there's no real reason to remove it as it was there by default. Another reason is that people want to have some sort of overview about what the view is for most of the users. People should use custom lists and they should be encouraged and incentivized to do so. There should not be a structure like DT as it skews the whole trust system. Of course people who get something out of it tend to not find any reasons to object it, that's largely human nature. It's exactly the same thing as can be seen in the politics, but maybe by acknowledging it we can be better than that? DT list is an anomaly in the trust system/network. Such should not exist, because eventually it builds up to be like any other top-down hierarchy as the time passes. I'm happy to see that the one (also being the only one) who can truly change this DT thing doesn't like how it works either. The problem with presenting such FACTS in meta is that you are sadly relating this information to 1. people who are already fully aware of this 2. People who are deriving power/advantage from the systems operating in this way. The REAL members who are likely in their ANN threads supporting their projects or on the btc discussion boards likely do not know about meta. They will only find out about it when they get hacked or something. DT and MERIT need either to be tightened up and not left open and completely subjective to the point of your like or dislike of LEMONS being responsible for you losing your ability to PAID2POST or trade. Or they need to be abolished. Need strict clear criteria for both systems. Punishment/removal from position for not meeting that criteria. Enforcing this criteria would not even be hard. Just produce the criteria and these system controllers will follow it or they will be booted out. No more voting your mates in to collude with you. There is no colluding. There is a mandate. There is criteria set. Follow it or you are gone. Why will they follow the mandate and criteria set? because they like the power. I have no issue with authority or people having power so long as that power is fairly applied to all members in a manner we all understand. Let them have some power. I mean they are likely to have been bullied and dominated in RL. So on the internets let them have some power for a change. I think everyone should sample different ends of the spectrum in all things. You will then see red trust you won't have to read to see if they like LEMONS. You will know they have demonstrated behaviour that REALLY will mean they are likely to scam you. Of course if they were stealing LEMONS then that is something you need to watch out for. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Anduck on January 08, 2019, 03:10:12 AM That list also includes people who have Default Trust included on their trust lists. There's no data about that. I parsed the list. https://anduck.net/files/bct_trustlists.txt (https://anduck.net/files/bct_trustlists.txt) shows some additional data, gathered from the https://bitcointalk.org/trust.txt.xz file. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: OgNasty on January 08, 2019, 03:51:48 AM I am against DT and I also have DT on my custom trust list. Yes, you have become one of DT's biggest critics despite not having an understanding of why it exists, yet you still include it on your list. ::) That means you are a hypocrite & DT has value even to it's biggest critics. I don't think you're making the point you're trying to make. https://heatherclemenceau.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/inigo_montoya.jpeg Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: LoyceV on January 08, 2019, 07:14:22 AM Can you exclude accounts who have DT in their trust network and make a list of accounts with only custom list? Just to see how many people have removed DT from the list. I can't, the data dump doesn't show "DefaultTrust", only individual usernames.Quote How can I see someone's trust list without including them to my trust list? See https://bitcointalk.org/trust.txt.xz, or for the uncompressed version from 3 days ago: https://pastebin.com/3CiX1T9pIt may be interesting to see the total number of entries: 22,605. That means just a few entries per user on average, which is far from enough to replace the DT-system. People should use custom lists and they should be encouraged and incentivized to do so. Encourage them: drop a link to Trust settings (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust) once in a while :)Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Lauda on January 08, 2019, 09:03:29 AM I count 3890 users with a custom trust list: That's rather surprisingly low. Thanks for parsing that, I've always wondered how many people used custom lists!Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: marlboroza on January 08, 2019, 12:05:51 PM Quote How can I see someone's trust list without including them to my trust list? See https://bitcointalk.org/trust.txt.xz, or for the uncompressed version from 3 days ago: https://pastebin.com/3CiX1T9pIt may be interesting to see the total number of entries: 22,605. That means just a few entries per user on average, which is far from enough to replace the DT-system. I completely agree. Some members are excluding accounts who negatively tagged them(I checked few accounts) and I noticed one member has removed DT from their network and excluded 3 DT members which one of them -ve them and two "neutralized" them with "begging for merit" comment. Eh, it all goes to statistics. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Anduck on January 08, 2019, 12:13:59 PM I am against DT and I also have DT on my custom trust list. Yes, you have become one of DT's biggest critics despite not having an understanding of why it exists, yet you still include it on your list. ::) That means you are a hypocrite & DT has value even to it's biggest critics. I don't think you're making the point you're trying to make. I think your understanding of why DT exists differs from the original intention. Care to tell us why you think DT was made in the first place? Do you have any idea why theymos made DT and now says he doesn't like at all how it works? I am not saying that DT is worthless. I am saying that it should be gone now. Obviously a top-down structure (once again) proves to not function as intended. Also, there are a high amount of critics of DT in the forums and most of them do not care about Meta section. I include DT, because it's such a strong anomaly that the whole trust system builds around it while that anomaly exists. This is why people who fully acknowledge the possibility to make a fully custom trust list, often do not do it. I also trust almost everyone in the DT1, so it's convenient for me to add DefaultTrust instead of writing all those users there myself. I can exclude DT1 users I do not trust. Now just figure out what means that DT is a strong anomaly in the trust system. People should use custom lists and they should be encouraged and incentivized to do so. Encourage them: drop a link to Trust settings (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust) once in a while :)That's not how a systematic problem gets fixed. Quote How can I see someone's trust list without including them to my trust list? See https://bitcointalk.org/trust.txt.xz, or for the uncompressed version from 3 days ago: https://pastebin.com/3CiX1T9pFor the parsed format, check out https://anduck.net/files/bct_trustlists.txt (https://anduck.net/files/bct_trustlists.txt). Also shows who includes/excludes who. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: The Sceptical Chymist on January 08, 2019, 12:32:22 PM I include DT, because it's such a strong anomaly that the whole trust system builds around it while that anomaly exists. This is why people who fully acknowledge the possibility to make a fully custom trust list, often do not do it. I sort of understand that statement, maybe 70% of it. The other 30% makes my head spin.Contrary to what a lot of other members think, I don't get off on being on DT2 and in fact it's a pain in the ass half the time. But since bitcointalk doesn't even moderate scammers, there needs to be some mechanism through which unwitting members can avoid being scammed and bad behavior can be punished, so to speak. I completely agree that the trust system is screwed up, and I think I've said that for as long as I've been here. If Theymos were to ditch the default trust system here tomorrow, and my feedback no longer carried as much weight, I'd be fine with that--as long as there was something in place to warn people about scammers, account dealers, identity thieves, trust abuse, extortion, etc. If you asked me how many DT2 members exist I couldn't tell you, but I know it's a lot. But there are only a handful of them active in handing out negs when they think someone deserves it. The rest are just members that some DT1 peeps trust. I'm assuming your gripe is because of Vod's feedback, and he's one of the active ones. So, if we eliminate the whole DT system right now without having a function that the active DT1/DT2 members serve, what would happen? All the cockroaches would have a field day, that's what. I hear lots of gripes but no suggestions about alternatives, and I'll admit I can't think of a different system that would be better either. I used to like the Scammer Tag thing that was in place when I was a lurker, but I do believe Theymos won't be going back to that. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Anduck on January 08, 2019, 12:58:02 PM Contrary to what a lot of other members think, I don't get off on being on DT2 and in fact it's a pain in the ass half the time. But since bitcointalk doesn't even moderate scammers, there needs to be some mechanism through which unwitting members can avoid being scammed and bad behavior can be punished, so to speak. Diluting the DT list (=adding more DT users) would reduce that PITA. I'm assuming your gripe is because of Vod's feedback, and he's one of the active ones. Vod threatened to red-rate me unless I changed my rating. Threatening to abuse DT position, and then abusing it, has nothing to do with one's activity. DT are currently free to abuse as long as they keep it mild and "legit", and sadly some DT members take advantage of that possibility. Be a friend of 100, bully 1, and those 101 will be sticking together and ignore the wrongdoing (or find some unreasonable excuse). It's exactly the same as in politics. Nobody would care if that structure was not pushed on people by default. Such a structure should not exist in trust system, as trust system should not have any means of top-down authority whatsoever. This sort of mixture of trust network and moderation, that the current trust system sadly is, is not excelling at being a trust system or functional moderation. So, if we eliminate the whole DT system right now without having a function that the active DT1/DT2 members serve, what would happen? All the cockroaches would have a field day, that's what. I hear lots of gripes but no suggestions about alternatives, and I'll admit I can't think of a different system that would be better either. I used to like the Scammer Tag thing that was in place when I was a lurker, but I do believe Theymos won't be going back to that. I think the "Force custom lists (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5080581.msg48500915#msg48500915)" idea by theymos is the best step forward. I think that a less dramatic change would be to dilute DT, add a lot more DT1 members, and see what happens. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: S_Therapist on January 08, 2019, 01:05:35 PM I think the "Force custom lists (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5080581.msg48500915#msg48500915)" idea by theymos is the best step forward. I think that a less dramatic change would be to dilute DT, add a lot more DT1 members, and see what happens. A forced custom list will solve the problem you are talking about but what will happen to the newbies? It has been mentioned by theymos too.What DT exactly is doing? Trying to save people like us a.k.a people who are not familiar with the forum. The majority of the persons will be harmed by either way if no DT is there, IMO. I guess account aged 1 year don't know how the trust system works, in some cases, even some Legendary too. How newbie will save them then? Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: The Sceptical Chymist on January 08, 2019, 01:18:57 PM Diluting the DT list (=adding more DT users) would reduce that PITA. Please explain to my pea brain how this would be so. Also, how would this affect the ability of DT members to warn others? Also also, I thought you wanted to get rid of the DT system altogether.Vod threatened Yes, I know you've said this ad nauseam across multiple threads. Sorry I brought it up.I think the "Force custom lists (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5080581.msg48500915#msg48500915)" idea by theymos is the best step forward. I think that a less dramatic change would be to dilute DT, add a lot more DT1 members, and see what happens. I did see that thread, and I'm not sure how forcing newbies to create a trust list would work, and they're the ones most likely to fall for scams around here, IMO. As to adding more DT1 members--did I miss how those would be chosen? Theymos would have to pick them, since he doesn't like the voting strategy, so it just seems like the DT system would end up being more of a clusterfuck than it already is, unless the DT1 members had to keep very strict trust lists. Diluting the DT2 pool seems like it would end up with more people with more power, more headaches, more internecine squabbles, more bitching about wrongly-left feedback, and more chaos.Or have I got my math wrong again? Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Anduck on January 08, 2019, 01:19:10 PM I think the "Force custom lists (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5080581.msg48500915#msg48500915)" idea by theymos is the best step forward. I think that a less dramatic change would be to dilute DT, add a lot more DT1 members, and see what happens. A forced custom list will solve the problem you are talking about but what will happen to the newbies? It has been mentioned by theymos too.What DT exactly is doing? Trying to save people like us a.k.a people who are not familiar with the forum. The majority of the persons will be harmed by either way if no DT is there, IMO. I guess account aged 1 year don't know how the trust system works, in some cases, even some Legendary too. How newbie will save them then? There have been scammers in DT. It amplifies their scamming power a lot when almost everyone sees them as "trusted" only because someone chose that e.g. a long time ago. Account sales happen too, which make this even worse. DT accounts are traded constantly, so how correct is that perceived trust given by DT then? Also, as I said before, scumbags will find their way on to any curated or however small list, if it gives them a position they want. It's how it works. We've seen this happening on DT, too. One solution, the one I mentioned in that quote, is to dilute DT list heavily. Also the sole purpose of it should be defined strictly. If such a default list structure exists, it should solely be a list of people unlikely to scam others, it should be nothing more, nothing less. This would then encourage people to make their own custom trust lists while also securing newbies from getting scammed. It's not for the forum staff / theymos to tell people who to trust. Giving an option to opt-out of that doesn't change this reality where DT has this power. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: S_Therapist on January 08, 2019, 01:29:54 PM There have been scammers in DT. It amplifies their scamming power a lot when almost everyone sees them as "trusted" only because someone chose that e.g. a long time ago. Account sales happen too, which make this even worse. DT accounts are traded constantly, so how correct is that perceived trust given by DT then? Also, as I said before, scumbags will find their way on to any curated or however small list, if it gives them a position they want. It's how it works. We've seen this happening on DT, too. You can call me a newbie as I have joined the forum earlier on October 4, 2018. But I didn't see what you have mentioned, maybe I have missed those since the forum is bigger than we think. But I didn't miss the chance to read all the thread related to Gleb Gamow/ YuTü.Co.in/ Phinnaeus Gage and I know suchmoon has paid for the account too just to prevent any kinda scam issue. I have mentioned it here because I read the history with a lot of interest but I didn't get anywhere what you have mentioned.Why don't you just post everything with a dedicated thread in reputation? I believe that will be worthy for sure. Everyone will see what is happening here in the name of DT. You should post the proof. Edit- Quote Go read the Reputation and Scam accusations boards. Dive deep into the history. Feel free to compose a list of all the DT'ers who scammed and also try to find out when they were removed from DT if at all. Would really appreciate having some links. Since you are an old member here, it will be pretty easier for you to link up.Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Anduck on January 08, 2019, 01:32:21 PM Diluting the DT list (=adding more DT users) would reduce that PITA. Please explain to my pea brain how this would be so. Also, how would this affect the ability of DT members to warn others? Also also, I thought you wanted to get rid of the DT system altogether.If there were more DT members, the chances that someone else had already tagged a scammer increase, etc. I assume that the "workload" for DT'ers is the source for the pain in your ass. Whoever trusts DT would still see your warnings as "trusted feedback". I'd prefer ditching DT completely. That doesn't mean that I couldn't suggest changes to DT. Vod threatened Yes, I know you've said this ad nauseam across multiple threads. Sorry I brought it up.It's an example of what sort of "mild, unpunishable" wrongdoings are done by DT members. I can find out many more. Often these things are discussed to the point where it's only frustrating to everyone, so maybe this fresh experiment is enough to get the point? I could bring up cases regarding or brought up by e.g. Deadterra, Lauda, mexxer-2, Lutpin, OgNasty, escrow.ms, etc. etc., but it would only end up like discussions regarding those cases ended before: in frustration, no changes (or small changes after insane amount of arguing), and wasted time. I think the "Force custom lists (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5080581.msg48500915#msg48500915)" idea by theymos is the best step forward. I think that a less dramatic change would be to dilute DT, add a lot more DT1 members, and see what happens. I did see that thread, and I'm not sure how forcing newbies to create a trust list would work, and they're the ones most likely to fall for scams around here, IMO. As to adding more DT1 members--did I miss how those would be chosen? Theymos would have to pick them, since he doesn't like the voting strategy, so it just seems like the DT system would end up being more of a clusterfuck than it already is, unless the DT1 members had to keep very strict trust lists. Diluting the DT2 pool seems like it would end up with more people with more power, more headaches, more internecine squabbles, more bitching about wrongly-left feedback, and more chaos.Or have I got my math wrong again? It could go as you describe, but I doubt it. I'd argue that more decentralization in the DT would end up in more balanced outcome. More people with more power would mean less power per single DT user. The current amount of power that DT'ers carry is way too much compared to what is needed to simply warn newbies about scammers. Why don't you just post everything with a dedicated thread in reputation? I believe that will be worthy for sure. Everyone will see what is happening here in the name of DT. You should post the proof. Go read the Reputation and Scam accusations boards. Dive deep into the history. Feel free to compose a list of all the DT'ers who scammed and also try to find out when they were removed from DT if at all. Would really appreciate having some links. Since you are an old member here, it will be pretty easier for you to link up. For example check out https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1995886.0 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1995886.0), https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1306301.0 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1306301.0) and https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1359877.0 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1359877.0) where a DT user scammed. There are loads and loads of cases there. It's not hard to find DT abuse (not just scams) in there. It just takes time to really go through this stuff. There are only like 60-70 pages in Reputation where this material mostly resides. Scam accusations board is the other one. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: LoyceMobile on January 08, 2019, 02:39:51 PM One solution, the one I mentioned in that quote, is to dilute DT list heavily. Also the sole purpose of it should be defined strictly. If such a default list structure exists, it should solely be a list of people unlikely to scam others, it should be nothing more, nothing less. I disagree: I want people with good judgement on DT. Not being a scammer isn't enough. Example: I don't think cryptohunter is a scammer, but he has terrible judgement.Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: cryptohunter on January 08, 2019, 03:00:52 PM One solution, the one I mentioned in that quote, is to dilute DT list heavily. Also the sole purpose of it should be defined strictly. If such a default list structure exists, it should solely be a list of people unlikely to scam others, it should be nothing more, nothing less. I disagree: I want people with good judgement on DT. Not being a scammer isn't enough. Example: I don't think cryptohunter is a scammer, but he had terrible judgement.Bring evidence now ................... I don't think you will. Where is my judgement terrible that makes me untrustworthy? Where as I can demonstrate that you do not have the capacity or critical reasoning required to be a merit source. I mean how can anyone be left to judge others posts who is observably suffering from a broken mind? Just from some of the statements you and other merit sources make you can tell that they are pretty much low functioning. If you want me to bring examples just ask and I will provide. Actually my entire post history from.. uncovering, fighting, damaging huge huge scams and fighting for fairer distribution (even though I would have gained much more from leaving it as it was) of huge projects only to be shouted down by a bunch of idiots who all later start complaining about how it went down and suggesting things I had presented to start with (bunch of fools). I help the very most weak where you and the pharmacist were trying to bully around and get banned and I know full well all of my actions will cost me probably red trust and merit withholding and could not give one shit because it just backs up my case that these systems needs to be tightened up or destroyed. Helping people with nothing become millionaires by helping to push forward only the projects that I see as filling in the missing pieces of the end to end fully decentralised or trustless arena we all want to see. Being asked to hold large amounts of coins for projects because they can trust me not to dump them like the dev did previously. Honestly I would ask you to bring forth one person on the entire board with more relevant credentials for global mod or dt. Fairness and honesty and robustness against caving against pressure against other system controllers are key here. Not that I ask for any positions here because I am certain that where there is still free speech even one person can make a huge difference without being given positions of power. If you can present one person with better proven judgement over these years... and as hard as all the scammers and loud mouth turn coats have scoured my closet for skeletons they find nothing. I have been told many times projects have financed people searching for anything to discredit me as their only hope for stopping my relentless slamming of their scams. They came up with NOTHING to demonstrate I committed any wrong doing. I don't even just mean the gang in meta i mean every scammer and scam project who have talked trash about me but never produced ANY evidence of any wrong doing at all. All you will find from the start is helping the weak, criticising huge scams and scammy distributional methods, pointing out and highlighting the biggest scam promoters and enablers, giving everyone fair chance of find the most profitable projects ever (that were not scams) freely and before they took off. Fighting for increased fairness and freedom for all. Yeah terrible judgement. You have done nothing like any of that you dumb fool.. you pull stats and also try to bully the weak from what I can see... that is it and get paid to spam it all over the place..and you criticise my judgement? You are a poster boy for why the merit system is broken I could not ask for a better example. I mean you have done nothing of note, your logic is a fail over and over and you have the most earned merit on this board. Anyway sorry to go off topic but since I am being named and accused of having judgement that makes me untrustworthy with no evidence I reserve the right to ask it is provided or it is observable he is talking nonsense. I can not wait for this bad judgement that would preclude me from a trust position (I never asked for dt or merit source ever anyway). Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Vod on January 08, 2019, 03:30:18 PM Vod threatened to red-rate me unless I changed my rating. I red rated you because you scammed. ::) Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Anduck on January 08, 2019, 03:34:41 PM Vod threatened to red-rate me unless I changed my rating. I red rated you because you scammed. ::) Don't lie. I decided what you did wasn't untrustworthy to me After this, you started power tripping when I provoked you. You illogically "misunderstood" me to reason your further wrongdoings and power tripping. Stop being dishonest. Here's the real reason for you red-rating me: I have made it neutral. You have made yours negative. Once of us will have to change it. :/ Which means that you gave me the option to 1) remove my rating to you or 2) be red-rated. I did not remove the rating, so you proceeded with option 2). Source: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3869593.msg37486761#msg37486761 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3869593.msg37486761#msg37486761) It's also bamboozling how you still haven't shown any acknowledgement of your illogical misunderstanding, even though it has been opened up to you various times. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: o_e_l_e_o on January 08, 2019, 03:49:14 PM I do think we could use more DT1 and, by extension, DT2 members, but we shouldn't be adding people just because we need more people. We should be adding people who would be an asset to the system, regardless of your feelings about the system in general.
If such a default list structure exists, it should solely be a list of people unlikely to scam others, it should be nothing more, nothing less. Surely that's what green trust is for? Green trust means you are unlikely to scam others. Being unlikely to scam isn't enough to warrant a place on DT if all your trust ratings are nonsense. I understand you want DT either diluted, changed or removed, but if you are going to derail every discussion about it back on to your personal beef with Vod, then nothing is going to change. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Vod on January 08, 2019, 03:51:54 PM Vod threatened to red-rate me unless I changed my rating. I red rated you because you scammed. ::) Don't lie. Blah blah blah. You scammed an auction. I left you negative trust. You sure are a crybaby hypocrite. ::) I understand you want DT either diluted, changed or removed, but if you are going to derail every discussion about it back on to your personal beef with Vod, then nothing is going to change. He seems to be oblivious to this. He doesn't want DT gone - he wants his red trust removed. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Anduck on January 08, 2019, 04:07:45 PM This is so totally offtopic, but I feel like I need to respond anyway. This Vod user just doesn't stop his harassing.
Blah blah blah. You scammed an auction. I left you negative trust. I've never scammed anyone. I've honored all my auctions and other business perfectly. Off you go, liar! Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: suchmoon on January 08, 2019, 04:22:02 PM Diluting the DT list (=adding more DT users) would reduce that PITA. You keep saying that and you even "applied" to DT yourself but in the last year or so you posted around a dozen trust ratings, 2 (perhaps 2.5) of which are retaliatory and others have no reference links. That's a horrible contribution to the trust system and you should not be anywhere near DT nor have any say in how it should be changed. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Vod on January 08, 2019, 04:31:59 PM I've never scammed anyone. I've honored all my auctions and other business perfectly. Off you go, liar! I'm not going to let a scammer call me a liar, bozo. ::) Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Anduck on January 08, 2019, 04:53:24 PM Diluting the DT list (=adding more DT users) would reduce that PITA. You keep saying that and you even "applied" to DT yourself but in the last year or so you posted around a dozen trust ratings, 2 (perhaps 2.5) of which are retaliatory and others have no reference links. That's a horrible contribution to the trust system and you should not be anywhere near DT nor have any say in how it should be changed. If I was Satoshi, would you then listen to these ideas I present? :) Look at the first post of this thread. See what makes this DT list and what the DT users do. DT should not be a group that requires whatever active spam/scambusting you're looking for. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: suchmoon on January 08, 2019, 05:08:42 PM If I was Satoshi, would you then listen to these ideas I present? :) Look at the first post of this thread. See what makes this DT list and what the DT users do. DT should not be a group that requires whatever active spam/scambusting you're looking for. Don't put words in my mouth. I'm talking about (1) abuse/retaliatory feedback and (2) feedback predominantly without references. This is useless and harmful to the trust system. Nothing to do with satoshi or scambusting. If you got nothing to contribute to the system then don't. But if you're making a mockery of it - I think that disqualifies your opinion on the subject, just like a bounty shitposter isn't qualified to provide input on post quality and merits. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Anduck on January 08, 2019, 05:15:13 PM If I was Satoshi, would you then listen to these ideas I present? :) Look at the first post of this thread. See what makes this DT list and what the DT users do. DT should not be a group that requires whatever active spam/scambusting you're looking for. Don't put words in my mouth. I'm talking about (1) abuse/retaliatory feedback and (2) feedback predominantly without references. This is useless and harmful to the trust system. Nothing to do with satoshi or scambusting. If you got nothing to contribute to the system then don't. But if you're making a mockery of it - I think that disqualifies your opinion on the subject, just like a bounty shitposter isn't qualified to provide input on post quality and merits. I'm not putting words in your mouth? Wtf. Is that a default line you open up with when you want to make an insulting reply? My ratings are not sent because of received feedback itself. Hence not retaliatory, I've told you this already, but you keep calling them retaliatory. Reference is not required. Many times the reasons for a rating are complex and not referenceable. Trust system is used in so many ways. Another reason why DT is skewing it up, as the same applies to DT. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: cryptohunter on January 08, 2019, 05:27:13 PM Diluting the DT list (=adding more DT users) would reduce that PITA. You keep saying that and you even "applied" to DT yourself but in the last year or so you posted around a dozen trust ratings, 2 (perhaps 2.5) of which are retaliatory and others have no reference links. That's a horrible contribution to the trust system and you should not be anywhere near DT nor have any say in how it should be changed. Who says? you? LOL I would say ANY person fighting against the systems being improved to be fairer, more reliable and producing valuable data for analysis are the people that should be kept away from trust positions in the first place. What possible motive can anyone have for fighting against making the systems more robust and reliable and transparent. Now if there were strict criteria for DT to follow it none of these arguments would be happening. First time they don't abide with the criteria and mandate boom they are gone. Of course they would need to be legends or heros and have a long history of fair behaviour and trustworthy behaviour. Any grey area squabbles would be too risky to start handing out red because unless you actually got scammed or have a clear case to provide that demonstrates they are untrustworthy then it will not be worth losing your DT over. There should not be persons saying or having opinions on how it should be changed or not changed. There should be proposals that are weighed on their merit. There needs to be systems proposed and then debate on whether and why they are an improvement and if they can be coded into the design of the forum. "Many times the reasons for a rating are complex and not referenceable" - Give an example?? "just like a bounty shitposter isn't qualified to provide input on post quality and merits" -such moon 100% agree with most of that and that ANYONE GETTING PAID2POST should not be allowed into a position of power controlling PAID2POST through merit and trust. That is a good move for a start. That takes out most of the sig spammers in meta here. I always love it when you pop up to help confirm the we need to debate ways to improve the systems you and others seem to control right now. Stick around suchmoon your contributions are sorely missed in meta lately. Bring the others back here too that are poster boys for the fact the systems of control need criteria and a mandate or be abolished. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: suchmoon on January 08, 2019, 05:29:37 PM I'm not putting words in your mouth? Wtf. Is that a default line you open up with when you want to make an insulting reply? whatever active spam/scambusting you're looking for. Where did I say that I'm looking for that? Rhetorical question. I didn't say that. My ratings are not sent because of received feedback itself. Hence not retaliatory, I've told you this already, but you keep calling them retaliatory. LOL yeah these ratings completely accidentally just happened after you got into fights with these users. Reference is not required. Many times the reasons for a rating are complex and not referenceable. Trust system is used in so many ways. Another reason why DT is skewing up it, as the same applies to DT. I'm not saying you can't use the trust system that way. Knock yourself out. Anything short of massive spam is allowed. I'm saying you shouldn't be in DT and your opinion on the subject is quite useless due to your abuse and bias. I don't expect you to see it that way, so carry on. "Many times the reasons for a rating are complex and not referenceable" -suchmoon Give an example?? Are you drunk? Edit: LOL, don't answer that. I just realized who I replied to. Another moron unable to figure out who said what, easy to get confused. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Anduck on January 08, 2019, 05:38:39 PM Reference is not required. Many times the reasons for a rating are complex and not referenceable. Trust system is used in so many ways. Another reason why DT is skewing up it, as the same applies to DT. I'm not saying you can't use the trust system that way. Knock yourself out. Anything short of massive spam is allowed. I'm saying you shouldn't be in DT and your opinion on the subject is quite useless due to your abuse and bias. I don't expect you to see it that way, so carry on. See the trust system guidelines here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=211858.msg2221664#msg2221664 I'm not putting words in your mouth? Wtf. Is that a default line you open up with when you want to make an insulting reply? whatever active spam/scambusting you're looking for. Where did I say that I'm looking for that? Rhetorical question. I didn't say that. To me, it sounds like you're implying that DT'ers need to have loads of rating activity / spam/scambusting. So you brought up how I have only "around a dozen trust ratings" and therefore not qualified. Why did you mention my "around a dozen" ratings when you talked about how I am not qualified, if you don't mean that more ratings activity is needed for DT member? If you want to answer, you can answer me via PM. We should stop derailing this thread. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: cryptohunter on January 08, 2019, 05:43:16 PM I'm not putting words in your mouth? Wtf. Is that a default line you open up with when you want to make an insulting reply? whatever active spam/scambusting you're looking for. Where did I say that I'm looking for that? Rhetorical question. I didn't say that. My ratings are not sent because of received feedback itself. Hence not retaliatory, I've told you this already, but you keep calling them retaliatory. LOL yeah these ratings completely accidentally just happened after you got into fights with these users. Reference is not required. Many times the reasons for a rating are complex and not referenceable. Trust system is used in so many ways. Another reason why DT is skewing up it, as the same applies to DT. I'm not saying you can't use the trust system that way. Knock yourself out. Anything short of massive spam is allowed. I'm saying you shouldn't be in DT and your opinion on the subject is quite useless due to your abuse and bias. I don't expect you to see it that way, so carry on. "Many times the reasons for a rating are complex and not referenceable" -suchmoon Give an example?? Are you drunk? Edit: LOL, don't answer that. I just realized who I replied to. Another moron unable to figure out who said what, easy to get confused. LOL although you can not see the perfect irony in that last statement. I find it quite hilarious. Thank you again for all the smiles you bring me. Typical suchmoon tactic. 1. yes I was skimming this thread whilst writing out another reply to another thread. So all you need to say is I did not say that it was anduck have a look. I will say okay yes. I agree it was not you. I take back that you said it. There you go.... answered later in post scroll down. NOW though. You seem to have read my entire post but like suchmoon always does is just ignore the central and most important point that he does not want to answer. So I will ask him again so there can be no missing it. WHY WOULD YOU NOT WANT THE SYSTEMS OF MERIT AND TRUST GIVEN A MANDATE AND CRITERIA SO THAT THEY PROVIDE RELIABLE, VALUABLE DATA THAT IS FAIRLY APPLIED TO ALL. WHY WOULD YOU NOT WANT TO SEE THESE SYSTEMS IMPROVED? Keep in mind your post regarding good poster is meaningless without clear definition. Now feel free to accept my public apology that I misread that other quote as yours . I still think that is wrong... if you can not say exactly why they got red trust you must not leave red trust especially in such a subjective system. So I am in agreement on that part. After you have done that answer my central point in uppercase above. I am guessing you will NOT. Anduck stop being such a pussy as soon as suchmoon confronts you. This is not derailing the topic. These are examples of the DT system in action. It should all be discussed here not on PM. Well that is if you believe you are telling the truth and that is it relevant to the discussion in the manner you are presenting it does. Of course alone they are only individual experiences but if true can demonstrate that improvements can and must be made. If you think you are right. Then no need to slink away to PM. If you are right you are right. Simple as that. Transparent open discussion is key to this board. Derailing how?? how much more relevant can prime examples concerning the DT system be to this thread? we are discussing if we can improve the system right? Suchmoon has no real power on an open discussion board because nobody does ..only the truth has power. If you get red trust, if you get no merits if you get banned. It does not really matter because you still exist and so does the truth so it can never stop being presented either by yourself or by close friends who can join who will insist on the truth being heard. Now I agree being bogged down in to much anecdotal individual experience is not giving the full picture if you are presenting something you believe is true and both relevant to the topic then no need to slink off to PM just because suchmoon turns up. We need to find the issues and devise a solution to these issues. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: OgNasty on January 08, 2019, 06:51:22 PM Diluting the DT list (=adding more DT users) would reduce that PITA. You keep saying that and you even "applied" to DT yourself but in the last year or so you posted around a dozen trust ratings, 2 (perhaps 2.5) of which are retaliatory and others have no reference links. That's a horrible contribution to the trust system and you should not be anywhere near DT nor have any say in how it should be changed. If I was Satoshi, would you then listen to these ideas I present? :) Look at the first post of this thread. See what makes this DT list and what the DT users do. DT should not be a group that requires whatever active spam/scambusting you're looking for. We listen to your ideas now. However, you could be the Queen of Sheba and we’d still say they were misguided. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Anduck on January 08, 2019, 07:58:00 PM We listen to your ideas now. However, you could be the Queen of Sheba and we’d still say they were misguided. My ideas largely align with theymos' ideas. (e.g. here (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5080581.msg48500915#msg48500915)). Main thing being that DT needs to change or go. How am I misguided? Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: o_e_l_e_o on January 08, 2019, 08:07:10 PM Because theymos wants to change the system to improve it for everyone. You want to change the system so you are no longer red-tagged.
Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: OgNasty on January 08, 2019, 08:14:53 PM We listen to your ideas now. However, you could be the Queen of Sheba and we’d still say they were misguided. My ideas largely align with theymos' ideas. (e.g. here (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5080581.msg48500915#msg48500915)). Main thing being that DT needs to change or go. How am I misguided? You think anyone who is trustworthy should be in default trust. That shows you don’t even understand the system. Trustworthy people have a high trust rating, while those with GOOD JUDGEMENT IN THEIR RATINGS should be in the default trust network. You’ve been shown to have questionable views in regards to auctions and also poor judgement in giving feedback. You’re now lashing out at the system because you refuse to see those 2 truths regardless of how many people take the time to try to point it out to you, further demonstrating your reason for exclusion and the functionality of the current system. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Anduck on January 08, 2019, 08:26:42 PM You think anyone who is trustworthy should be in default trust. That shows you don’t even understand the system. Trustworthy people have a high trust rating, while those with GOOD JUDGEMENT IN THEIR RATINGS should be in the default trust network. You’ve been shown to have questionable views in regards to auctions and also poor judgement in giving feedback. You’re now lashing out at the system because you refuse to see those 2 truths regardless of how many people take the time to try to point it out to you, further demonstrating your reason for exclusion and the functionality of the current system. My view of what DT should be has nothing to do with my understanding of how it works currently. Also I am not "lashing out at the system" as you describe. I have given out perfectly reasonable feedbacks. Feel free to PM if you feel that some feedback I've sent is unjust, we can talk about it. And that "questionable views in regards to auctions" -- well, vendor bidding really is a common thing in various auctions around the world. I guess you can call it "questionable", but for some reason it still remains to be an acceptable thing in various auction standards. Not in Bitcointalk auction standard, obviously. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: OgNasty on January 08, 2019, 08:32:49 PM I have given out perfectly reasonable feedbacks. Quote from: Anduck's Sent Trust to SaltySpitoon SaltySpitoon 2018-12-24 If you do business with SaltySpitoon, be careful. Expect problems especially if anything disputable or surprising happens. This person uses twisted logical argumentation when it suits him. Believes prejudice in the face of facts. Finds reasoning to justify whatever activity, regardless of resulting low level of reasonableness, coherence, fairness or even correctness. Applies double standards. Portrays himself as fair and conscientious -- don't fall for that. I've not done business with SaltySpitoon. I think the situation with Salty could have been handled more reasonably. Not in Bitcointalk auction standard, obviously. Then why are you trying to upend the entire trust network to suit what you believe DT should be as a result of you not adhering to the Bitcointalk auction standard as you understand it? Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Anduck on January 08, 2019, 08:51:23 PM I have given out perfectly reasonable feedbacks. Quote from: Anduck's Sent Trust to SaltySpitoon SaltySpitoon 2018-12-24 If you do business with SaltySpitoon, be careful. Expect problems especially if anything disputable or surprising happens. This person uses twisted logical argumentation when it suits him. Believes prejudice in the face of facts. Finds reasoning to justify whatever activity, regardless of resulting low level of reasonableness, coherence, fairness or even correctness. Applies double standards. Portrays himself as fair and conscientious -- don't fall for that. I've not done business with SaltySpitoon. I think the situation with Salty could have been handled more reasonably. Possibly. Not in Bitcointalk auction standard, obviously. Then why are you trying to upend the entire trust network to suit what you believe DT should be as a result of you not adhering to the Bitcointalk auction standard as you understand it? These two things are unrelated. The feedbacks I've received merely increased my motivation to get BCT trust system improved. DT people have way too much power. Also FWIW, I've been against DT-including trust system since it was implemented, just not very vocal about it. (See #bitcoin-otc logs.) About that auction issue, I learned about Bitcointalk auction standard regarding vendor bids in that auction. Back then, ~3 years ago, I did not know that vendor bids are not cool here. The bitcointalk auction standard is vague and not even described anywhere. I've held countless auctions since, with no complaints. Now two DT'ers are stepping in to rate me for that vendor bid (at least publicly they state that as the reason). Do you see that as reasonable and justified? "Warning! Trade with extreme caution!" Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: suchmoon on January 08, 2019, 09:07:10 PM I learned about Bitcointalk auction standard regarding vendor bids in that auction. Back then, ~3 years ago, I did not know that vendor bids are not cool here. The bitcointalk auction standard is vague and not even described anywhere. I've held countless auctions since, with no complaints. Now two DT'ers are stepping in to rate me for that vendor bid (at least publicly they state that as the reason). Do you see that as reasonable and justified? "Warning! Trade with extreme caution!" Your trust rating has not so much to do with your self-bidding but rather with you being stubbornly defiant about it. Any reasonable person would have said "shit, I didn't realize that, sorry" and moved on whereas you're never wrong. This speaks to your poor ability to handle disputes or even minor disagreements. You're lucky to get away with two red trusts (so far). Here we are derailing the thread again :). How about you stick to your cockamamie ideas of destroying DT, those are easier to ignore. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Anduck on January 08, 2019, 09:13:05 PM I learned about Bitcointalk auction standard regarding vendor bids in that auction. Back then, ~3 years ago, I did not know that vendor bids are not cool here. The bitcointalk auction standard is vague and not even described anywhere. I've held countless auctions since, with no complaints. Now two DT'ers are stepping in to rate me for that vendor bid (at least publicly they state that as the reason). Do you see that as reasonable and justified? "Warning! Trade with extreme caution!" Your trust rating has not so much to do with your self-bidding but rather with you being stubbornly defiant about it. Any reasonable person would have said "shit, I didn't realize that, sorry" and moved on whereas you're never wrong. This speaks to your poor ability to handle disputes or even minor disagreements. You're lucky to get away with two red trusts (so far). This narrative that I did not do this "shit, didn't realize that" is misleading. Go look up how it went and stop believing in third hand stories. I am not defiant about it, why would I be. Aren't my actions speaking louder? I've not done a vendor bid since that auction! So stop spreading that bullshit narrative, it has nothing to do with reality. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: suchmoon on January 08, 2019, 09:31:27 PM This narrative that I did not do this "shit, didn't realize that" is misleading. Go look up how it went and stop believing in third hand stories. I am not defiant about it, why would I be. Aren't my actions speaking louder? I've not done a vendor bid since that auction! So stop spreading that bullshit narrative, it has nothing to do with reality. I don't need to go anywhere, I have followed your whole 20+ page thread any many detours into other threads. The overwhelming consensus has been that you're wrong but you insist that you're potentially honest somewhere outside of Bitcointalk where self-bidding is acceptable so you must be accepted as being honest here as well. I don't think that's how it works. Your self-bid was a dishonest way to cancel the auction without explicitly cancelling it, regardless of what other auction places may or may not allow. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Anduck on January 08, 2019, 09:34:36 PM This narrative that I did not do this "shit, didn't realize that" is misleading. Go look up how it went and stop believing in third hand stories. I am not defiant about it, why would I be. Aren't my actions speaking louder? I've not done a vendor bid since that auction! So stop spreading that bullshit narrative, it has nothing to do with reality. I don't need to go anywhere, I have followed your whole 20+ page thread any many detours into other threads. The overwhelming consensus has been that you're wrong but you insist that you're potentially honest somewhere outside of Bitcointalk where self-bidding is acceptable so you must be accepted as being honest here as well. I don't think that's how it works. Your self-bid was a dishonest way to cancel the auction without explicitly cancelling it, regardless of what other auction places may or may not allow. That's quite an unfair description of what has happened. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: SaltySpitoon on January 09, 2019, 04:35:45 PM I have given out perfectly reasonable feedbacks. Quote from: Anduck's Sent Trust to SaltySpitoon SaltySpitoon 2018-12-24 If you do business with SaltySpitoon, be careful. Expect problems especially if anything disputable or surprising happens. This person uses twisted logical argumentation when it suits him. Believes prejudice in the face of facts. Finds reasoning to justify whatever activity, regardless of resulting low level of reasonableness, coherence, fairness or even correctness. Applies double standards. Portrays himself as fair and conscientious -- don't fall for that. I've not done business with SaltySpitoon. I think the situation with Salty could have been handled more reasonably. It really could not have. We resolved things the absolute best we could. We exchanged probably over 30 messages, and spoke in depth for well over a week regarding various matters. Neither of us have any misunderstandings of each other, and we both left each other appropriate feedback. I believe that this is a perfectly acceptable outcome. Those who think my judgement is wrong, likely understand Anduck's point of view, and his feedback may be exactly what those people would want to know about me. Likewise in the opposite direction. People who dont care about any of our points of view will ignore each others warnings. For the most part, the DT system works exactly how the users want it to work. The tool in of itself is just a hierarchical post it note. The people that bring up a cause in Meta or the Reputation sections are who define what the system is used for. Why its become accepted to give negative trust to Scammers, Spammers, Account Farmers, etc are all because of years of history of people asking questions. Debates have been had over, for example, why its ok to give account farmers negative trust. Theymos didn't put any rules anywhere that said, You must mark account farmers with red feedback. Who did they scam? No one. Why is it ok to give them red trust? Well, because people find their actions undesirable and untrustworthy when it comes to accountability and building a community. That resolution came out of a lot of discussion though. The system changes that Theymos would enact are making DT as a tool more flexible for its users, not creating some sort of regulation around it. As far as I know, the only rule when it comes to DT and the Feedback system, is that you may not spam people's feedback. Everything else is user created. When the community as a whole like like to see something change, it'll change in that direction. That doesn't mean people having a tantrum will get their way however. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: The Sceptical Chymist on January 09, 2019, 04:41:47 PM That's quite an unfair description of what has happened. I hate to keep feeding this discussion about your neg from Vod, but what suchmoon said is completely accurate--it's just not complete, leaving out your private conversation with Vod about feedback removal. That's a separate matter, but the self-bidding description is on point. I've already said my piece about both things, so I'm not going to continue flogging that poor dead horse. Consensus pretty much is that self-bidding on an auction here is not cool. That's what reserve prices are for. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Anduck on January 09, 2019, 07:58:22 PM Neither of us have any misunderstandings of each other No lies, please. You misunderstood me heavily. I told you this (2+ times), and tried to explain what I meant, but you stick to your prejudice. You refused to truly listen to what I had to say, and you kept deliberately understanding my words in the worst possible way. Consensus pretty much is that self-bidding on an auction here is not cool. I know this and agree completely. I've done all my auctions without vendor bids since I learned that it's not cool here. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: suchmoon on January 09, 2019, 09:00:15 PM Neither of us have any misunderstandings of each other No lies, please. You misunderstood me heavily. I told you this (2+ times), and tried to explain what I meant, but you stick to your prejudice. You refused to truly listen to what I had to say, and you kept deliberately understanding my words in the worst possible way. Unless there was some hidden discussion that I'm not aware of, this doesn't make any sense. Disagreeing with you doesn't mean your opponent misunderstands you. From what I've seen Salty understood you perfectly well and engaged in a lengthy discussion with you. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: SaltySpitoon on January 09, 2019, 09:02:05 PM Neither of us have any misunderstandings of each other No lies, please. You misunderstood me heavily. I told you this (2+ times), and tried to explain what I meant, but you stick to your prejudice. You refused to truly listen to what I had to say, and you kept deliberately understanding my words in the worst possible way. Consensus pretty much is that self-bidding on an auction here is not cool. I know this and agree completely. I've done all my auctions without vendor bids since I learned that it's not cool here. There would have been zero discussion about the matter for the last few years if the bolded statement was true. People make mistakes, they take actions to fix them, and its done. Unless they constantly defend their mistakes. You don't get to say, hey I'm sorry I was wrong, but actually I was right you just don't understand. I can almost guarantee there would never have been a problem with Vod, or me now, had you just said, "yeah, it was my mistake" when someone called you on it. I absolutely completely understood your justification to me. And thought it was wrong. Its not prejudice, there are just inconsistencies in the story which lead me to believe you are not being truthful. If you are being truthful, it doesn't change anything, because it still makes me question your ability to rectify your mistakes. Being able to convince yourself that you are the victim for screwing someone else over is WAYYY more alarming to me than making a mistake due to a cultural difference. I've been trying to avoid telling you what the correct answer to the situation would have been, on the off chance that figuring it out on your own would have given a possibility of redemption. The analogy I told you about the tourist giving people the middle finger, and whether it made sense for them to continue giving people the finger after being told of the cultural difference in meaning, was meant to spark the idea that you should have stopped defending yourself and simply given up on the idea that its ok to do something untrustworthy because of a cultural difference. When you find out you made a mistake due to a cultural difference, you say, hey sorry, this is why I thought this was ok, but I understand its different here. I'm sorry. You don't go on defending your actions and calling others out because they are misunderstanding your culture. Making a mistake and fixing it isn't a big deal. Making a mistake and continuing to try and justify your mistake for years says something about your character. The reason I was so sure of my decision was because we fully discussed everything. I got an inside look at how your thought processing works, and thats where I found the problem. My feedback isn't meant to warn people that you are a dishonest scammer, its that there is the possibility of them getting screwed over by you, because you are exceptionally able to warp and twist what most would call common sense in order to justify your own actions, even when not a single person is on your side. I have absolutely nothing invested in my negative feedback to you. Its not a fight I need to win, power tripping, or a matter of pride. If I had to say I had any attached emotion, it'd be that I'm a little irritated that you think I'm being hasty, when we've spent so much time talking. Claiming I'm misunderstanding the situation when I've given you ample time to clear up any misunderstanding, and even responded back on any unclear points I might have had is a little demeaning. TLDR: My tie in to why this is relevant to this thread, is that DT takes effort. I don't leave someone a negative on something iffy, and many other DT members do the same. It took hours of discussion with you before I felt comfortable doing so. I absolutely believe I gave you a fair shake and put in far more effort than is reasonably expected to coax your true intentions out. That said, DT's purpose is to give accurate/reliable feedback. You might disagree with me, but I gave people resources to investigate my claim for themselves. If they don't agree with me, they don't need to heed my advice. Thats essentially all there is to it. The same is true to your feedback about me, if they don't agree with your claim, they are free to ignore your feedback. Thats how it works, DT is just a good starting point for those who don't know who to trust yet. Give a member a few months here, and they create their own weighted trust lists, at least in their head if not by physically altering their list. We are not going to agree with one another, and I'm perfectly alright with that. I just hope that we can agree that each other's feedback will only matter those those who choose to value it based on their own perception of its merit. *edit* Quoting for my own future reference... Unless they constantly defend their mistakes I am solely saying that vendor bidding is not unethical, scam, untrustworthy or bad behavior in general, when it's applicable. Vendor bidding is done in various auctions around the world. I fully understand that it is not part of Bitcointalk auctions. I told you this many many times, but you just refuse to listen. I don't defend my mistake. (This is obvious from my very first message regarding this.) I defend myself when people call me a scammer, because I've not scammed anyone. Vod told me that he doesn't see anything untrustworthy in how the auction went. Even though his rating mentions the vendor bid. He misunderstood me illogically, and didn't listen when I told him how he read my words illogically. See this (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5080581.msg49119454#msg49119454). You're talking about my thought process with quite a confidence. Your description of why you're rating me is not in line with your other output. For example, you implied that your DT position played a significant role in that event, as you felt that by rating me negatively I wouldn't need to "worry about Vod anymore". Also, you're applying double standards as you're not red-rating someone who changed auction rules mid-auction. Yet you do a fresh red-rating to someone who didn't know about bitcointalk auction standard (and didn't change auction rules.) Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Anduck on January 09, 2019, 09:15:23 PM Unless they constantly defend their mistakes I am solely saying that vendor bidding is not unethical, scam, untrustworthy or bad behavior in general, when it's applicable. Vendor bidding is done in various auctions around the world. I fully understand that it is not part of Bitcointalk auctions. I told you this many many times, but you just refuse to listen. You just keep on telling me how you think that vendor bidding is absolutely dishonest and that I'm bullshitting you when I say that it's actually quite common practice. I presented you various sources where you can go and educate yourself, but you refused and instead believe your prejudice. I don't defend my mistake. (This is obvious from my very first message regarding this.) I defend myself when Vod (and you?) call me a scammer, because I've not scammed anyone. Vod told me that he doesn't see anything untrustworthy in how the auction went. Even though his rating mentions the vendor bid. He misunderstood me illogically, and didn't listen when I told him how he read my words illogically. See this (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5080581.msg49119454#msg49119454). You're talking about my thought process with quite a confidence. Your description of why you're rating me is not in line with your other output. For example, you implied that your DT position played a significant role in that event, as you felt that by rating me negatively I wouldn't need to "worry about Vod anymore". That is abuse of position and so called "power tripping". Also, you're applying double standards as you're not red-rating someone who changed auction rules mid-auction. Yet you do a fresh red-rating to someone who didn't know about bitcointalk auction standard (and didn't change auction rules.) Consensus pretty much is that self-bidding on an auction here is not cool. I know this and agree completely. I've done all my auctions without vendor bids since I learned that it's not cool here. There would have been zero discussion about the matter for the last few years if the bolded statement was true. Have a try at explaining how the bold statement is untrue? I've not done a vendor bid since that auction ~3 years ago. Bitcointalk auction standard doesn't include vendor bidding. Anyway, your logic is flawed and your attempts at steering opinions or whatever with such no content sentences are pathetic. My feedback isn't meant to warn people that you are a dishonest scammer, its that there is the possibility of them getting screwed over by you, because you are exceptionally able to warp and twist what most would call common sense in order to justify your own actions, even when not a single person is on your side. This makes no sense. What's your beef with me? Your prejudice is what you call "common sense", now? How about digging up real common sense and stop harassing me. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Timelord2067 on January 10, 2019, 10:32:40 AM Have just come across this thread. Who do I have to thank for removing or excluding me from DT2?
Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Lauda on January 10, 2019, 10:37:04 AM Have just come across this thread. Who do I have to thank for removing or excluding me from DT2? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;full shows: hilariousandco, Lutpin, DarkStar_, Tomatocage, EcuaMobi have you excluded. I don't think it's an exclusion problem, but rather an inclusion one. Whoever had you included, removed the inclusion from what I can tell. Wrong thread though?Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: Timelord2067 on January 10, 2019, 10:50:27 AM Have just come across this thread. Who do I have to thank for removing or excluding me from DT2? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;full shows: hilariousandco, Lutpin, DarkStar_, Tomatocage, EcuaMobi have you excluded. I don't think it's an exclusion problem, but rather an inclusion one. Whoever had you included, removed the inclusion from what I can tell. Wrong thread though?Thanks for the info, I don't believe it's the wrong thread as my UID details etc form the basis of one entry of the list the tread is based around. Tom & Hilarious are understandable. Lupin is a supprise. Dark Star & Ecuai - no idea. Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: LoyceV on January 10, 2019, 01:27:21 PM I will probably do an update Let me archive (https://archive.is/OSAoM) this thread, so we have a copy of DT1 and 2 before the changes.Title: Re: Is the Default trust system still working/active? Post by: coinlocket$ on January 11, 2019, 12:05:22 AM New topic here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5095716.0 , This one is archived and It will be closed soon.
|