Bitcoin Forum

Here's my specific suggestion: Add me to DT1.

Why?

If DT exists, I would want it to be a list of people who are unlikely to scam others, and nothing more. My DT2 additions would not be ultimately trusted people, but just people that I feel are trustworthy enough to be unlikely scammers. I've been in this scene for years and have seen many kinds of scammers and people in general, also having moderated bitcoin IRC channels for years and recently bitcoin subreddit too.

So in other words, I would want to decrease the "legitimacy" of the DT list as an "elite, highly trusted people" list. This would encourage people to make their own lists. I would be adding loads people I've got to know over the years, and I am sure that many do not find them trustworthy to e.g. do trades, even though I do. It should merely be a list of people unlikely to scam others, and that's how I would treat it.

Additionally, add bunch of current DT2 members to DT1 so the DT1 gets "diluted" as it should.

Edit:
Some of my thoughts related to DT: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5080581.msg48502686#msg48502686 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5080581.msg48502686#msg48502686)

It's great to see that you're still using the same kind of sketchy logic that earned you your current trust rating. Great job Vod & Salty.

I don’t believe any DT1 member has ever asked to be a DT1. This would be a new approach (https://i.imgflip.com/z9c83.jpg).

I haven't been here as long as the old-timers, but I haven't seen anyone request that status yet.  It's particularly odd coming from a member who was just barking about how the DT system should be abolished because he has a beef with Vod.  And a member who believes bidding on his own auctions is acceptable--yeah, just the kind of person this forum needs on DT1.

Regardless of what happened with the PM and posting exchange between Anduck and Vod, Vod's feedback is correct.  You either set a reserve on your auction or you let the real bidders decide what the item should go for.  You don't bid on the auction yourself.  It's the same reason shill bidding is wrong, too.  Anduck doesn't seem to grasp what he did wrong, and he certainly shouldn't have any influence as to who gets added to DT2.  Bad idea, dude.

Vendor bids are a common practice around the world. Ebays and such have made people think that all auctions are "get stuff for cheap" forced sale auctions, while in reality such "no reserve" auctions are always stated to be as such -- except here in bitcointalk. I did a vendor bid once, got taught the bitcointalk way of auctioning and have done all my auctions without any complaints since that.
And yes, DT should be abolished. Not because Vod misuses it, but because it gives Vod's opinion/misuse/whatever way too much power. Apply this to every DT user.

Theymos asked for specific suggestions to DT1. My non-specific suggestion would be to add loads of new DT1 members so the status of DT would get diluted heavily. And you know my opinion of the whole DT thing..

Which one of them would you like to alternate with?

DT sucks except if you could use it for your own goals, e.g. to exclude Vod. Gotcha.

You keep making that argument, but people on this forum keep telling you it's not acceptable.  

I would suggest you not try to auction anything on bitcointalk and stick with those auction houses where they allow you to bid on your own auctions.  It's either that or there needs to be a rule put in place in the Auctions section that this practice is acceptable.  I think there need to be some guidelines put in place there anyway since it's basically a free-for-all right now.  And believe you me, I would never bid on anything auctioned on this forum should that rule come into effect--not that I bid on anything now.

Giving you any sort of power, e.g., adding you to DT1 would be an idiotic move on Theymos's part, and although I don't understand some of the decisions he's made thus far, the man is not an idiot.  Just forget about your suggestion--and about this battle, because it's pretty clear it's not one you're going to win.

Edit: Anduck, don't PM me, and I'm not derailing your thread.  You're requesting to be added to DT1, so any discussion of why you shouldn't be would seem to be fair game here.

I don't think he's trying to win, he's gone full Quicksy now and will try to troll and discredit the system.

I'll see your DT1 and also suggest I am added as global mod and the root admin.

Not that I am actually saying you should not be a DT1. I mean the entire way of how this seems to work looks like an insiders club.

I would love to see why exactly any person is on DT1 or DT2. What was the criteria they met? What things have they done since being a member here made them eligible?

There should be strict criteria to attaining any position that is meant to mean something.

I PM'd you, because my PM is not related or relevant to this thread. But whatever, now that you're implying that I want to play unfairly -- whatever that means --, here's the PM I sent you, so others can read it too. (As anyone can see, this message I sent to The Pharmacist is not related to this thread at all and his implication of me "playing non-fair game" is a narrative pushed by him, who knows why.) Also you can see that I did not say that The Pharmacist is derailing, even though he claims/implies so.


Now let's stick to the topic.

There are two ways this sentence could have been interpreted, and now that I'm reading it again and reading your response to my response, I'll admit I misunderstood it.  I thought you were accusing me of derailing the thread, but I can see now that you weren't stating that.  My apologies.

One simple does not ask to be added to DT1.

It must be it. Just recently Anduck suggested that whole system should be removed:
And now they want to be on that list, but they are not sure if it exist:
They knew DT exist and also suggested few times that system should be removed/deleted:
And now they want to be part of that bad bad thing which maybe doesn't exist. It is so confusing.

I think this is a good description (by eddie13):

Now back to OP: I think it's obvious you want to be on DT for revenge or leverage.

I don't think anyone should suggest himself for DT member. Even you aren't on DT2 then how you expect to become DT1? It's more important from DT2. If you really deserve then it should suggest by other reputed member's or DT member's. It's not decent way to suggest yourself. I can't see you have tag scammer. You tagged Vod! Really he deserve red tag?

I have tag lots of scammer and I have exposed many corruption and scammers, it doesn't mean I can suggest me for DT. Same to you also. If some one from DT1 like you then may be there is chance to become DT2 but I don't think it will happen.


If I am not wrong DT1 directly selected by forum admin. And obviously he had selected what he thought right. DT2 selected by DT1, if DT1 put you on their trust network then you will become DT2. I don't think there is any specific criteria, it's depend on overall activity.

That's true there are few DT1 and DT2 became inactive. List should be refresh again.

This nicely highlights the problem of DT. People treat it as an authoritative thing.


In my opinion, that sort of way to use DT is wrong, because it's too constraining, paints a wrong view of the DT list and encourages people to not make their own lists.


I want DT to be gone or be changed. I can help with the latter, but would prefer the former.

Can you explain why you think this is wrong? I can't think of a single reason why a trustworthy judgement and doing the right thing wouldn't be what we need on DT.

That is so NOT how DT works or is supposed to work. Why would anyone add you in DT1 when you clearly hate the system, but also want to game the system by trying forcing to be a part of it. And your lack of understanding scenarios isn't helping either. Adding you into DT1 will result only in one thing: You going beyond desperate levels to remove salty spittoon and vod from DT, so your trust score looks better.


Try again!

When DT1's are expected to only add people they're personally vouching 100%, or near that, the DT list gains a status it shouldn't have. I am arguing that DT should only be used as a list of people unlikely to scam. Or in other words, DT should be diluted a lot and the status of it should be decreased. Something about this:

1) People are supposed to make their own trust lists. Having a default trust list, people often choose to not alter their own trust list to be able to see the trust score and "trusted feedback" as others likely see it.
2) The perceived trustworthiness is not always matching reality. Big scammers have been on DT. In any case, DT1 is the view of theymos and DT2's are the view of DT1's. More DT'ers, more views, more decentralization, less (perceived) authority and trust for the correctness of DT. This would be good as it encourages people to make their own lists. It would still protect people from getting scammed (at least small scams) and the list would "heal" itself a lot quicker than it does currently.
3) Diluting the status of DT to a list of just unlikely-to-scam users, people are encouraged to make their own trust lists. There should not be any other qualifications to get on the DT.
4) DT users, especially DT1's, are getting a lot of heat, because there are so little of them. Also due to the same reason, they can't verify and dig in to all the stuff happening. This enables small scale wrongdoing as curators have much bigger stuff to do.
5) Con men always know their ways in to whatever list. If it only takes "good judgement" for few years and posting sensible stuff for a couple years, they'll do exactly that if the gained reward is worth it. We've seen this happening in the scene. Because of this, there's no point in even trying to build an universal list of super trusted users (which is what DT is trying to be currently). If everyone made their own lists, con men wouldn't have a clear target.
6) Having a public "highly trusted" status being on DT, it only boosts the effect of the scams they can pull. Now what are the upsides of having people with such status?

I would make DT1 then.  And you hate me. 

I don't hate you.
As far as I know, you've not scammed anyone. I'm not sure if you'd be proper to be on DT1, because of your poor understanding of what is scamming. But to be on DT? Of course: you're unlikely to scam others.

DT has very little to do with one's personal trustworthiness. Though, I'd imagine not being a scammer would probably be a good aspect to have if you are going to get picked to join. The point of being on DT is having the ability to leave others accurate feedback. In addition, you should add other people who you believe are also qualified to do so to your DT list to increase the spread. If you are on DT 1 you are responsible for every single piece of feedback given by people on your list. The same is true about being on DT 2 and the people you add to DT 3. Its really not all its cracked up to be.

I excluded you from my trust list before I even knew about the self bidding thing, not because I thought if I did a trade with you I'd get scammed, but because you are way too fixated on retaliation. You want vigilante justice in the form of the ability to silence those who'd disagree with you, and that is completely and unimaginably wrong. I've actually considered whether or not this is all some elaborate joke, because I can't comprehend how someone could convince them self that they are making sense. I can completely understand being swept up in a moment, making a mistake, and being a bit too stubborn to admit it. But it really seems like you've convinced yourself that your plan for DT is for the best, and its not just delusions. The system isn't screwing you over, you are either just somehow failing to understand that its not just 500 unrelated people picking on you for no good reason, or this is a joke of some kind.

I have no personal grudges against you, I'm sure you are a functioning human being that doesn't go around kicking puppies or burning down orphanages, but really, for your own mental health, take a break from the campaign to right wrongs, and just chill. Who cares if Vod and I think you deserve negative feedback, ignore us and carry on. If anyone cares too much about our feedback, use escrow. I just said in my feedback that I wouldn't participate in an auction you run, I didn't say that you are a Bond villain looking to steal the crown jewels.

You're not the first one to come up with gimmicky "reasons" to justify whatever trust/rating activity.
I'm not fixed on retaliation, I'm not doing anything based on retaliation. You seem to be very confused.
If you're however talking about the Vod rating case: the root of me being so vocal about Vod's misuse of current DT is his unjust rating towards me. Go find out what it's about. Shortly, Vod threatened to rate me red if I didn't remove my rating towards him. So he rated me red. Wanting that sort of rating behavior to stop, especially when done by current DT, is now "fixated on retaliation"?


Is this "vigilante justice in the form of the ability to silence" what DT can do currently? Insane, and totally not what DT should be about!

I don't want to silence anyone. I want everyone to not be able to cast stigmas on anyone in the form of DT ratings. Current DT is being used poorly -- you're a prime example of that.
I don't want any "vigilante justice in the form of the ability to silence". I don't know how you came up with this anyway, but obviously it's made up of thin air. Stop doing that.


I am working on trying to make this DT thing, at least in the current format, not exist, so it wouldn't be there to enable e.g. power trippers & bird brains to have any wrecking power. It doesn't really matter who uses it right and who uses it wrong, it's a systematic problem as there are always going to be wrongdoers.


This is exactly the problem. People are "forced" to care about your feedback, and have your feedback as "trusted" by default, because that's how the current DT works. I want to change this. Of course you're now being against changing DT status because it would reduce your power. I didn't expect you to be able to objectively look into this anyway, as you already did show me how you are not even trying to be objective in your actions. (E.g. when you care more about your prejudice than quite simple facts.)

It would be very comedic if you both ended up there.

---

If I cared, I’d ask to be on dt1 but the thing is... I don’t.

I’ve witnessed (at least with senior members) my reputation and my trust are completely different and I seem more “reputable” than I am “trusted” on the current system and I’m quite happy with that. Sure id like a bigger number but I’d like bigger of almost everything on my forum account, I’m waiting for more paid memberships for me to waste my bitcoin on ;D.

---

I thought reserve prices were the self bids you were allowed, anything beyond that and you’re saying ‘I’ll accept this value and take it as it is’. I’m not sure I’m entirely against the self bid principle but the premis just confuses me.

Nobody should really care about DT1 as much as people do right now. The whole DT should be diluted to have almost no status at all. I've presented points about this in my previous posts.

The minute that the normal members can put someone to the list of DT members is the minute we will see more and more scams happening in the community, so I don't believe when you are saying you want to create your own  "elite, highly trusted people" list as if you really trust them you don't need them to become your DT list in the first place as you yourself personally trust them. Having them become part of the DT while you personally trust them basically seems to be useless for other people as one approval of one person isn't really enough to make them be trustworthy to the rest of the community.

That doesn't make any sense. I don't want to create any "elite" list. I want to dilute DT list to not be any sort of elite list. It should merely be a list of people unlikely to scam others, it's not treated as such right now. In any case, the whole DT thing is something that should not exist in a trust system. DT list is a structure that changes the whole nature of a trust network/system.


A heavily diluted DT list (or no DT list at all) would encourage people to make their own lists and also "trust score" would be curated much better. Right now few individuals can choose to wreck some peoples trust score. Same vice versa. In a heavily diluted DT list more peoples' voices would weight something.