Bitcoin Forum

A change in the rank and i.e. the "merits" - at this time - seems to me as a very little allowance only... Or? ((not to forget, it exists in the world another marketplaces, as bitcointalk.org, also......))

https://i.imgur.com/G69Oul8.png

https://i.imgur.com/wr25rDD.png

When reading you OP, it's not completely clear to me what your question is... Your title however is clear, so answering the question asked in the title: you can trust NO rank.

• Accounts get hacked
• Accounts get sold
• Users can go for a long con (for example, the master-P fiasco)

But generally speaking, trust levels increase IF:

• the account's password hasn't been changed recently
• the account has stayed active for the last couple of months/years without changes in posting style/language usage
• there are no CREDIBLE negative tags for scamming or cheating on the account
• there are no CREDIBLE negative flags for scamming or cheating on the account
• the rank is relatively high
• the account has a relatively high number of merits
• the account is in DT
• the account has credible positive feedback
• the account has a staked address/PGP pubkey

The trust level of these accounts is higher than a newbie account because the account owner has invested a lot of time to get his account to a certain level, so it's unlikely he'll throw away a high trusted, lots of merit, old, active, high ranking, DT account away for a couple hundred bucks...

The answer to your question is always the same, no matter what: none.
You should trust no one on the internet; you don't know if he/she wants to help you or himself/herself. Always DYOR.

The only difference can be in case of a trade. Since an account is valuable, if you can prove you were scammed in a trade and get a DT believe you and tag the scammer, that account is basically ruined (no money from campaigns, low selling value, ... ). So in a trade there's a very good chance an account that worth more than the amount traded will no scam you.

Also, we're still on the trust area, you should read the feedback an account has got and decide for yourself if it worth your trust.
How old is that feedback is also important, since there were examples of trusted accounts getting hacked and sold, but usually that translates in a gap between the feedbacks.


Merit is not in the same category as trust. A scammer can write something very useful and meaningful and may get merit. So I'd get it out of the equation.

Trust has nothing to do with ranks.

Trust is a measure of the risks that can be incurred in order to obtain a service.
Never trust anyone, especially if you don't know who you're dealing with.
Rank does not mean trust, there are many high-ranking scammers.
I can trust any account as long as the amount of risk incurred by that account is less than the amount of money in which the deal was made. For example, a long-running account that runs a business of thousands of dollars would not scam me for a dollar, but could do so if it was $ 1 million.

Why we need ranks then? Maybe better to operate without ranks - above Full Member i.e. :) - because the remained Ranks speaking about Trust: Senior, Hero, Legendary :D

It’s people you can get to trust once you know them, not profiles with an avatar, a given rank, and a certain amount of merits. I’m not sure what kind of trust you are talking about, but being here, it most likely comes down to having some kind of economical reading. Given the right circumstances, almost anyone in real life is potentially untrustable under that context. Give them a mask (profile/avatar) and an anonymity cloak, and those chances boost.

Having said that, on the forum, I would find some people more trustworthy than others. Not due to their rank, but rather more through the persona they have managed to build here. Is that them really? Who knows. I’m personally more belligerent here with some topics than in real life, meaning that the image I project here is not exactly who I am, but some of my personal thoughts are easier to lax of a faceless environment with distance in between. Others may go about it the other way round, who knows.

There is a weak correlation to rank though in my argument: I can be more prone to trust someone based on the character I perceive they have here, and to do that it normally requires time, which in turn potentially means that the person has been around for some time and has, therefore, achieved a certain rank. As I said, it’s a weak correlation, and just as one collective is not all black and white, nor is a collective group of accounts with a given rank, set of merits or whatnot.

Maybe we should give the ranks with trust (Full, Senior, Hero, Legendary) only for members which persons are well identified through documents or i.e through eyewitnesses - which eyewitnesses are identified well already.

Trust is not dependent on ranks. The rank of a profile is dependent on the number of merits earned and the period of time the user has been active on the forum.
A user needs to be constructive in their discussions to increase their rank, but that does not make them trustworthy. I would be more interested in the amount of time they have been active on the forum and their general disposition and interactions.

If I'm you directly answer the question in the title; Never trust someone easily, regardless of the rank or trust score. Always have your reservations, especially if you are going into financial dealings with the said account.

Accounts which have been active for a long time, and are therefore higher rank, are more likely to have built up a good reputation than a newbie account. Conversely, simply being active for a long time doesn't automatically mean more trustworthy. So although highly trusted accounts are more likely to be highly ranked, higher ranks aren't inherently more trustworthy.

I'm sure that suggestion has nothing to do with your inability to rank up above Full Member. ;)

Absolutely not:

First, from the poll:

Yes, bitcointalk is centralized.  It's not owned by the members, it has rules and staff to enforce those rules.  This is not a bad thing.  I always get the feeling that bitcoiners think everything should be decentralized, but I don't think decentralization works with everything--in fact, I'm damn sure of it and I've seen examples of this in my career, for instance.  Anyway.

Yep.  I've often written the same words myself--and then I end up trusting people in spite of my admonition to others not to do so.  It's in my nature, I guess, but it's very bad practice on the internet in general and on this forum in particular, and that's because bitcointalk is absolutely loaded with scammers.  Sometimes they present a very professional, legitimate facade and sometimes they're obviously sketchy.  You just never know who you're really dealing with.  That's especially true because of account sales and hacking, as you pointed out.

I remember that debacle well, and that was quite a scam he pulled off.  If I'm not mistaken, though, wasn't that account sold somewhere along the way?  In any case I think what happened qualified as an exit scam if not a long con, and I'm not sure if there's much difference anyhow.  The point is that you can't necessarily trust somebody's positive feedback or rank, though if someone has a lot of positives, particularly from DT members, it's a good sign--but not a sign that that member can be trusted without question.

Unfortunately for all this lip service, people do trust each other a lot around here.  I find that a positive trait even though I know everyone should be exercising more caution when doing deals with each other.  It is what it is.  At least we haven't seen a long con being pulled in a while or another massive DT scandal since Master-P (I think).

Considering MagicalTux (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=2134) and TF  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=67058)cases you should not trust :
VIP, Donator, Forum Contributor, Established Member,Legendary,etc.

Basically no one expect yourself.
It's like in the real life, but here the things are even worse, you interact only with userID and Avatar and some post history, this is all you have. You don't know who is sitting behind the keyboard, If this account actually changed hands, or the guy is just a crook farming trust and gaining reputation preparing for a nice huge exit scam.

Don't trust anyone, nobody cares about you here as nobody knows you and for money people are ready to do a lot of shit. I've seen relatives killing one other for inheritance. You don't know what sick mind is sitting behind the keyboard, most of the serial killers are looking quite normal and nice individuals but...

If you intend to trade, be informed that you are risking the amount even tho you are using the most reputed escrow for example.

Don't share your private keys even with your mother. They should remain private - just and only for you.

Trust your judgement and your gut feeling. If you have the slightest concern when dealing with someone, if we are talking about money, goods etc, use an escrow. Higher rank doesn't mean a higher level of trust. Everyone can become a scammer if for some reason he fells the opportunity is 'worth it'.

I can't remember the name of the user who scammed a newbie here a few months back. The guy seemed all right, had a relatively high rank, he was writing posts about protecting yourself online, was privacy oriented and advising users of what to do and what not to. In the end he ended up emptying some users wallet who asked for his help. He saw an opportunity and decided to throw his reputation under the bus.

Ranks are largely meaningless when it comes to trust. Anyone could turn out to be a scammer here or have their account stolen by one so that's why you need to take multiple factors involved and also look at their behaviour and history before you trade with someone. If theymos himself randomly messaged me asking if he could borrow $1000 in bitcoin I wouldn't just blindly send him it because he's a Legendary Admin who's very trusted. A lot of things could be wrong there. The fact that someone like him is even asking for money should set off alarm bells. If someone's password and/or email has been reset recently - even if they're a very reputable member - that should also make you more cautious as to who you're actually dealing with.


You don't have to take the ranks as meaning everything, but they're just a barometer of how long you've been here (and now also how many merits you've received). They can help you in judging a person but they should not be solely relied upon.


Well that's what the feedback system is there for. If you trust or distrust someone you can show that by either leaving them feedback or adding them to your trust list system. Theymos would never implement any sore of KYC verification and even that can be abused or bypassed so all it would lead to is a false sense of security.

If you trust someone based on rank you'll get scammed. It would be trivial for an account like this one (which I recently woke up from inactivity) to have been sold. If I hadn't recently verified my identity via a 2015-staked Bitcoin address, you'd have no real way of knowing if I was the original owner of this account or not, and that's a big problem. To be fair, even then I could have given the private key of that address away if I had sold this account, so the only thing that verification shows you is that it's unlikely I've been hacked, it doesn't tell you a lot about whether I've sold this account. Note I don't say impossible as they could have hacked both my account and my wallet!

I'm willing to bet that it would be pretty trivial for me to sell this account. Not to boast, but I think a 2012-created Legendary account with a strong history of trust and multiple sticky threads could probably be shifted very quickly in private markets. And then they could go and use that to perform a big exit scam. That's why I've told people to be very wary if you ever see this account trying to do big trades, an IPO, escrow, etc :)

I think people are more aware of the above nowadays, but previously accounts being sold and then used to perform big escrow or IPO exit scams was fairly common. It could still happen any day now even though people are more aware of it, because if a scammer slowly wakes an account up and makes it seem natural, it's hard to notice the signs.

Back to the original topic though, don't trust based on rank. Trust based on a history of reputable behavior and use your common sense.

Uhm, I'm pretty sure ranks were supposed to be a statement of how much you've contributed to the forum and how many have approved or appreciated your contribution. As for trust, most people whom have negative remarks made about them should have a negative trust value shown and you can easily see it on their profile, right? As for trusting the sort of information, well, that is up to you. You can consider or remember things that were written down here but you should still do your own research. Solely basing your knowledge off of people on this forum may not be the best idea after all. Accumulating from different sources, compiling, and determining which is false and true should be the most easiest way to get the information you want. Now if you're a lazy one, then I have nothing for ya.

I were not voted on the poll since my answer wasn't there. I only trust officially to admin. Because I trusted him already with my identity like IP. And yes, personally I trust so many user. No matter what is their rank. You can't trust user with rank based. So many legendary user already scammed and sometimes newbies show enough trust. So trust can't be measure rank wise. Even a well trusted person could turn into scammer what I noticed from beginning. So it totally up to your faith, how and which user your are going to trust.

Trust has nothing to do with rank. Rank is an identity of the forum, who spent how much time here or who are the older here.
People have shared a lot of examples here. You can check their previous feedback from other people and evaluate them if they can be trusted with, and with how much money.
From my observation, in this forum, numerous people try to build their reputation for a bigger scam. So, I prefer using escrow in all the big deals.

To be a "Legendary" i.e. cost a simple payment... i.e. x bitcoins. or y dollars... maybe an another marketplace, but please check sometimes the prices in our Marketplace also for ranks above "Full Member".
To get one don't need any time or don't need any big effort.

Legendary is a phrase which has a meaning in english, and this meaning suggest a kind of trustworthy member! (and Senior, Hero also...) I think it is a big issue!!!!
The ranks shouldn't have any relationship with trust, if ranks we shouldn't interpret as any trust level!

I think, it would be better. i.e. Full Member the highest rank, because this member has a connection to the jurisdiction of our world.
If somebody won't want to be identified - remains simple Member. If a rank has no connection with the meanings of "Legendary", "Hero", "Senior", then it would be more better to exchange this ranks to Member or Full Member.

It is very difficult to assume that your opinions in this topic are unbiased. By the way, stop double-posting.

Perhaps if you had concerned yourself with the forum's rules, you would be able to become a Sr. Member. :)

---

I would be fine with doing away with ranks but we do have some connection to 'meaningfulness' with the addition of the merit system.

Someone who has created twice as much valuable content (on average) than a Hero Member could be considered Legendary. They would also require active posting on the forum for at least 110 weeks and at least 775 posts.
The minimum requirement for a Legendary member would be an average of 1.29 merit/post. That's pretty legendary.

---

---

Now, if ol' thermos does plan on removing ranks, then account selling will also cease. If he could do signatures at the same time (since ranks are associated thereof) then that would be great.

Ranks don't have any relationship with trust. Have you read the 20 or so replies to your initial post? No one equates rank with trust. Literally every post is saying that rank means nothing in terms of trust.

What connection is there between "Full Member" and any jurisdiction? I have no idea what you are talking about. And you seem to still be proposing that Full Member should only be for users who undertake KYC? Not only would that never happen, but it would kill the forum overnight. The only people willing to undertake KYC just to post are bounty spammers.

"unbiased"? Who is "unbiased" if the meaning of a rank has a connection to a trust level?
Why it is double-posting?
Where I used the word "jurisdiction" before?


Maybe we should delete then "Full Member" also, and we should create a new rank (i.e. for me ;) ...): "Well Known Member" ;) and an another one for members known only through eyewitnesses: "Known Member"...
Or similar phrases...
What is your opinion? It is better, or?

We would be able to decide in a thread & chart about the start and end-state - and then it would be possible to do the changes with many signatures. Or?

It doesn't.

You are making consecutive replies to this thread instead of concatenating into one single post.

Remove ranks except for the first four, then. Brand New, Newbie, Jr. Member, Member.

Then remove all signatures.

Trust has nothing to do with what Rank you or others have !
Its possible that you can trust a Full Member or trust an Newbie before doing that on an Legendary who has done something  great for the Forum or for you !
Accounts get sold and bought and sometimes Scammer abuse this.
But if he has done something trustworthy for you that means not that he can be trusted for others with money or something else !
Thats where the Feedback comes to the play and if you gets or given an possitive Feedback means also not that the user can be trusted for others.
Its a long way for that.

I think the centralized STAFF with the centralized MONEY (= merits) means for bitcointalk.org (and for Bitcoin also) a political risk.
A robot can tracks members, which was already identified through an external organisation, and then can be detected, which people getting and giving most "merit"s (I think, it is a tree).
If the people with the biggest influence to the other people (and political, economical ideas behind) was identified, it is very simple to identify the jurisdiction(s), in which they living.

If the jurisdiction(s) was identified, it is possible to reach this jurisdiction and ban politically and economically the members. Or?
Maybe the staff and then important people will be exchanged (I think it was already done), and then bitcointalk.org can be used against the original targets of the founder and the original community.

In many places are bitcointalk.org Announcements a must - i.e. coinmarketcap.com, ICO's, IEO's, ... The staff, the important people here can influence the crypto market - against the original targets, ideas...
In the first block of Bitcoin we can read some orig words of satoshi - and in bitcointalk.org we speaking already mostly about "fintech firms" and "bank connections" :D

It has - through meanings in the English...... (Full, Senior, Hero, Legendary...) Such words has a connection to a trust level.
If rank shouldn't express trust, then we should choice phrases for a rank WITHOUT any connection to TRUST.

"Brand new", "Newbie", "Jr. Member" is also a trust level, but it is a technically trust level - without such ranks we are don't able to act against attacks ((through bots, simple and for us maybe dangerous people, ...))

You are still making consecutive posts.

---

This is true. This is also why several ignorant new forum members ignorantly trust those of higher ranks.

Perhaps this is true but the solution needn't be a shift of an entire system to solve a byproduct thereof. Isn't that kind of why we have trust ratings, flags and warnings, people posting on threads, etc?

Moreover, it still won't absolutely solve the problem. There is no such thing as a foolproof forum design to prevent people from getting scammed. There will always be a fool slipperier than even the slyest of scammers, and they will slither into a scam thread and snatch their prize of financial forfeiture.

Technically. But if we want to anchor semantics into everything and reproach the idea of a ranking system, then nothing should be tracked. Activity, merit, posts.

I do have a proposition for your idea of a trust-free forum: 4chan.

The rights of extra signatures should we give to "Donator" or "VIP"... Maybe it means more support for the Staff. Or?
The normal signatures should be remains - at Full Members, "Known Members", "Well Known Members".
"Full Member" should be then remain.

Sorry for "double posting" - I trying to give you my opinions, but I need sometimes for a issue more time as other issues - so I am not wait for opinion of others, I trying to answer every-bodies questions, issues in many posts.
I won't left my opinion to loose - so I post they at the time as I can.

"double posting" for me is i.e. "posting" with SAME content.


I do it sometimes. Many thanks. I don't like it, because it don't document the time of the changes correctly...
But - please...

What do you mean "normal signatures"?

I advocate for the removal of signatures altogether, given that * [dD]iscussion boards—save for Technical Discussion—are boards of unending spam.

I can understand "not waiting" but the issue is that you respond to one person in a post, then another in a separate post that directly follows.

It's not that big of a rule, but it's better to edit the posts together if you find that your post is the most recent reply on the thread.
If someone has responded to your former half of the post (prior to the edit) then you can shift the latter half to a new post, then.

"consecutive posts" - this is more better as "double posting". Please read my post about my opinions above. What can I do if I want to document such ideas?


Many thanks.

I think, it is an issue. New people feels - this forum supports scam. My proposal to remove TRUST then from the rank phrases. Maybe less rank means more scam resistance. It is important, I think.

^{There is an} https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/frostee/frostee_edit.png ^{button at the top-right of your posts, right next to} https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/frostee/frostee_quote.png ^and https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/frostee/frostee_delete.png

"normal signatures" - what I can create at this time - as a "Full Member". More space - should we give to "Donator", "VIP".
Spam - I hate it also.

Im gonna straight to the point, nowadays we cant trust on just something or someone, actually there so no rank we can actually trust above all even some higher ranks can be untrusted thats why a lot of high rank you will see that theyre have some -1 on their profile that symbolizes the negative trust but on the other hand, higher ranks can be the most trusted person because of their experiences, the conclusion part is that dont abuse the power or the way other see you because your high, you and we should be a good model to the new on the forum that why it called newbie.

Race = Ranks

If we are going to base the level of trust in Ranks, we are going to be RANKist (racist), oh wait, is that even a word?

In real life, you can't even trust your family, even yourself betrays you.

Obviously, I wouldn’t trust anyone, not even a moderator. Your trust shouldn’t be based on number of merit earned over the months, btt account rank and not even the trust level.
BTT account like every other account on the internet can be hacked.
If for any reason you have to trust someone on btt forum, I’ll suggest you trust someone that you’ve grown on btt to trust. By that I mean, a user who you’ve studied it’s posts and comments over a long time and it’s pattern/standards remain consistent.

Best advise would be to learn the best Risk Management skills.

Don't trust on anyone before you DYOR and investigate their characteristic through their history in the forum.
- Rank: people can buy accounts to have high-ranked accounts.
- Merit: people can exchange or buy merits.
- Trust: people can buy trust or feedback (sometimes they will be caught if they exchange trust / feedback back and forth, but sometimes they do get trust legally from loan services).
Fundamentally, all of things are elements that help you to judge one's general trust/ reliablility.

Ranks is irrelevant to trust thing,you can trust newbie or legendary if they have trade history here without any issues for that trust system will help you but also read the untrusted feedback which might tell the entire trade history of the person you trade and also you need to see the recent trade history if someone is higher rank because accounts were hacked and sold so you may not be dealing with the real owner now.

There are many misconceptions about whom to trust or not.
A User with a lot Posts / Merits / Rank can still scam you. A person who is good at writing may not be good when it comes to trust and he may try to gain advantage of the situation.
There is a trust ranking for everyone, that can give you a little insight of the trust able person. In all these situation we still need to trust someone and generally active DT members are trust able.

I would trust no one here, when it comes to my money. That's why I have chosen Bitcoin to be my favourite form of money.
Some people might know where this quote comes from:

If I good understand - the bigger ranks, the more new merits are only tools here to scam others. They aren't show, how much your experience or your renown more... Or?
It let possible to scam mostly newbies or not members... All others should know - nobody should trust here anybody. Or?
As greater the rank (i.e.) as bigger tool it is to scam others. Or?
Hero's i.e. got (mostly bought already...) their Rank - because the opportunity in it to scam others... Or?
And many others do great jobs for you - and you will able to pay off they with merits :D

Why using we then such tools? We should avoid such tools or similar opportunities......
And, if we shouldn't trust others - we should negate the result of this poll. Or?

I locked this poll to save the result :D

I tried to comprehend your post but couldn't, replying to the part I qouted above, firstly the poll was a waste of time since it's just a wrong idea to trust anyone just because of his/her rank. You can't never be sure who's behind the accounts on the forum as buying and selling of account occurs daily on the forum so accounts can chances hands at any moment and still stay under the rader for quite some time (days, months or even years) without getting notice. Therefore trusting just because of an account rank is the same as trusting a random online user just because they were the first to discover an opportunity before you. In this case (just because they joined the forum before you did).

Trusting because of posts quality (merit received, style of posting etc) is just stupidity too, also just basing your judgement on the trust the user has recieve is also not advisable since trust are quite easy to manipulate. In my opinion you should only trust those that have quite a excellent record in that area of your interest. If you're interested in a loan, only transact with those that have excellent record in that area, and when you need a third party for more safety, only employ the service of escrow that have proven without any doubt to be considered trustworthy. Still though nothing is gauranteed.

I can't see the poll's result but you should know that it doesn't prove anything.
You got the answer for your question in the previous replies but for some reason it seems you are not reading them or just ignoring them because it is not what you were expecting.

The higher one's rank the bigger the opportunity to burn your account and disappear will be. I've seen many a hint that a decent number of established members don't have a pot to piss in.

No one should be under any illusion that if something landed in a long standing member's lap the temptation to exploit it will be strong and it may only not have happened because the chance hasn't arrived yet. There are enough old schoolers here who wound up screwing people.

We'll never know whether it was a long con or spontaneous but the higher up you go the more is dangled in front of you if you've placed yourself in the right circles.

There've been people I've grown up with who turned around and fucked me for piffling advantage after knowing them for decades. On the internet I'd times that possibility by a few million no matter how carefully crafted someone's rep is.

This topic used to be pinned in the Newbies section: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=33835.0

You shouldn't even trust a moderator without having a good reason, more than one ended up scamming other forum users.

Please:
https://i.imgur.com/ToZ6f5e.png

Before I locked this poll, I changed my vote - because for Member and Full Member only I voted. You can see, my opinion earlier.

But such members are remained mostly "orig" bitcointalk.org members at this time, I think...
They trying to save the original ideas: P2P community, no trusted third party, not to allow to scamming others and help if somebody was scammed, to change our Economy - to correct our wrong, centralized money system, ...
Such members trying to save and realize Satoshi's dreams. Please see the remark in the first block in Bitcoin-Blockchain.
But we should detect, the dreams wasn't implemented with bitcoin. Please see my opinion on reddit (https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/9u2men/a_criticism_of_bitcoin_as_a_kind_of_money_and_a/):

Bitcoin is only a paper-money, and it is able to use in our wrong, centralized money system! We use a buzzword for this here: "Fintec" already.

the ranking is indeed needed in every organization, to determine which are senior and beginner.

Let alone the bitcointalk Forum, in everyday life government has ranks ranging from Group A to D.
This is a sign that the A beginners and B, C and D can be said senior and Legendary.
For me there is nothing strange about the current rank, you just enjoy it between likes and dislikes, it depends on how to think.

If you think well about the current rankings, you don't need to worry about this problem, just give your best you will get what you dream of.

Trust but Verify.

Personally, I'd copy the rank names of the military, starting with Private, Corporal, Sergeant ... all the way to Captain, Major, Colonel, General. ... Satoshi would be the Commander in Chief or something, and the Staff would become Joint Chiefs ...

Only the most rank of all, corpses. Only they are guaranteed not to cheat you.

I don’t think that there is any relation between Trust and Rank. So a Member rank can be more trusted than a Hero Member. So we should not Justify It with rank. But its right that the more High rank the more chance to stay safe for deal.

I personally trust the forum member who have lots of previous smooth deal history. Again a person with whom I already made some deal previously. 

NO.

Trust does not relate to ranks. Trust belongs to the person who uses account, not the account rank.

If a trusted person uses an account in the forum, that account is always trusted, at whatever rank it has at anytime points.

It is trusted at brandnew rank.
It is trusted at Junior member rank.
It is trusted at member rank.
It is trusted along the way to Legendary rank.

If you falls into trust points, it will cause serious traps because trusts can be exchanged as I saw. I see them as faked trusted users and with that kind of 'faked trusted' users, they can change to untrusted at anytime points they want. At the end of their time in the forum, they end as untrusted, scam ones.

I'd want to trust Satoshi, but he pulled a Houdini :(

stop bumping and posting on an old thread if you just reply with a generic post that has been mentioned a hundred times before