Bitcoin Forum

While having a look at the forum Trust System this morning, this question just came into my mind that "What happens if someone mistakenly gives you a negative trust and dies?" Does the forum have plan B for that. Because we all know that life is as volatile just like Bitcoin, whereby today you may be sound and tomorrow you are either sick or gone, as nobody knows when he or she will ever die. So this is a very vital question everyone needs to know, as it can affect anyone on the the forum irrespective of your rank, and that's the reason why I decided to post it here on the "Reputation" board as this is the only place people having issues regarding "Trust System" and the rest come to lay complain and have there issues resolve. So what actually happens after a tagged has been proven to be innocent and the tagger is seen not to have come online after a period of 120days. Does the forum have a plan B for that? If Yes, please can you educate us more on this, because am sure there are people out there suffering from this, and those yet to suffer the same issue. Because there are certain reasons that may result to someone been tagged a "negative trust" on the forum, which could be weather the person has been noticed to be a scammer or a promoter of scam on the forum, and I was made to understand that accounts with negative trust are always restricted from many things on the forum. So please, what measure is one advisable to take after been tagged a negative trust and proven to be innocent and the tagger is seen not to ever come online again because probably he or she is dead or critically ill. Because your answer will be of great benefits not to just only me but to those facing the issue today and those yet to face it in the future.

Or,

1. Is Negative Trust irreversible?
2. At what rank can someone send a negative trust? (Newbie, member, Full, Sr, Hero or Legend)
3. How many negative trust can one send in a week, month, year or lifetime)



So thank you and God bless you as you help a brother or sister there out to resolve their issue. Thanks

1. Only the user can moderate the rating they left for others however admin can always change setting. But admin usually do not involve in user cases
2. Anytime any user can send a feedback. Negative, positive, neutral all are the same privilege
3. There are no limit set for it. Unlimited.

He will eventually drop from the DT list and his rating will become meaningless. For a while you’ll still flash red but it will eventually disappear. You shouldn’t worry about it that much. However, the fishy part here is verifying the death of this individual. Some forum users go dormant for a few years and come back later. You can’t assume that they are dead.

We can say it is reversible but admin and moderators do not want to interfere with trust system, so consider it irreversible.

At any rank, but it appears distinct on your profile page and in each post you make if a DT member tag your account. Trust system is more about DT members because they have more power to make the trust appear more to other forum users.

As many as possible, but if not legit and seem like using it to spam like giving one user like hundreds of negative trusts, it can be reported and probably it would be deleted, even if not deleted, only one will appear per user unless you visit the user's trust page.

If the tag is not valid anymore, The DT1 can exclude that particular person so that his tag will not have any weight for your trust score but if the person is not a DT then it’s feedback don’t matter anymore. Usually some DT usually counters it by neutral feedback to negate the negative feedback that already given since it unmoderated. There’s a lot of case like this especially on casino accounts that previously has an issue and resolved later but the problem was the person give that negative feedback already gone or not using the forum anymore. You will notice a more positive feedback is given to counter it since trust score what’s matter most and not the single neg feedback that goven in the past. The recent feedback always govern since it’s on the top of your trust page.

TMAN, no one knows what happened to him. Bruno, everyone knows he died. Lauda, left the forum.

There are many users who are not with us for different causes. All cases are different. But I think it is safe to say, when anyone die and if this is confirmed then people will remove him from their trust setting since his judgement does not reflect the current value for the forum anymore.

The trust feedback is actually not for counter feedback to each others. It used to be but now the appropriate trust feedback is to leave one when you are in business with a user. Problem still remains because some people think they are too important to the system.

that was always a dilemma. if some proven forum user has stopped coming here (no matter what is the reason) whether that is a reason to be excluded from the DT list?
For example, should we distrust TMAN because it has been offline for a long time thus hiding all the negative tags he left?
He ^TMAN is left some inappropriate red feedback (in my opinion) in the Best_Change (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=1073450) case ^{he might as well change his mind if he is active}, but I believe he should stay in DT because he did a lot of the work marking risky accounts.

It depends.
Should we trust the account when it is not active for long long time and no further contribution to the forum?

I do not see such account should be in the DT system anymore. I will practice not adding him in my trust setting at all. If he become active and can prove that he is owner of the same account then I am more than happy to add him on my trust setting.

OP, you need to read this post. I think that after reading, you will have an understanding of who can put negative tags and in what quantity and in what rank.

LoyceV's Beginners guide to correct use of the Trust system (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5191802.0)

Also try to create your own list of trust, especially since you can study this topic at the same time as creating a list.

Technically you are right but since Theymos didn’t provide a guide on how to this with this kind of special situation which the user who gives feedback is not available anymore while the feedback is not valid already, The counter feedback is a improvised solution to neutralized that negative and we know that this is still being used on some scenario that some DT gives unreasonable feedback to other user just because of his personal opinion didn’t align to the negative trust receiver point of view.

You need to understand that Theymos wants a decentralized feedback system. He value uses' collective understanding of a system. For it, he does not enforce anything. We don't even have any official rules per se.

Theymos discouraged retaliatory feedback. (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5095156.0) Counter seems a form of retaliatory. If you think anyone is not using their feedback properly or if you feel their judgement is controversy or they make wrong calls then "~" them. Leaving a counter against a red feedback or a counter against a green feedback does not change anything.

Again it all depends. I am speaking my mind and how I understand the system that most are comfortable to use. Ignore the part where there are personal interest and financial motivation for many users.

If there is a DT member who gives you (red Trust),: wrongly, you can appeal in reputation to explain the problem, before he died, for that some DT members here put a lot of emphasis on the system as below.


As said by: @BitcoinGirl.Club.
The words of @BitcoinGirl.Club, a decision can be made, if the relevant member gives (red Trust),: for you, and leave the forum forever, if proven you are innocent, of course maybe the admin can decide the deletion plan: B, but if on the other hand you are guilty and he is still in DT position, your efforts are in vain no one cares about the (red trust) you have, that is something else added.

Trust ratings are irreversible, the red tag remains forever no matter how many positive trust you get after that until if there is any change in the trust feedback system but once it was trust score which is different from now.

Anyway the chances of giving red tags with no proper reason is less likely to happen or if it happens then the user can come up with a thread regarding and seek for the actual reason.

I think this question is too far fetched. It's very unlikely that someone leaves negative feedback by mistake, let alone die suddenly after. You should try to fix the problem before he dies ;) The trust system in this forum is so perverse that this would be the very last thing to think about, if it's even worth thinking about.

if events as you said might happen. I don't think moderators and admins will interfere with the trust placed in you. it's all personal, you with the person marking you negative.
even if the person who tagged you is no longer on DT, it will remain in your account forever. looks negative or not, if the creator doesn't delete it won't disappear from your account.

Trust is not a static thing to be rated from one netgative trust, but the sum of your negative and positive score determines whether you are trustworthy or not. There is a case where @best_change account received a nagtive trust from @TMAN and yet he runs a successful signature campaign and many trust him without affecting that trust.

One single wrong feedback can't turn anyone OFF dt because they may have hundreds of correct feedback. In such a case, you won't be able to do anything. You have to carry with the feedback.
TMAN has already been mentioned. I know Zepher from the forum who have died (RIP) but still in DT because of their correct use of feedback. No matter what, if majority of their feedbacks are correct, they are not likely to get OFF dt.

Unfortunately, this is not what happens according to the system that the forum operates on trust feedbacks. Once you verify the list of trusted members, you will find among them members who have been absent and others who have not been active for a long time. Rather, there are already untrusted members among them, as evidenced by many facts against them.
About the topic rised by Op, the only solution from my point of view is to add ratings from other members about the rating left by the deceased member, since the forum system prevents the administration from changing or canceling these ratings.

I guess that's true, although isn't Vod still on some level of DT?  Even if he's not, there may be a chance that an inactive or deceased member might be kept on DT because of the respect of the feedback they've left by the community--know what I'm saying?  So it might not be true in all cases that a red neg would eventually turn to not-red.  Nor should it, especially in the case of scammers.

Anyway OP, that's how this crazy trust system here is structured.  It's been this way since I became a member and it's looking like it ain't gonna change in my lifetime.  I think it's far, far from an ideal system, but it's what we've got to work with--so either accept it or try to get Theymos to do something about it.  I do think if spam feedback stays well after a member has gone inactive that it's a problem.  And we all know spam feedback when we see it, so let's not quibble about semantics.  It'd be nice if mods would remove those (although there's so much of that kind of crap that it'd be an overwhelming task).

I know a user who received a negative tag on the forum for disagreeing with Vod on the BTT official discord server I believe his name is MininpaL or something he tried to appeal but nothing was done after all only the user who left it has the right to remove if even if the community is against it, I still believe that a thread should be created for the appeal of inappropriate feedback and let the admins decide, maybe a kind of vote from the DT members Decentralization is good and bad at the same time.

Thank you for this comment, after reading the op, i was interested to know the solution to what the op enquired about, i felt relieved after reading this comment, its indeed good to know that the trust system is a well thought out system that gives little to no room for forum users to abuse.


According to what i know which i guess alot of users have already stated, Yes, any trust, be it Negative, Positve or Neutral can only be reversed by the user who gave it, though like some persons here have said, Admin and moderators to have the ability to reverse whatever kind of trust you were tagged with, but they choose not to interfere so as to allow complete decentralization of the trust system.
 
Aside newbies which I am not sure if they are permitted to make use of the trust system, i think every ranks are eligible to use the ranking system.

Answer is unlimited, there is no set number of Negative, Positive or Neutral trust one is permitted to give in a month, you can leave as many as possible if you wish.

One of my simplistic understandings of trust systems is that they can vary depending on who is giving. I might consider removing the red tag on anyone's profile I've decorated if proven otherwise, but the tag will remain in certain cases. Even though the system trust is actually not moderated, I assume it can still be changed by the admin if there is a serious error that causes chaos. In essence, if you want to tag a user, then you should also consider deleting, revising the tag if proven otherwise. I've done it once, red tag changes to neutral and maybe vice versa if next time he's proven wrong again.

All rank, it just depends on what wrongs or what positive thing they did, not on the rank.

The assumption is that it's unlimited, I can send more than 10 tags or maybe 100 in a day especially if I want to do it to a scammer or cheaters.

Maybe we can have a flag-like system to dispute a negative feedback and counter such situations? Only users on the DT list can vote on it with three voting option- Agree, Disagree, Neutral
Whichever option gains the most votes after a period of time, the feedback will be accordingly updated.
No change in the case of Agree
Feedback will be removed in the case of Disagree
Feedback will change to neutral in case neutral gets the majority.

It will make the trust system democratic and reduce the autocratic element. A step forward from the current "three estates"-like system.

Probably someone has already proposed this solution, given how active the meta section is.

Negative trust from a non-DT member is meaning less. Normal users could give you a red trust but that won't be visible if they don't go to your profile to check it.



Sometimes when I explore the forum I notice that the user's trust rating is not visible. I know usually we can see that the user has any trust score and which one is below his BTT username. Is that a setting that can be applied to hide user trust score or is that a forum bug?

I wouldn't say its meaningless as that user can eventually become DT member.



In some parts of forum (for example Meta or Bitcoin Discussion) trust rating is not visible for anyone, if that's what you meant when you said that trust rating is not visible.

This may not be relevant to the thread in question, but please what does DT means. For going through all the comments in this thread I just discovered the use of such term and am lost.
If possible you can drop a link to explicitly expose me to other terms too.
Thanks!

The trust works like something that is absolutely and uninterferable but it should have some short comings. I have had the question that if a DT gives negative tag purposely to an innocent member, what will be the punishment of the DT member?
Would he be tagged or removed from the DT. I have read where thyemos retrieved merits giving to someone, therefore he could also remove a negative tag. But I know he will not do that since it's related to trust.

As suggested by others there should be a thread called Feeback Appeal, so that of anyone feels that he is given wrong feedback, he could protest there with reference and other DT members will decide on the matter.

There have been several cases in the past where DT members have gone against some unworthy negative tag, but at the end of the day, DT is not moderated and it is about personal judgement stuff, we had Vod and Lauda who spread negative tag like a wildfire, both have been voted out of DT1 so their DT strength lies on those DT1 who still have them on their trust list.

I also suggested the DT appeal thread, but the rate of abuse will be much.

If a situation arises where the member leaving positive, negative or neutral trust dies then basically their account should be not be accessed unless others know the username and password. That trust/feedback stays on your account as there is no way to remove it unless it is removed after logging in to the same account (that left it) to delete or modify it.

The chances are unlikely it will happen in the event of death therefore the trust/feedback will stay.

Although the topic is rather old, I think that there's a small nuance nobody has "touched" yet.
While trust rating is indeed irreversible if the user leaves the forum, while trust rating indeed can be changed only by the user (in theory), there's something more:

Bitcointalk is a forum based on a central database. This means that if the administrator (i.e. theymos) can be convinced, he could invalidate (remove?) directly in the database the trust feedback.
Of course, it would be an overly dangerous precedent, of course, this has never been done (afaik), but, at least in theory it's possible.
There were discussions that at least banned users' feedback would be nice if it's invalidated, but it has never happened.

But, like in every good or bad, I tend to never say never (still, you better learn to live with whatever feedback you've received, it's a safer approach).

If he dies immediately after giving a wrong trust, then it would mean that he got the punishment of death for his mistake  :D
He will be answerable to god for the mistake he did in the world hereafter.  :)

There may be some serious answers to this discussion but I don't think this could happen. Maybe 0.001% chance of a person dying after giving a bad trust.  ::) 

Ah well, imagine living a punishment filled eternity in the hereafter just for leaving a negative feedback  :o

Seriously though, there is no chance anything can happen to that trust/feedback because the only way to remove it would be for the someone to log in to that account and remove/edit it and since the person would be deceased it is highly unlikely to happen unless multiple people share those login detailed.

Its been told and advised many times that we should arrange to tell our wallet private keys to someone very close to us, so in case we die, the money can be used by the family members and is not wasted lying in the wallets which no one can access.

This post made me think that in that case, we should share our password for bitcointalk, email, and maybe Facebook/Twitter/Instagram too to someone we can trust  ??? Maybe to the same person, we think can take care of our private keys   ???

I am sure many people already have taken steps to avoid a disaster such as losing access to email accounts, social media accounts, maybe shopping websites and of course crypto wallets. That is somewhat different to someone accessing this website regarding the thread title but still is important.

It is difficult to trust that information with a lawyer who will release it in the form of a will after death therefore people probably make it up as they go along. Some could write down credentials and leave it in a safe place and others can basically give it to who they want on the basis they trust they will not access the websites and wallets until/unless death has occurred.

Would anybody inherit a login for the forum and then use it to edit tags as per a will? That really would be a first  ;D

Do you really think this is a problem?

Let's assume that a person left a negative tag. I don't think it was a mistake. Nonetheless, And he himself died. Clap and it's gone.

And this man obliged his relatives, who did not understand the life of the forum, so that after his death, what would they do? It was explained to everyone what happened to the deceased? And that he still has a sin in the form of an incorrect tag? And they urgently need to sort things out?

Is it possible to continue the fantasy?

It seems to me that this is madness that is simply not worth discussing.

Died and died. All. Point. We drove. The one who stayed with the tag definitely should not die from this. :o

I do not want to welcome the word mistake in tagging, and let us assume it was a mistake. Did the person die a day after leaving the negative tag?
If anyone gives you a neg tag you don't deserve, you should follow the person up immediately or wait for sometime for the heat to calm down, you follow the person up in pm. Explain things for the person the user will definitely remove the tag. In the occasion that the person refuses to remove the said tag, you can open a topic in the reputation for the forum to judge the matter.

;D ;D ;D Lately, I have been reading about die, died, dead and death. Could I please share my password with you in pm incase  ::)

Do not hold back, you are direct and to the point as always lovesmayfamilis  ;D

For the subject matter, I think all that could be said about has been said about it. If someone dies after leaving, whether he made a mistake or not the bigger sadness would be the member dying and not the one living with a negative tag.

The deceased would probably not leave instructions in his will asking loved ones to remove negative trusts therefore the OP probably has the answers.

Funny thing, when we hear about tags, our minds jumps to negative tags for a single reason, its the most common on the forum and so, we forget that tags could be neutral or positive as well.
When they say someone could get tagged by mistake, I doubt its even possible. I haven't seen it happen before and it's so not going to happen except, if some judgements that came out wrong would be called a mistake then, we could see it to be that as the threads suggest says.

Meanwhile, people get tagged for definitive reasons of which not excluding misquoting somome or quoting out of context. I've seen this happen before in the past but, it came as a neutral and I guess other issues could accord. I've thought of tagging someone once, even prepared the tag but held back for some obvious reason of occurances amongst others. Be it as it may, when your tagged, its not always the end of it but it coul be. Mistake tags can be corrected by appealing if the DT to have tagged you doesn't com to the knowledge of it in time but could be permanent in the event of an absent (never to return such as Lauda) or deceased forum user.

Just be a good forum user and avoid tags on the negative.

In an association I belonged, one day our chairman said that next meeting there would be review of dues. Some members of the association started panicking that why should there be a review.  I now reminded them that it could be an upward or downward review  ;D.  When it comes to tag, the negative is always avoided.


The neutral tag can be used to solve many problems but for the fact that it doesn't prevent people from joining campaigns, it tends to be less effective.
Meanwhile, I once stumbled on someone's feedback and saw a neutral tag like "Reminder or Note for myself "...I laughed, like someone's feedback space is now used for note taking or reminder setting  ;D ;D ;D