Added.

This is still missing the point. I'll give an example: I tagged Boplewww for posting this. As far as I know, nobody got scammed by this user. I don't think anybody would doubt this tag, it's just an example of what I consider more useful than waiting for an actual scam to happen.

Correct. And that's kinda the point: if a scammer gets tagged, he shouldn't have a say in who gets to see his tag.

The red tag was countered by actmyname. It was considered by others too, see this example:

Isn't it obvious DT won't always agree? There are clear red and clear green cases, but in between there's going to be differences of opinion at some level.

Right-click your guy's name while he's climbing.
Your current number:
This number was reset for all users at the start of this giveaway.

Based on the evidence provided in Bountyhunters.io probably will scam their members. Watch out!!!, I tagged bountyhunters.io on November 13:

Today, I received a PM asking to remove the red trust. This is the only tag I've always wondered about when I would receive a PM asking to remove it. I'm willing to remove it, but I'd like to hear some community input first.

Short version: bountyhunters.io was asking users to provide their private key or mnemonics before giving them their bounty payment in Tokens. The fact that they asked for private keys in order to be paid is very shady at least, and a potential exit scam at worst. They seem to offer other options now to be paid (in Tokens). I don't use their platform myself.

I'd appreciate it if someone (or a few people) can take the time to give their opinion on this.

First: in general, most of the users who complain about the trust system, are the ones who got tagged. I agree with the large majority of all red DT-tags.
You're talking about the few that are debated. In general, I think the DT system serves a purpose, and some "collateral damage" can't be avoided.

This goes for all users, not only DT.

For a while I thought it's a bad thing that DT can't agree on tags, but then I realized it's actually a good thing. It proves DT is not a "gang", but it are individual users with an individual opinion.

There's another thing that got me thinking: the amount of DT-trust is largely based on being a "high profile" user, and not on the amount scammed.
Example: alia is at -2048, but BITMIXCOIN.IO is "only" at -64 after scamming more than 16 BTC.

I'd say it depends on the situation. I've received some positive trust for being helpful. I don't think that's "worse" than someone who receives positive trust  after a few small trades with DT-members. In fact, it took me many years to get this (and I appreciate the appreciation), while it's quite easy to gain trust by doing a few trades.

Although I agree with this, I can also see why some users tag them anyway.

I think this is too limited. If you have to wait for a DT-member to be scammed before a scammer can be tagged, many innocent Newbies will be scammed too, while doing a small deal to work on a long con doesn't mean someone can be trusted either.
As an example, look at the red trust I left. Before I was on DT, it was mainly for users who cheated my giveaways, or (the first one) a non-paying faucet). After I was put on DT (around March this year), I've tagged a couple dozen users, and none of them scammed me. Since scams aren't moderated, DT is the only protection this forum has.

---

If you don't like the trust system, set your own trust list. I still haven't done it, because I prefer to see users as most people see them. But feel free to start promoting custom trust lists, if enough people agree, DT will become less powerful.

---

I've tagged several spamming scammers while waiting for them to be nuked. Spam relies on large numbers, and without a quick warning, they will eventually make victims. Delaying those warnings doesn't do the community any good.

I've only received positive DT-trust without reference link, and about half my "untrusted" feedback doesn't have a link either. Basically, those are opinions, and it's up to the reader to decide whether or not he trusts the source.
I try to always (exception: the very first feedback I left) create a reference link.

I would agree, if this is only valid for high-ranking accounts. A Newbie scammer should be red at first tag because he can and probably will just create another account, a Legendary has much more to lose.

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've started making my custom trust list because of this:
He's now excluded on DT3. Even though he hasn't left any trust, I believe this is the right way to treat a user with such a flawed judgement. I didn't tag him for the same reason:

I did put his alt Chosen Username on ignore too.

Voor de fees maakt het niet uit, voor de privacy (ook van de klant) is het beter om voor elke transactie een nieuw adres te gebruiken. Voor lagere fees helpt het wel om SegWit te gebruiken. Er zijn 2 opties: adressen beginnend met bc1 geven de laagste fee, adressen beginnend met 3 zijn volledig compatible met alle wallets.

Dat is zelfs met de laagst mogelijke fees te weinig voor een transactie. Het is ruim minder dan een cent, als je het niet wil verhogen kan je het net zo goed weglaten.

Zolang je het wachtwoord niet vergeet zit je met BIP38 goed. Brute-forcen is zo goed als onmogelijk.

Fees zijn nu laag, maar dat was niet altijd zo en zal ook niet eeuwig zo blijven. Zie Fees are low, use this opportunity to Consolidate your small inputs!
Als je doorgaat met 15 transacties per 2 weken te ontvangen, is het aan te raden om af en toe al je "kleingeld" samen te voegen, bijvoorbeeld door het naar een nieuwe paperwallet te versturen. Een jaar geleden waren fees van $25 per input heel normaal, dat moet je zien te voorkomen.

Archived!
Based on your screenshot (which I can't archive Archived) you're trying to sell omedian.

Why not improve your business and increase your trustworthiness by signing a message from a funded address?

Here you go:
Address: 1brt1reqPVJML2wALbjpsW6Bfmb885wxh
PrivkeyPart: 5JketsQgPjFqxLYszoPmkhCGjuVu9WfQUHsGuZ38DJyWJdUA42V (Balance: )

I can confirm it works again

The airdrop was based on the user's rank at that moment. To receive 100 Merit, that user must have had a Full Member rank. He deranked by deleting his posts.

That happens when you sort all accounts based on extremes.

I've created this list, which shows how many Merit points each user has received after the airdrop.

That's not enough: someone with 260 Merit has most likely received 250 from the airdrop too.

Good luck!

You're probably better off not comparing yourself to obvious merit abuse.

If I interpret this post from theymos slightly out of context:
You're not a spammer, you engage in decent conversation, and you use the forum as a forum instead of an ATM. I think you deserve the Merit needed to rank up.

I'm posting this here as a reference in case someone wonders/questions why I went on a meriting spree
Note: sending Merit doesn't necessarily mean I agree with a post.

I'll move this to this thread:
I've tried the site in a private browser, which means no cookies and browser history. And yet, it's not working.
It used to work fine, with auto-login, up to the last time I've opened the site a few days ago.

That's confusing Does that mean new entries will be for the draw on next Friday? If so, here's mine, the same numbers again:
40, 41, 42, 43, 44

I've received my giftcard for 0.0025 BTC, and already lost half of it Thanks

Is there a reason the Login button doesn't work anymore? I've tried 2 different browsers.

Actually, it's $27984 and up. Crazy-igzo got right at the middle between bitebits and me.
I bet micgoossens would gladly give me a Lambo full college fund
I wasn't just "asking" for the dollar value of 1 Bitcoin at the time I made my prediction:

I haven't tested it, but have you lookd at Electrum command line options? I was amazed with this feature a while ago. It may be worth checking if it can do what you need.

Update:

The number of posts is still dropping, but less fast. I'm curious to see if it goes up again once crypto keeps recovering as it did in the past week.