For protection, I can't leave names of those I disagree with before I end up on their blacklist.
it is your right to do so, you shoudnt be afraid to publicly expose your thoughts this is your freedom to speech, stand up for it. Just FYI, I don't endorse leaving anyone a neg because of a differing opinion and I don't think I've ever left one out of sheer anger, politics, or just a disagreement. @The_Pharmacist, I got no issue with your feedbacks that's why you're included in my trust list. @Gunthar I'm not scared of getting distrusted, I haven't even left that much of a impacting feedbacks to be distrusted. Still new to the trust systems and I'm taking my time to understand. About speaking out, isn't that what I'm doing? I choose not to mention names unless it's really necessary. When elephants are fighting as an Ant it's best advice to stay on the sidelines and observe not jumping right into such a fight. That's exactly what I'm doing. When the time is right I'll jump in. For now just like the Ant don't think anyone will take me seriously for what I have to say. I'm still new to the system. Reading their feedbacks you'll discover they're letting their emotions get the best of them so what I was saying is, I'm trying to stay safe who knows I might anger them then they leave a negative feedback of wrong quoting or not starting my sentence with capital letters  Anyways the trust system is improving and we'll get there someday. |
|
|
|
|
Hate is such a big world although, I don't just agree with some of their feedbacks but again the trust system isn't moderated so one may say you're free to not trust another user for any reason but for me if it isn't a trust related issue it isn't worth the RED TAG.
For protection, I can't leave names of those I disagree with before I end up on their blacklist. When it comes to the trust system, we aren't there yet but OK is a good word to describe it.
|
|
|
|
So, to make this a short story, this is our concern about asking for donations, and we welcome the community's input: A scammer can make a deposit to our donation address and accuse us that this was a bribe/extortion money, and to avoid all that hassle we have stopped asking for donations on our website.
Very true, that's a valid concern although you guys have created a very strong reputation for your team that anyone from forum will believe such an accusations but inexperienced guests of forum could. When a fund is sent to a donation address it's considered as a donation irrespective of what the motives behind the transaction was. So again, scammers who'll try to take advantage of the donation address for wrong accusations will just be wasting their time and it'll earn them more RED TAGS. |
|
|
|
Personally I'll say it's appropriate to red tag user because from your topic and his OP he looks untrustworthy. He opens a service thread bump thread and locks it, asking interested customers to PM or chat him on telegram thereby taking their transaction off the public space isn't a trustworthy practice and has scam written all over it. Next he already has negative feedback although they're untrusted ones that doesn't mean they're wrong. This could be people he has already scammed through the PM's and on telegram. I'll say you should go ahead and tag user to prevent potential scam. OR You can leave neutral tag, asking forum users not to trade with that account and ask him to defend his negative feedback and carryout his transaction openly on the forum also PM the users that have already left feedbacks for valid reference if they were scammed. If he's not found guilty and agree to carryout open transaction then all tag should be lifted, in the spirit of this - You should be willing to forgive past mistakes if the person seems unlikely to do it again.
When someone copying their own thread on multiple boards,it is also plagiarism an needs to be banned.
Note:I reported people for copying their own thread and got banned as well.
That isn't plagiarism but spamming and i bet moderators didn't ban that user for plagiarism (for that particular post) but could be for spamming or any other offends after investigating the account but since they dont give direct reason we can't conclude. This is what plagiarism is Plagiarism is the "wrongful appropriation" and "stealing and publication" of another author's "language, thoughts, ideas, or expressions" and the representation of them as one's own original work. Source The key word their is "another author" can you steal from yourself, answer is NO. |
|
|
|
|
Simple answer, No. They shouldn't be ban for using well know proverbs or sayings without providing reference. Most communication in this forum uses informal writing format therefore users shouldn't be ban for not using a formal format of writing such as providing reference to famous quotes. Although "giving credit where credit is due" is something that should be encourage on the forum.
|
|
|
|
That's poor from me, I thought I would have helped about 30+ newbie to rank up by now. I received over 100+merit that's around 50+smerits just in January 2019. I have been very active in Beginners and help board trying to find newbie with quality post and post history but so far it has been discouraging. I'll start exploring new boards to find those newbie with quality post aiming to hit a target of 50+ helped newbie by December 2019. For the newbie that must have missed check this thread out "UPDATED [01/02/2019]: List of Active Merit Giveaways threads." |
|
|
|
|
Is this suppose to be something to debate about? A projects that knowingly employ proven untrustworthy individuals is technically an untrustworthy project. When you associates with well known criminals chances are you might be one of them. And when the police (DT members) comes for them, you'll also be arrest (red tagged) later you can appeal your case in court (Reputation board) and after investigation if project not found guilty you'll untagged. The tagging is to prevent any scammers attempt. It's as simple as that.
|
|
|
|
As I said in the OP, this thread will be updated regularly as new suggestion are been made and here's a reply from theymos that could serve as a possible guidelines towards leaving trust feedbacks on other users account. You should consider reading other response and his replies after this quoted reply (on thread). Update from theymos I do not view it as appropriate for trust ratings to relate primarily to non-trust matters. By giving someone negative trust, you're basically attaching a note to all of their posts telling people "warning: do not trade with this person!". If we can get DT working well enough, in the future I'd like to prevent guests from even viewing topics by negative-trust users in trust-enabled sections, so you have to ask yourself whether your negative trust would warrant this sort of significant effect. In particular, in my view: - Giving negative trust for being an annoying poster is inappropriate, since this has nothing to do with their trustworthiness. If they're disrupting discussion or never adding anything, then that's something for moderators to deal with, and you should report their posts and/or complain in Meta about it. - Giving negative trust for merit trading and deceptive alt-account use may be appropriate, but you should use a light touch so that people don't feel paranoid. - You should be willing to forgive past mistakes if the person seems unlikely to do it again. - It is absolutely not appropriate to give someone negative trust because you disagree with them. I'm disappointed in the reaction to this post. Although H8bussesNbicycles is perhaps not particularly trustworthy for other reasons, the reasons many people gave for neg-trusting him are inappropriate. You can argue that what he's advocating is bad on a utilitarian level, but he would disagree, and his advocacy of a certain Trust philosophy doesn't by itself mean that he's an untrustworthy person. DT selection is meant to be affected by user lists, and it is totally legitimate to try to honestly convince other (real) people to use a list more in-line with your views. I'm not going to blacklist people from DT selection due to not following my views, since a big point of this new system is to get me less involved, but if a culture somewhat compatible with my views does not eventually develop, then I will consider this more freeform DT selection to be a failure, and I'll probably get rid of it in favor of enforcing custom trust lists. |
|
|
|
It's going to take a long time before bitcoin price growth looks like that of an Escalator, maybe a market cap of $1 trillion will do the trick.
A market cap of $1trillion how realistic do you think that can be in the nearest future considering the current amount of the market cap and also in my opinion the market cap don't have to reach that amount before bitcoin recover Read the original topic again, we arent taking about bitcoin recovering but debating on the elevator or escalator price growth rate of bitcoin which is more favourable. Also my stay in crypto have made me realise anything is possible. I said for bitcoin to rise and decrease at a steady rate it needs a high market cap that's why i said a market cap of $1 trillion could do the trick. |
|
|
|
@OP, How the user is protected , if the some user decided to scam for very first time?
In that situation its not so easy for a new user to commit scams. I beleive no one going to make deals with a newbie user who haven't got enough experience & reputation yet. I believe you misunderstood @r1s2g3 statement, let me clear you. What he's trying to say is, what if the user trying to scam is the first scam attend could be a legendary user or any rank, that's to say the user doesn't have a warning red tag on his account how then is the guest user protected if he can see trust score. In conclusion, he's saying we shouldn't depend on the trust system but take matters into our own hands and protect our funds by doing some research before trading with any user on forum. |
|
|
|
Everything that has begin will have his end.
This "Merit" and "Trust" mafia should be once forever removed.
<***>
We don't need anything controlled by Mafia team, but we need more moderation and official rules.
When the forum gets more moderated and official rule are made for almost everything, you guys will still be the one complaining of the system been harsh and too centralize. Many accusations will still be made that theymos is still giving power to the same Mafia (as you claim) through those official rules. |
|
|
|
And now all the "small jobs" that would have been paid under that amount disappear.
Life isn't always fair, you need sacrifice somethings to achieve greater things. So what you're trying to say is the minimum wage would had stay that way so there'll be more smaller jobs and get paid in such a small amount that can't even last a family for a month? |
|
|
|
|
It's going to take a long time before bitcoin price growth looks like that of an Escalator, maybe a market cap of $1 trillion will do the trick. One of the major driving force of bitcoin is the potential price increase. The blockchain technology can be implemented in several ways but the potential price increase of bitcoin is one of the reason bitcon is still the most popular cryptocurrency so i won't advocate for an escalator growth yet. Its still a new technology so lets give it time and enjoy the elevator growth rate while it last.
The rapid ups and down is what keeps bitcoin very active and fun. As an investor, I don't think I'm ready to give that up yet if i wanted to invest in an escalator growth commodity i go for gold
|
|
|
|
The moment I received merit from you for an old post you have previously merited I was surprised I thought it was a bug or something and had to check you merit history and saw you did the same thing to everyone else. Your present was really missed for the few days you were away. With this act I guess you're fully back. welcome back DdmrDdmr. Someone was enjoying your absent, you got some catching up to do.  DdmrDdmr is quite busy lately IRL, so that gives me a fighting chance. For now |
|
|
|
From the respond I got trying to provide a possible guidelines on reason why or why not to leave a trust feedbacks on other users account. I came to a conclusion, the reason theymos haven't provide a guidelines for the leaving of trust feedbacks is because he wants each decision to be an individual one. The reason you don't trust anyone totally depends on you therefore I could give a Yes answer to some of the questions above meanwhile another will give a No answer. But in conclusion I think trust feedbacks should be left only when a trade is involved. |
|
|
|
|
You know I'm a fan of always saying the forum has a solution to every problem well this is one of those problem they're still yet to provide a solution for guest forum users. The forum should show a warning message on marketplace board and some other trade related subboard for guests (only) informing them "Not to make a trade (buy/sell) without registering an account on Bitcointalk" and maybe a short note explaining the reason for that warning. Something like "The trust rating of other users can only be seen as a login forum user, beware of scammers".
Since theymos isn't ready to show the trust rating of forum users to guest yet (reasons best know to him) then a warning message will do the trick perfectly.
|
|
|
|
I'm okay with users showing a link to a good post of their own.
Exactly I saw that comment by loyceV that's why I report my thread for the first time previously I report other users thread/replies and sometimes their replies on my thread. Also that's why i ended with this statement "Post is welcome to constructive criticism" so I can take corrections. |
|
|
|
|
The way I see it precious metal has a high possibility rate of returning as a everyday currency. fait currencies (euro, USD etc) have failed as a currency. We all know the future of money is digitalization. Now what better way to achieve that then going with the physical form before accepting the digital form not forgeting they're all coins.
Here's my predictios, precious metal return as a day to day currency then the people wants something better which can be easily access/spend then cryptocurrency comes into the picture
|
|
|
|
|
Wow great video @Crypto-DesignService this must have taken some good amount of your time and it was all worth it. Your current account stats has to be a new record. Now I understood why you ran to B&H to open a giveaway thread. You did some great work on this presentation. I owe you some merit😁. Keep it up.
|
|
|
|
Or maybe the function should be re-coded that only the OP instead of the previous ones would be quoted.
When you say OP you mean 'OP' Original Post / Original Poster. This could refer to either the user that started the thread or the first post in the thread.
If that's what you mean, I disagree with you because If this was already implemented it means I won't have been able to qoute reply you right? Qouting shows you're giving a direct response to another reply on thread. replies without quote most times on a thread shows you're responding to the original thread/post. And other times, those type of reply can be confusing as one may not know what you're responding to. Qouting shouldn't be restricted to OP in fact, qouting the OP isn't necessary unless you're responding to a particular sentence in that OP and qouting the whole OP isn't appropriate. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
