|
LOT 4 @ 0.013BTC
LOT 5 @ 0.013BTC
To slow. To low.
|
|
|
|
I agree escrow is either a yes or a no, I've never seen a "some" sales can use escrow. Can you elaborate?
He probably need funding along the way so some of the payment needed for cash flow. Escrow therefor not option for all coins. My guess. |
|
|
|
|
LOT 1 @ 0.25BTC
LOT 2 @ 0.02BTC
LOT 3 @ 0.02BTC
LOT 4 @ 0.01BTC
LOT 5 @ 0.01BTC
|
|
|
|
|
But you need to post start price, rules etc for the auction. The lots to bid on.
|
|
|
|
BTCump - Any interest in an auction?
I have intererest in the coins. |
|
|
|
|
More bounty workers are welcome.
|
|
|
|
No, that wouldn't work in that way and let me give you an example why not.
Lets say you are trying to buy 2 BTC for USD and the person you deal with ends up scamming you, he takes your money and he is gone (yes I know you should use escrow but just hear me out). He gets tagged by DTs. Two years have passed and he can now delete his feedback and can freely scam again. Would you be willing to make another deal with the same user again or recommend that someone else does it? After all, his negative trust has now been removed.
The only way in which this could work is by taking a look at each case individually. Like you suggested, someone who gets tagged for Bounty abuse or wearing a signature of a scam ICO (without being aware it is a scam for whatever reason) should get a chance to redeem himself after some time has passed if he has shows signs of improvement. But giving everyone the freedom to delete the trust ratings they don t agree with is a dangerous thing.
It depends what angle you look from. I look from the angle where 1000 accounts that don't scam get useless. But I have seen the fight is lost  |
|
|
|
I tried my argument. Did not find any backers  Will let the post die in shame. |
|
|
|
I think it's not a good idea to allow scammers to scam others once a year...
Actully it a little like your trust feedback I think it could be good to have a chance to delete after some time Bounty abuse If you get one them from high rank account your account is dead. You can't learn from it. And maybe the feedback was not even right. Sometime the one giving feedback could be wrong. |
|
|
|
Are you willing to cover all losses from scammers who's negative trusts were removed this way, which deleted all references to being a scammer on their profile, and allowed them to scam someone else?
I have only been here 1½ year. As I see it the trust feedback it not used to prevent scam that much. But mostly to tell new people how to act. And therefor when they learn along the way they should have a chance to remove 1-2 feedback yearly as I see it. Edit: You are one if the few I have seen that actually try to fight spam with the system. But in generel I mean. |
|
|
|
If there should be an option to remove feed back in which you where concentrated on the negative feed backs
Would it also apply to the postive feedback?
Would users positive feedbacks also be deleted
As I see it should be possible to delete any feedback you like. 1-2 yearly. |
|
|
|
and I think all users should be willing to review they feedback they have left if the user in question has shown a true effort to either change their ways or make amends.
But the feedback spammers as I see it send alot red and then they are gone forever. |
|
|
|
|
1) Most users learn and improve along the way.
2) Most users get hit by "feedback spammer".
Because of that I think it should be possible to delete 1-2 feedback yearly from trust summary.
Many other nerds can probably recognize that a small error in the system can ruin it all, even if it doesn't matter.
|
|
|
|
|
Random load.
You don't know before you have peeled it.
Maybe run a competition:
Winners of collectible auctions get one point. You need a point to get a coin.
|
|
|
|
How about the most important part..... the price??  Does it matter? We want one |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
