I see your Negative trust.  It's wrong and i don't agree with it. Like i have said before i don't agree with some things Lauda does or says.  You have to understand most of these DT Members have ZERO life outside of BCT and want to play superhero on here...This is what they do. This is what makes them relevant iin the world.  Their red paint means they want attentiion and are screaming for help.

No person their right mind spends 8-10 hours a day on a forum judging peoples posts and leaving negative feedback is in their right minds.

They are abusive losers and it can't be fixed until theymos puts his foot down and say enough.

Tolerate it if you can uuntil the system breaks or theymos comes to his right mind and fixes it.

false accusation... mods check this out and red trust this liar. Never sent him a pm ever.

what did my pm say... post it here if it is real.

I don't know how could you think "VINSIN" will continue his scam. But i can assure you here in the bitcointalk it will be so much tough for him mate.

Active DT team and trustworthy members are always here to keep our users safe from scammers. There's no way if you don't give him money for free.  

No, you didn't read (or you didn't understand) my post... that is exactly what I said you said... you want "only confirmed buyers/sellers to be able to leave feedback". Is that not what you mean when you say "trust is implemented after buying and selling"?

You still haven't addressed the fact that there is NO WAY to be able to do this on the Bitcointalk platform. As I said, this is a discussion board... it isn't geared towards online commerce. The fact that people can arrange trades does not make this a proper eCommerce platform with buyer/seller protection built in. There is a reason why everyone advocates for using trusted escrows. Without it, there is NO protection.


Because the trust rating you left is still there... everyone can see your feedback, if they chose to click "untrusted" feedback... and if they have you on their trust list, it'll even show up as "trusted". That's how trust works.

I always check ALL the feedback that a user has... but that's me. If people are too lazy to do that, then that's their problem.

Actually I was being sarcastic. My apologies for being too subtle about it.


There's a few things you can do:

1. Start over with a brand new account.
2. Don't trade with somebody who has a deep red trust rating.
3. Use a bit more discretion if you do proceed in future trades, or better yet: don't trade at all, especially when it comes to accounts.

If only we had some sort of system where users could leave ratings for other users based on their experiences in dealing with them, and then other forum members could read what they had written, and decide whether or not they wanted to trade with or trust them... Some sort of a "truster system", perhaps... Just thinking out loud.

Why do you think that other people would do the same as you and ignore all of those (Default) Trust ratings that indicate that VINSIN is not to be trusted?

This is something that still confuses me... he had MULTIPLE red trust ratings... and you still went ahead and traded with them... WHY?

you can ask 2 others before me, with just 6 sally transactions, why they traded with him too. It's not about the red trust.
I feel there is something genuine with him that's why.
He will continue to scam with this method. He is smart!

Why would you do that? That is probably the worst thing you could do.

No, it isn't babysitting... it is enabling users to make informed and considered decisions.

If DT were not able to tag an obviously sold/bought account (which is what gwsukabokepjerang is advocating for, they want only "confirmed" buyers/sellers to be able to leave feedback)... how exactly is a "dumb lender" supposed to conduct "due diligence and risk calculation"? How would the "dumb lender" even know that the account was sold?

The obvious flaw in gwsukabokepjerang's argument, is that there is no facility to confirm buyers/sellers on this platform. There is nothing to stop a user from creating 100 alt accounts and leaving themselves 100 positive reviews. How would that let a user conduct due diligence? This place is a discussion board first and foremost... and simply has a "marketplace" board where people can put buy/sell notices. This is not amazon, it is not ebay... yet, that seems to be what they want... BitcointalkBay or something? *shrug*

Anyway, personally, I'm more for tagging bought/sold accounts as "neutral", as opposed to insta-tagging them red... This would then flag the account as bought/sold, so users know that previous trade history and feedback is no longer valid. If users are not checking the complete trust history (trusted AND untrusted) of anyone they conduct business with, then that is their problem. I'm a big fan of personal responsibility... just like "be your own bank"... you need to "be your own security department"!  

If a neutral tagged account then does something stupid like scam or spam for sig etc... then sure, go and tag them red.

And not to read DT's trusted feedback, just like how they gang up on me.
How is that fair?

Ok, i will repeat and will repeat many times, there is no such thing in this world as customers giving feedback without buying items.
And continue doing this, more will get scammed.

What did i do wrong?
I can't participate in signature campaigns?
And build some trust for some deals to earn side income?
Everyone needs money!
Ok even that i said i want buy accounts that have trust if can, no trust is okay,
so that at least i can participate in signature campaigns.

Why can DT feedback not be trusted? If there are obvious signs of a scam, shouldn't that be publicized accordingly?

Moreover, there are escrows in place if people look for them. However, centralization of escrow services isn't exactly what you want.

Hi!

You are full member with 200+ merits.

Obviously you are confusing rating/reviews with the trust system.
DTs tag members based on many factors. Feedbacks left from "customers" is one of these factors.
DTs identify scammers and tag them as a preventive mesure.
Though, positive trust should be given to a member after he makes successful deals.

Reputation section isn't really popular, most members only visit Bitcoin Discussion, Economics & Alternate cryptocurrencies sections. Besides, i doubt newbies are familiar with this forum systems (DT, merit, unique rules, etc.)


Money isn't problem as this forum have lots of money, but the real problem is theymos manage this forum system/feature mostly by himself and AFAIK don't really trust others for this matter.

Just explain why you think that users should lose money to scams and then provide feedback when they can be protected with proactive feedback.

After Lauda got off DT things were quiet and peaceful around here and I was sleeping the sleep of the innocent. Then Theymos decided to shake things up again, rather rudely. That's what woke me up. I had preferred to stay asleep. 

FYI, i'm not DT member. Additionally, i'm not fan of DT system, but your idea isn't practical and will bring new weakness to the system.

Any reason why i am the only newbie in this thread when most are DT?


That means the forum must be turned into marketplace where the forum have full information (such as buyer, seller, escrow, data, sold item/service, price, etc.) and it's tall-order. You need to convince theymos to add such huge feature.

Thats why it's ripped off!
It's all about the inner circle gang up and bullies us!

Suppose someone is selling a gambling script that they claim to guarantee winnings. This is a clear scam.
Suppose someone is selling a stolen item.
both of the above can use default escrow right?

Suppose someone is opening an ICO with a fake team and whitepaper.
did you not read the previous posts? i have given answer on this!

It's amazing i'm the only newbie here.


untrusted feedback all i see is account selling and some honest black reviews.

You see, that's the problem, those before me don't want to waste their time on $40.
How many people have been scammed by him until i showed up?


you can keep on defending this system, but more will get scammed.
i should have just ask VINSIN to give me money to delete the untrusted feedback.
No point!
I highlight clearly the problem but you guys brushed me off!

The trust system is not based on whether you have made a transaction or not. Trusted feedback is based on your personal trust list. Anyone outside of your DefaultTrust depth settings have their feedback shown as untrusted.

Therefore it is not a matter of whether you are a customer or not.

Request sent to theymos.
Will start bidding after receiving his reply

I don't see why you think that it's proper to wait for a victim to send a user negative trust.

Do we wait for thieves to steal before we convict them of their crimes, despite knowing their intent?

How about ponzi schemes? If we wait until they collapse to warn people that it's a scam then there will be literally no consequence to someone starting a ponzi.

It says trade with extreme caution.
And the opinion of these DT punks is irrelevant.What matters is the reality and reality is that majority of forum members instantly take you as scammer when seeing the default red trust