That is a very sensible post and I know actually it to be a truthful account of part of my current situation.

However let's analyse this.

1. Suggesting or debating anything in "meta" is not like discussing it with the entire board. The same few people hang out here who also happen to be the beneficiaries from the "merit" system. WHY? because meta board is merit board. You see more merit handed out here for discussing "merit" than anywhere else. So discussing the importance of "merit" here with those that are the main beneficiaries of the "merit" system is going to be met with a lot of replies about how important merit is for everything under the sun.  

2. Those persons commenting on how LOW 100 earned merits is for DT key positions are.
a/ part of the merit cycling club
b/ meta board posters (99% of the board don't know about meta board or never visit it)
c/ self confessed trust abusers and those that support proven liars and trust abusers knowingly.
d/ have self interest and motive to suggest a higher level
e/tman?? a provably demented and untrustworthy turd. He has never made one original thought inspiring important post ever. I asked him to provide one and he  vanished like a fart in a hurricane. The very notion that anything he says could be a "good" idea obviously ranges anywhere between very unlikely through highly improbable to basically impossible.

3/ Those persons saying that 100 is too low are not considering the activity threshold of 1500 or 2000 so really we can't say they provided any insight into why "merit" alone should have anything to do with trust or why it could be "better" than combining "merit" with activity.


I agree with you that I take a caustic tone of late. However, review my post history for the previous 6 years and you will find that I generally only take this tone with persons that I consider scammers, untrustworthy or that take that tone with me first. I am the victim of blatant trust abuse and will not even consider altering my tone until those scum bags are removed from DT or they undo their trust abuse.  Even then my opinion that those that have demonstrated they are untrustworthy (liars, trust abusers, sneaky sock puppet sig spammers ) or if they are knowingly supporters of untrustworthy persons should be kept away from positions of trust will never change. There is no shortage of legends with clean (free from observably untrustworthy deeds and actions) pasts on this board... we are not that desperate that we need proven liars and self confessed trust abusers and other dirt bags in positions of trust.

Tone though to me should be secondary to content. So I hope those really wanting the best for this board and wish to see free speech flourish here take note of what is currently happening with this board. Regardless of the manner the information is presented. Find the truth that is all that is important.

There are 3 simple options here

1. tighten up the systems to prevent abuse
2. make sure those that would try to abuse them are not part of the systems of control
3. remove the systems

as i warned previously these systems of control set up as they are very dangerous for this movement, better to have no systems of control at all (trust)

merit is good at stopping account farmers. In its current state (merit) it is dangerous to apply any other meaning to it.

No. That would be only for the key positions.

Although perhaps a 3-6 month min activity should be considered for those. This to me does not seem so important. Although tightening it up wherever possible if you want REAL "trust" to be a factor could be suitable. Then again unless they are posting on meta or got lucky with some really notable thread the 10 merits should take care of this especially on the boards most REAL noob enthusiasts will be posting the discussion boards or ann section.

Really? well i notice suchmoon told him to remove my merits and he did it. So needing to be told is one thing but allowing yourself to be cajoled has the same outcome.

I don't doubt this. However trying is not always the same as doing. Perhaps "together" the board can help analyse this "data" and provide a better system. I see no reason at all for "merit" being the sole determinant for the key positions in a trust system. This simply places the key positions with those that have proven once that they will selfishly hoard and cycle merits as we have established happens... but the explanation is simply we find each other to be the best posters in ....well our opinion.

Hence why we have proven untrustworthy scum in these key positions.
Better to have no systems than systems that reward untrustworthy persons and allow them to stifle the free speech of honest members whilst being rewarded for their foul actions.

I would like to see the NEGATIVES for making it 100 earned merits + 2000 (perhaps 1500) activity. Plus perhaps some trading activity.

I would rather have it centralised where one person whom is fully accountable and seemingly fair (and does not overly set to silence free speech)  has total control of a trust system than I would see it pseudo decentralised to a bunch of people that contain many proven untrustworthy persons of ill repute who will try to use red trust for selfish means.

I care nothing for being on DT or merit source. I will willingly be blacklisted from all that if we can construct systems of control here that are not being used to silence free speech.

Theymos although seemingly taken in by the likes of suchmoon and even lauda and overtly and openly calls such double standards untrustworthy scum "excellent members" he himself does not seem to want to silence free speech because he could quite easily do so.  I would rather have 1 person who is fairer (albeit in my opinion mislead in key areas by observably untrustworthy and rotten scum) have control of a trust system rather than hand it off to a bunch of persons that are crushing free speech.

I have been told as I have said some legends and other members support what I am saying but fear to speak out for themselves. This board must not allow this kind of sentiment. People must be free to say what the fuck they like as long as they are not scamming or promoting scamming projects or ripping people off - then they must not be silenced or threatened with red trust for saying things that goes against a small group of persons personal agendas. Absolutely they must not get red trust for presenting facts regarding the wrong doing of those that are part of the DT system.


Having said all of that. If we have to have it decentralised let us at least make a real attempt at making it decentralised and not wide open to gaming and abuse motivated by self rewards that result in free speech being crushed and a pseudo decentralised dangerous system. Let's tighten it up or go back to Theymos says who is in the trust system and he puts clear guidelines for red trust and also hopefully criteria a post must meet to be merit worthy.

I accept that we just change the attack vectors but surely we can make it harder to abuse that it currently is. It is wide open and offers motive and reward for doing so.

Hmmm

So I see in this thread so far.

1. No rebuttal to my claims that 100 merits + 2000 activity (1500min) is superior in the terms that I already laid out.
2. A bunch of merit cyclers that benefit from these easily gamed and subjective systems making false claims as to why I am suggesting that it should be changed to 100 merits + 2000 activity.
3. Some noob ass lickers (@coolcryptovator merit source wannabe)  telling me they are to be trusted more than some legends I have known here for nearly 6 years who have held at points millions of dollars of crypto and never once abused that. Whilst making false statements to ass lick his master suchmoon. CAN YOU GUESS WHO IS TOP MERIT FAN IS??? YES YOU HAVE IT ---SUCHMOON?? the merit merry-go-round (not political at all)
4. People commenting here who are proven untrustworthy and have no place commenting on a trust system.
5. Jetcash an observable joke of a member who is terrified of even reviewing evidence of wrong doing (yeah great one for DT and merit source)


@The Pharmacist AKA Huge Black Woman - Merit source and DT1

Can you give me one reason I should believe anything that you say since you are a proven greedy sneaky devious racist trolling sig spammer using sock puppets to grind more btc dust from this board?

Someone who claims his crowning achievement here is joining a "highly paid sig campaign"  ?

I thought I was on ignore? what happened with that?

How do you have the bare faced effrontery to even comment on a trust system? and when I see you lecturing others on financially motivated shit posting I keep thinking your account must be hacked or you have lost your mind entirely.

Keep spamming  your sig under those net negative shit posts and you will soon have enough to afford another computer. How are you staking your  pivX that I sold you? on your phone?

@suchmoron

I see another false claim from you here again. I have said I have no desire to be on DT at all ever. So that nulls your latest piece of net negative dirt you have contributed to the board. Let's change it on the proviso that I am auto blacklisted from DT ( i have no time for snitching around for small time shit like you all day - I tackle scams as I always have HEAD ON  not crying here on meta and snitching to higher authorities)  Never mind whiny bitch "Alex", now that I have seen what you (apparently don't) look like then we should change your rank to drab snitchy bitch.

Also you told me in black and white that good poster /bad poster were MEANINGLESS without criteria and definition?? Now you want to use merit as some objective score with that means great poster and indicates the level of trust you can place on them?? Please bitch stop contradicting yourself over and over in public.

Again - I thought I was on ignore? what happened?

So again. Present a sensible argument for why we have 250 merits for key trust determining positions when it is observably gamed cycled junk that is misleading with regards post quality and has nothing to do with trust)

As if any system would provide.

1. financial motive for abuse
2. no framework at all to guard against abuse
3. reward the abusers with the potential to crush free speech and silence dissenters ?
4. assign trust to those that observably game and abuse the systems the most LOL


Let's just remove merit for anything other than leveling up past snr
Lets make DT 100 earned merits and 2000 activity + some observable trading activity if you want.

Local rules - anyone can reply who can substantiate their post with observable events or facts. No person can voice opinion without presenting credible evidence to substantiate it. Else I would like their post removed like mine always are even when they are on topic, relevant and supported with credible evidence or observable events.


Originally I noticed the DT new mechanism hinged upon they key positions of 100 earned merits.

Who here told coaxed Theymos to up it to 250 earned merits?

My money is on suchmoon? seems to have too much influence here like instructing him to remove my merits from an objectively merit worthy post that stood worthy of merit (compared to most of the trash she merits) regardless of honest intent as specified by the merit source.

My question remains unanswered as to what the reasoning is on upping it to that level since we know that centralises it greatly to the same people that ride the merit-merry-go-round

What is the point of making a pseudo decentralised system that actually just centralises it and places firm control of DT into the hands of those that observably

1. cycle merits amongst themselves.
2. collude to include each other on DT
3. collude to exclude mostly the same members from DT
4. Can be seen discussing and colluding if key trust support should be pulled or given depending on others trust lists essentially cherry picking who they want in the trust system.
5. Wtf has merit got to do with trust? A long history here is far more important. Since if you have not done anything untrustworthy for 5 years then you are more trustworthy than those getting merits from proven untrustworthy persons for supporting their agendas and ideologies to me. Also that account is far more valuable since it will take years to replace -- no short cuts. So if you are risking something far more valuable then you are less likely to scam.


This is not decentralising it it is centralising it and at the same time allowing free speech to be crushed on this board.



I would like to know

1. who told theymos to raise to 250 merits?
2. why it would not be better to make it 100 earned merits + 1500 activity or even 2000 activity?
3. some trading history perhaps??

It would then

1. decentralised DT far more
2. take much longer to power up an account for DT hence giving more history to examine before trusting
3. make it harder to collude for the observable colluders in the merit-merry-go-round
4. free speech gets a break from the jack boot of the merit/dt colluders.
5. If you have been here years you are far more likely to be wealthy and not need to scam like noobs. Your account is also far far harder to replace now. You are talking years not just a few months like some DT have been here.


Let's revise it to 100 earned merits and 1500 activity. That is a much more important account to lose and will become more so over time.

I see a bunch of noobs on DT that have no place being there only to serve their merit merry go round masters and serve their direct will. They have no history to examine and their accounts are not worth much in terms of replication. Some are barely snr members?

The entire thing is observable ludicrous.

The old system was far better than this.

Even up it to 2000 activity hence if you are proven untrustworthy and black listed then that is going to be YEARS to replace that account under a sock.

Throw in the requirement for 50 successful trades if you want.  Although of course that can be gamed.

It can all be gamed to an extent it is just making it harder and harder to game that is the key.

I see ZERO improvement here so far using this new pseudo decentralised system for trust. Let's revise it to be truly decentralised. Let's get some sensible elder members on DT and those that have ZERO untrustworthy deeds in their OWN history here.

You don't have judges who are proven previous criminals do you? or proven liars? or those that clearly demonstrate sneaky and greedy actions for financial reward?? wtf is this board turning into?  These people should be the ones glowing red not the ones painting honest members accounts red and only allowing their "pals" onto DT to condone and add support to their wrongdoing.

I've been watching this and now that this bunch of colluders are firmly entrenched in the DT system there is no way to see them removed unless by their own will. Since they are all mostly "merit" sources too the entire thing is completely ludicrous.




 

Merit is cycled junk stop worrying about it. So long as it prevents account farmers levelling up then that's fair enough for anything else especially DT positions is it irrelevant.

Really merit can be viewed as a honey pot to demonstrate whom are the colluding scum bags sending it all to each other in a nice circle and those persons prevented from joining DT.

Perhaps a cap on merit for each account at 1500 there is no need to cycle more to each other.

Also you want to become a legend you need to present your best posts that made a difference here that are not just ass kissing in meta for merit crumbs.

You want a rank above legend then let's analyse their best posts and see what they have actually contributed.

I would rather give higher ranks on what people have "achieved" not how much ass kissing and merit cycling they have got away with.

If you have made zero difference then you should never even be a legend regardless of the posts you make supporting other merit sources and joining the merit merry-go-round.

Nobody with any real knowledge of this board and the REAL value of members here gives 2 fucks about this shitty broken cycled merit system.

It is the WORST thing to happen to the board since its inception. It has lead to a gamed and broken system to install a bunch of untrustworthy scum into positions of control to crush free speech here. It had one purpose to prevent account farmers powering up that is it. It is damaging to try and use it for anything else.

Can you stop droning on about this broken gamed junk as if it has some meaning.

I see more "merit" given for talking about "merit" than anything else here on "meta" "merit" board.

Do you really believe persons like smooth gjhiggins Dzimbeck and all the other excellent posters with hardly any merit have less value that a PROVEN sneaky greedy racist trolling sock puppet sig spammer like the pharmacist aka HUGE BLACK WOMAN? Bring me his most brilliant original thought provoking posts so I can laugh at them. The guy is a full on imbecile and proven untrustworthy scum bag.

Bring some criteria for merit that is enforceable or just accept it is MEANINGLESS as suchmoon correctly stated.

When I see self made is just see a bunch of ass licking driveling fools hanging around meta begging for some crumbs.

Most people choose not to discuss issues that in public contradict the agendas of those they perceive to be in power. Generally they will align with them or just pretend there are no issues.

Just sig ban him for a couple of years.

If he is a good member and just made some sloppy mistakes and got lazy on referencing then not really worth losing a good member (if he is one i don't know him myself). We need all the REAL enthusiasts we can get for this movement.

Only financially motivated shit posters should be banned perm. Even then if you just take away their sigs for a few years it will likely have the same outcome.

I would rather see Yogg banned (from DT and merit source) for trust abuse and collusion with other known bad eggs on DT.

I'm not in favour of perm banning any person that really is true fan of building an end to end trustless decentralised arena unless they really do not care at all about damaging this board for their own personal and selfish financial gain.

I agree it is a shame.

I last heard graham was working on some parts of beecoin but that was some time ago so perhaps that did not work out as he hoped.

Time will tell. I still have some of my own beecoins and the community coins are still safe for a time in the future if beecoin kicks off again.

I'm pretty sure the OP realised without the 250 cycled gamed merits then any direct removal at this time was not going to happen straight away.

This is merely a good thread that people when abused with red trust over a non scam related matter can join and together plenty of other actions can be taken when there is the will to do so.

Trying to operate within a broken and gamed system against those already entrenched deeply and controlling that system is not going to work out well.

Better to aim to get the broken system fixed.

first important step = you found meta
second step = align your views with merit sources and DT's and never think about contradicting them nor mentioning they obviously cycle merits to each other in here so they can then vote each other on to DT.

third step = make sure to join in on hating anyone who does mention what I directly told you not to mention in step 2.


You'll be a "self made" hero in no time and likely a DT1 and merit source thrown in

You can then red trust anyone who says something you do not want them to say.

Then you can get on a "highly paid" sig campaign and spam the living shit out of the board.

Rumours cycling that Binance stole some parts of Blocknets DEX design?

If this is true then will this open them up to legal action or not?

This is kind of sneaky and devious behaviour from a top Exchange if it is confirmed.

Just read about it on another site and they seem to have some serious gripes here.

If there is some truth to this then that could have very serious implications for Binance in future.

https://bitcoinexchangeguide.com/blocknet-alleges-binance-dex-contains-stolen-technical-data-from-its-blockdx-decentralized-exchange/

there was a youtube vid somewhere but I can't find it again at this time.

A lot on DT are not titans they are noob garbage ass kissers who scrounged and begged for enough merit and favour to be permitted on DT because they do what their masters tell them.

I would hardly trust any of them at all since they have clearly demonstrated that they will condone wrong doing and untrustworthy deeds so long as it suits them to. They will willingly sanction trust abusers and liars to continue their abuse and even openly support it.

Most need removing.

There are a few exceptions and some that have demonstrated they do have some fairness and trustworthy admirable qualities. But they are few and far between.

Just show us what you got suchmoon.

He's got his sig removed for 2 years so unless he a real enthusiast that account will die. If Theymos has looked into it personally and said he can keep his account then he must think this person will continue to contribute even without a paid sig.

This shadowy threat you try to wield to get good members banned for a couple of sloppy errors well meaning errors is going to get taken away from you now. ScumBuster.

Only real plagiarists should be banned that are spamming this board for financial gain. Not people that have good intentions that got lazy or sloppy or were not even aware you HAVE to reference every single thing. A sig ban is  enough for them. That could even be variable in time but since I personally think the board would be way better with no sigs i'm not too bothered about the time length.

Removing quality posters and helpful persons for a sloppy error or 2 is a net negative action as I have said for a long time. You want all the REAL enthusiasts you can get here working together.

I agree. Some "lazy" people being helpful and copying some mining guide or some other helpful project announcement from twitter.... or anything just trying to be helpful and answering a question should not be a ban. Just take away their sig for a year or 2. The good posters will still post. I mean a sig should be for promoting projects that you are specifically interested in because you believe they are really going to make a difference here or that you support the person running them. Those will be few and far between and are not gambling, and other shit people spam everywhere just to make money.

If your sig is taken away no big deal you can still post and contribute.

Appeals to keep your account are understandable. That account is your id here and has sentimental/historical value within this movement. A sig is nothing if you cry about losing that then it is obvious you were just here to make a quick buck.

No appeals for copy and paste where the sig is taken away. OR you can appeal but if found guilty still then you are actually banned for good. That will likely put an end to these appeals.

Even that guy the other day banned.

1. was just some obvious project announcement he was relating

2. "walks talks looks like" a duck or whatever else he said is a common saying and I would not even count that as copy and paste anymore than using a film quote or something in a funny way.

I agree though the persons intentions are the most important... and if they are net negative overall.

Yes those bots and spammers ripping off any nonsense to spam over and over for money. Then ban them. Grey areas or possible net positive people sig bans. No point getting rid of anyone that is a real enthusiast for this movement.

This is excellent news and a sensible solution.

REAL members should not be here to spam their sigs and treat this board like a cash cow.

If they are plagiarising for financial reward then cut their sigs off and they will vanish anyway.

REAL members who got a bit sloppy for citing a reference every time will not care much about no sigs but can still bring their valuable contributions anyway (without a sig)

Sensible solution.

If you are a real enthusiast of building or helping to promote the start of and end to end decentralised trustless arena then you will not feel it ESSENTIAL to spam sigs everywhere.

I feel meta is a board that should be full of REAL enthusiasts ONLY. I would make it a non sig zone. Let's see who really wants to see this movement go somewhere and who just wants to manipulate things for their own self interest and benefit at the cost of silencing those that may not agree with everything they want/say.

This already happens most DT1 are the only ones that have cycled enough merits to vote (key votes) who stays in the trust system.

If you have 10 merit then you have some pseudo influence.

If you want an election process then the entire board needs to be able to vote (except proven/strongly suspected scammers)

DT is not really the issue. self awarded cycled merit is the problem that breaks the entire systems of control here. If merit was given based on strict criteria for valuable posts then that would help. However, I am still not sure wtf merit has to do with trust. This should be based on persons that have done 100x of trades and not scammed when they may have had prior opportunity to do so.

If the cap fits....