Don't over-create Trust Appeals; keep minds/ emotions stable. No more Red

[Quickseller]

 

- De-escalation: If some people end up locked in a feud where they're only really giving negative trust to each other in retaliation for negative trust, then one of them should propose burying the hatchet and removing the negative trust. Otherwise it never gets resolved, and everyone is worse-off for it.

Often, one user will give retaliatory negative trust but his ratings are meaningless and he ends up with additional negative trust for “fake ratings”. This is very one sided because one person is effectively trying to defend himself but only ends up with additional negative trust to the extent that he cannot reasonable expect to rebuild his trust score.

Some people also criticize certain people (because of a rating they received or otherwise), and end up receiving negative trust for this specific reason.

Frankly, I think it is past time to ban a number of people from being on DT (both 1 and 2) permanently, and there are a small group of people who should be banned from appearing on anyone’s trust network unless they are directly trusted by the person, and there is a small handful of people who should be considered to be banned from having their ratings show up by default (and their trust list being considered) under any circumstances.

I don’t think it is appropriate to give negative trust for being critical of someone or “slandering” (allegedly or in reality) under nearly any circumstances. Doing this (in response to criticism about you or someone else) should make the person a prime candidate for one of the above types of bans. If you are being criticized, the proper response is to make a well thought out argument, or you can ignore the criticism.

Regarding CH (since this has become another CH thread) — I don’t think negative trust against CH is appropriate. To my knowledge, he hasn’t ever tried to scam anyone, nor has he done anything that would be reasonably consistent with him preparing to try to scam anyone in the future. It is my belief that his siding with scammers is him being critical of the system and not necessarily to help scammers.

[Andrey123]

Good day.
I tried to translate and understand the essence of this topic, but it is difficult for me.

I have a problem with the Trust, I created the topic in the hope of getting it sorted, but at first, Trastt was -2, and after creating the theme, it became -16 (((
It's horrible!

More than two years have passed since the creation of my theme.
Nothing like this has ever been and never asked anything in debt, without bail.
Only helped people here.
Even positive feedback people left.

And where should I go to resolve this issue?

[btcsmlcmnr]

<... >
And where should I go to resolve this issue?

You should know that when you posted there as reminder for your Trust Appeal, you likely made Trust Appeal Evasion.
You should only mention about your case in your Trust Appeal topic (Problem with negative Trust), only in that topic. You locked your Trust Appeal topic since January this year.

• Bumping your Trust Appeals regularly, but not more than one time per 24 hours, and remember to delete previous bump
• Discuss about your case only in a single Trust Appeal topic

Not only in my topic, you only did it there: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5095156.msg50903184#msg50903184

I think it will be better for you if you only stick with your Trust Appeal topic (you should unlock it and bump it for help). I don't know what is your case, but it is better approach for you.

Good luck,

[Andrey123]

Thanks for the answer.
That is, I need to return my topic, which I created in the section "Reputation"?
But won't I make it worse?

[btcsmlcmnr]

Yes.

That is, I need to return my topic, which I created in the section "Reputation"?

Who knows? It is your case and you should know your case better than anyone else.
1. If you actually did something wrong, you have to do three things:
- Admit your mistakes (not serious mistakes)
- Change the way you use your account in the forum.
- Wait for forgiveness after very long time.

2. If you did not do anything wrong, you have to patiently wait for feedbacks from DT members.
- When they see and accept their mistakes, you will be free.

You did or did not make mistakes, I don't know. Refuse your mistakes and say lies will make things worse, not better.

But won't I make it worse?

[The-One-Above-All]

That's never going to happen on a big forum: by the time some users have given up responding to a troll, other users will notice it for the first time and try to reason with him again until they too give up and are replaced by someone else.

Perfect example:   Flat Earth thread. Almost 800 pages of garbage!  The OP has every lie debunked a thousand times, but new users keep pointing out the same lies.

Why doesn't Theymos do his part and shut down obvious troll threads?

The funny thing here is that LoyceV is accusing cryptohunter of "trolling" (the boards fav term for something they can not even agree on a definition for when he provided them the opportunity to in his they see me trollin they hatin thread)  apparently the trolling is his message that the trust system is a broken mess that can not be fixed. Since that is his main gripe.

Vod clearly agrees, as you can see he is claiming he wants to "defriend" and  red trust lauda or others in his gang but he dare not because he correctly realizes they will use red trust in reprisal. Therefore Red trust clearly silences whistle blowing on scammers. IT FACILITATES SCAMMING at the highest level. There is no other way to see it.  So now VOD you are trolling according to loyceV, your message is the same.

Instead of moving the topic to "trolling", let's keep it on TRUST APPEALS - which there should be no need of because if you need to prove someone is a scammer or provide a strong case they have scammed or intend to scam to give red trust OR YOU ARE BLACKLISTED. Then all you will need to do is say present the proof or STRONG case and if they can NOT then the red trust has to be removed. NO paying people to remove the red trust, no free speech getting crushed to remove the red trust.

It was a very poorly conceived system because it is based upon the reasoning that everyone is going to act as perfectly and unselfishly as possible and not even consider colluding, WHEN THERE ARE CLEAR FINANCIAL MOTIVES for being selfish and abusing it. It is the most crazy trust system you could ever dream up. I mean that and it is based upon the even more crazy , misleading and dangerous merit system.  There are only 2 options.

1. scrap it all
2. Put down strict rules as mentioned above for using red trust and blacklist those that try to use it for their own reasons outside of that. Whilst making sure observable scammers and those with ANY financially motivated dirt AT ALL in their past are removed and blacklisted as soon as they are noticed.

As we have said before the "possible" meager benefits of ANY  trust system over a warning on ALL accounts that they MAY scam you,  are crushed to negative when the implications for free speech are taken into account and the way red trust can Facilitate scamming and crush whistleblowing. It is like every other system that satoshi is AGAINST the people at the TOP can abuse it. Whilst everyone else is at their mercy and have to kiss ass and adopt their views, or beg to stay red trust free.

If VOD (one of self proclaimed POLICE of this board) feels he is too scared to red tag scammers like lauda or his pals because they will red trust and burn his account back what fucking hope is there for this board? Without rules even DT members are scared of tit for tat on their accounts. Perhaps this is why they look like such a bunch of cowards and ass kissers. Then again they could just be weak and pathetic individuals that will just allow the all board members to be placed in vulnerable positions so they may avoid red tags or not being popular.

Cryptohunter never supported scammers ever. He never saw any proof any of them were scammers. Regardless of which if a scammer rightly noticed the trust system was broken and used as a weapon to silence whistle blowers then agreeing and supporting that view is the correct action to take. If a scammer says something like " the earth is  spheroid" and other people voice opinions "the earth is a cube" then you support the spheroid claim.

[btcsmlcmnr]

Too long, but it is what I agree with. Maybe I created a new term in bitcointalk.org, Trust Appeal.  
As same as Ban Appeal, user who starts Trust Appeal should present, and explain his or her case in a single Trust Appeal thread.

Instead of moving the topic to "trolling", let's keep it on TRUST APPEALS

Updated the OP.

{c} Where to create Trust Appeal?
It is the Reputation child board. Most of users create their Trust Appeals in Meta board, that is wrong, because such things related to Trust don't relate to forum issues. Therefore, it is clearly not belong to Meta board.
Please create your Trust Appeal in Reputation child board

[El duderino_]

That's never going to happen on a big forum: by the time some users have given up responding to a troll, other users will notice it for the first time and try to reason with him again until they too give up and are replaced by someone else.

Perfect example:   Flat Earth thread. Almost 800 pages of garbage!  The OP has every lie debunked a thousand times, but new users keep pointing out the same lies.

Why doesn't Theymos do his part and shut down obvious troll threads?

Just to hopefully keep an amount of trolls in one place perhaps??

[btcsmlcmnr]

With latest changes in Trust system, that you can find there: Trust flags, I hope that Trust Appeals and Trust Drama will decrease in coming months. Trust will still play its own function and roles, but it seems that with separation on Trust and Flags, from now on, Trust (especially negative Trust) will less likely to be misused like before the changes. Let's see, but I hope that we will see less Trust Appeals. Because from now on, Trust is used for a single purpose, described by theymos. It will only be used to warn risks of trade, not opinion disagreements.

I think that several of the problems with Trust were because three different goals were being jammed into one system:
 1. Getting a general idea of someone's trade history and trustworthiness in one convenient location, sort of like reviews on sites like EBay.
<...>
Use-case #1 is the old trust system, but I made the descriptions on the rating types a bit more general and removed the concept of a trust score. The numbers are now "distinct positive raters / distinct neutral raters / distinct negative raters". You should give these ratings for anything which you think would impact someone's willingness to trade with the person, but you should not use trust ratings to attack a person's opinions or otherwise talk about things which would not be relevant to reasonable prospective traders.