Bitcoin Node Challenge feedback

[Satofan44]

7 ) Kick out participants who send more than X merit to other/ex participants. Reactionary procedures don't work very well compared to prevention, from my experience.

If you add this as a rule to the contest somehow, could negative trust from defaulttrust be given afterwards?

This would basically mean those users will have to keep track of other (former) participants, and be careful not to Merit their posts. I wouldn't go down that road:

If a DT member tags you for something stupid involving merit (ie. probably anything less than selling merit), then they're not going to be a DT member for much longer.

(click the quote for full context)

I don't get it. If I create a campaign or contest with rules and someone purposefully tries to cheat and gets caught (such as no alt accounts), it is untrustworthy behavior and it will warrant negative feedback. However, if the rule involves merit and someone cheats it then is not allowed to give them negative feedback for cheating the challenge? That seems very strange.

In any case that quote is proof that any claims of the DT system being decentralized are bullshit. He’s the emperor of the system, and most participants are subservient.

[nutildah]

I don't get it. If I create a campaign or contest with rules and someone purposefully tries to cheat and gets caught (such as no alt accounts), it is untrustworthy behavior and it will warrant negative feedback. However, if the rule involves merit and someone cheats it then is not allowed to give them negative feedback for cheating the challenge? That seems very strange.

Feedback over merit is usually reserved for instances of merit selling. Sometimes I see tags for merit exchanges, although they are usually neutral. You, as an account on this forum, are allowed to do whatever you want. You can red tag anyone for anything, including cheating with merits. Just don't expect everyone to agree with you. If the red trust is presented in such a way that its a clear indicator the account is untrustworthy to deal with, then sure something involving merit could be involved, so long as it fills this requirement.

In any case that quote is proof that any claims of the DT system being decentralized are bullshit. He’s the emperor of the system, and most participants are subservient.

I think he prefers to be regarded as a benevolent dictator, which he is for the most part. He has a long history of being laissez-faire when it comes to ruling over the forum. Of course his word carries a lot of weight and I'd think much of the forum would support him in just about any change or venture. At the end of the day, its a website, not a democracy. I think the Default Trust system is about as close to democracy as you can have without involving some kind of DAO approach, which for some reason or another almost always fail.

[NotATether]

I believe the goal of this challenge is to introduce inexperienced members to important skills like starting a CORE node.
So preventing lower-level members from participating doesn't seem to me to be the goal of the challenge.

On the other hand, 14 merits is a lot.
I'm participating in the challenge, and in my case, 14 merits adds up to a 100% increase on what I've received so far.

I'd suggest a mix: don't exclude Newbies, but reduce the number of merits. Or use a proportional table like Newbie = 1 merit, Jr. Member = 3 merits, Member = 5 merits, and so on.

You cannot comment here if you are participating in the challenge. Read the OP.

Your post has been removed.

[NotATether]

After careful consideration of everyone's feedback, I have decided to implement the new rules system described before.

- New participants are now required to have at least 20 merits. Merit earned from "merit giveaway threads" will not count towards this quota. Interpretation of what qualifies as a merit giveaway thread is entirely up to my jurisdiction.
- The account age must be at least 100 days old, and have at least 100 activity.
-- These requirements also exclude Newbies and Jr. Members from joining the challenge.
- It is now required to post a screenshot of your node output in addition to copying and pasting the text. The screenshot must be the size the entire screen.
- Accounts with changed ownership may be removed.
- TypoTonic has generously volunteered to compile the daily reports, with additional details to follow.

There will be a grace period of 2 weeks for existing users to finish syncing their nodes, with these changes to take effect on November 14.

After this date, unqualified participants may be removed without notice.

Thanks to everyone who provided feedback on this matter. This thread will remain open for a few more weeks to accommodate additional feedback.

[LoyceV]

The screenshot must be the size the entire screen.

For what it's worth: I would never do this! This screenshot would include information on other running programs, status icons and shortcuts, which isn't something I'd want to share with the world. Anyone privacy conscious would either skip this challenge, or use a spare laptop for it (which means they're unlikely to keep using the node after this challenge).

[NotATether]

The screenshot must be the size the entire screen.

For what it's worth: I would never do this! This screenshot would include information on other running programs, status icons and shortcuts, which isn't something I'd want to share with the world. Anyone privacy conscious would either skip this challenge, or use a spare laptop for it (which means they're unlikely to keep using the node after this challenge).

They can simply hide applications from the taskbar or notification area that they don't want to share, or set it to "auto-hide taskbar", or even black out such areas (within reason).

[TypoTonic]

- TypoTonic has generously volunteered to compile the daily reports, with additional details to follow.

OP contacted me via pm and I agreed to volunteer, making it easier for him to review the latest entries and distribute rewards. I'll be the one to compile the reports daily when the new rules go live, but ultimately, he still has the discretion whether participants qualify or not (considering factors like merit and other account concerns) as stated earlier.

[Satofan44]

Feedback over merit is usually reserved for instances of merit selling. Sometimes I see tags for merit exchanges, although they are usually neutral. You, as an account on this forum, are allowed to do whatever you want. You can red tag anyone for anything, including cheating with merits. Just don't expect everyone to agree with you. If the red trust is presented in such a way that its a clear indicator the account is untrustworthy to deal with, then sure something involving merit could be involved, so long as it fills this requirement.

Thanks, in this case I believe it can be done and I find it strange that DT members are not doing it. If cheating on rules warrants negative ratings, then just include merits in the rules and that is it. I think people are too afraid to even try to do anything based on that strict statement that is being quoted repeatedly.

In any case that quote is proof that any claims of the DT system being decentralized are bullshit. He’s the emperor of the system, and most participants are subservient.

I think he prefers to be regarded as a benevolent dictator, which he is for the most part. He has a long history of being laissez-faire when it comes to ruling over the forum. Of course his word carries a lot of weight and I'd think much of the forum would support him in just about any change or venture. At the end of the day, its a website, not a democracy. I think the Default Trust system is about as close to democracy as you can have without involving some kind of DAO approach, which for some reason or another almost always fail.

That is understandable, but people really need to stop saying that it is decentralized. Whether a democracy or whether there is benevolent dictator, neither one is a decentralized system.  

The screenshot must be the size the entire screen.

For what it's worth: I would never do this! This screenshot would include information on other running programs, status icons and shortcuts, which isn't something I'd want to share with the world. Anyone privacy conscious would either skip this challenge, or use a spare laptop for it (which means they're unlikely to keep using the node after this challenge).

Anyone privacy conscious is already running a node, or does not care about merit challenges, or would not participate in this challenge anyway for a variety of privacy concerns. Just my opinion (lol), but this time you are wrong.