Trust system is abused.

[Quickseller]

Also whining publicly about untrusted feedback can only make it worse.

People frequently send negative trust based on "untrusted" feedback that others have left. Someone who cares about their reputation will want to prevent any kind of negative feedback from appearing on their profile whenever possible.

Your post makes it sound as if you are arguing that it is okay to scam someone as long as they are not in the DT network and as long as they do not understand the importance of opening a scam accusation, and that all trust that is "untrusted" should be ignored.

There is also the possibility that someone will get added to the DT network in the future.

All this is just your speculation. I didn't mean any of that. Try reading or smth.

No, that is exactly what you are saying. There is no other way to put it.

[suchmoon]

Also whining publicly about untrusted feedback can only make it worse.

People frequently send negative trust based on "untrusted" feedback that others have left. Someone who cares about their reputation will want to prevent any kind of negative feedback from appearing on their profile whenever possible.

Your post makes it sound as if you are arguing that it is okay to scam someone as long as they are not in the DT network and as long as they do not understand the importance of opening a scam accusation, and that all trust that is "untrusted" should be ignored.

There is also the possibility that someone will get added to the DT network in the future.

All this is just your speculation. I didn't mean any of that. Try reading or smth.

No, that is exactly what you are saying. There is no other way to put it.

No, what I said - exactly - is here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1542520.msg15564826#msg15564826

Not even close to what you're blabbering about. I think it's safe to say that I probably know better whether my post needed some creative "way to put it" or not. Hint: it didn't. So don't.

[TheGr33k]

There is a way.  It's called messaging a moderator and pleading your case.

[Cloverdale]

There is a way.  It's called messaging a moderator and pleading your case.

He can't. Trust feedbacks are not moderated that is why most people do as what they will with it. If you appeal their response will be of that it is their own trust feedbacks and opinion and you can't change it because that is how their mind works.

[minifrij]

There is a way.  It's called messaging a moderator and pleading your case.

To which the moderator will say "Trust is not moderated, sorry". Especially considering that the negative feedback was given due to the user doing something discouraged by the forum.
I wonder if your account has been sold again, since I'm sure you've had this explained to you in the past.

[suchmoon]

There is a way.  It's called messaging a moderator and pleading your case.

Moderators can't do anything about trust ratings. Sig spamming on the other hand...

[TheGr33k]

There is a way.  It's called messaging a moderator and pleading your case.

He can't. Trust feedbacks are not moderated that is why most people do as what they will with it. If you appeal their response will be of that it is their own trust feedbacks and opinion and you can't change it because that is how their mind works.

Wrong. I have proof that the admin changes ratings.  Do you want me to show you the web capture?

[Your Point Is Invalid]

Also whining publicly about untrusted feedback can only make it worse.

People frequently send negative trust based on "untrusted" feedback that others have left. Someone who cares about their reputation will want to prevent any kind of negative feedback from appearing on their profile whenever possible.

Your post makes it sound as if you are arguing that it is okay to scam someone as long as they are not in the DT network and as long as they do not understand the importance of opening a scam accusation, and that all trust that is "untrusted" should be ignored.

There is also the possibility that someone will get added to the DT network in the future.

All this is just your speculation. I didn't mean any of that. Try reading or smth.

No, that is exactly what you are saying. There is no other way to put it.

Thats not what he is saying, trying to remove untrusted feedback is a waste of time because no-one really cares about untrusted feedback, the thing is, if that person gets added to DT and you can prove that they are abusing the system, they will quickly be removed. So basically, im saying that this is a waste of time.

[Your Point Is Invalid]

There is a way.  It's called messaging a moderator and pleading your case.

He can't. Trust feedbacks are not moderated that is why most people do as what they will with it. If you appeal their response will be of that it is their own trust feedbacks and opinion and you can't change it because that is how their mind works.

Wrong. I have proof that the admin changes ratings.  Do you want me to show you the web capture?

Please go ahead and show the proof, from my understanding, they will not change ratings, they would just delete it

[TheGr33k]

There is a way.  It's called messaging a moderator and pleading your case.

He can't. Trust feedbacks are not moderated that is why most people do as what they will with it. If you appeal their response will be of that it is their own trust feedbacks and opinion and you can't change it because that is how their mind works.

Wrong. I have proof that the admin changes ratings.  Do you want me to show you the web capture?

Please go ahead and show the proof, from my understanding, they will not change ratings, they would just delete it

Oh yeah, you're right.  I apologize.  I worded myself incorrectly.  By change,  I meant make it neutral or lower in that sense.


I apologize.

http://archive.is/mohqY


But still,  I was on the right path.  What I meant was to inform people that the moderators can do something about a rating if you just plead your case like this person did. Indicating that ratings are indeed monitored.

[minifrij]

Oh yeah, you're right.  I apologize.  I worded myself incorrectly.  By change,  I meant make it neutral or lower in that sense.
I apologize.
http://archive.is/mohqY
But still,  I was on the right path.  What I meant was to inform people that the moderators can do something about a rating if you just plead your case like this person did. Indicating that ratings are indeed monitored.

Congratulations. You have successfully proved that moderators, just like any other user here, can change their own trust ratings to neutral/negative.
AFAIK, the trust rating that BadBear removed was one that BadBear himself added to the user. Someone can feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

[TheGr33k]

I got negative feedback from a user who refused escrow and a random user I never saw. There should be a way to apply to get feedback removed

Hi there!  Just so you know,  there is indeed a way to get feedback removed,  just as you had requested! 


http://archive.is/mohqY

[suchmoon]

I got negative feedback from a user who refused escrow and a random user I never saw. There should be a way to apply to get feedback removed

Hi there!  Just so you know,  there is indeed a way to get feedback removed,  just as you had requested!  


http://archive.is/mohqY

It's been already explained to you that BadBear changed his/her own feedback and doesn't possess any magic powers to change another user's feedback. Why do you keep repeating this bad advice?

[Omegasun]

im totally disagree to DT member. they can easily give negative trust even if the reason is personal and not scam or illegal accuse. i hope that admin will change the rule about trust feedback. maybe it is to have a reference proof before the trust feedback occur..

[TheGr33k]

im totally disagree to DT member. they can easily give negative trust even if the reason is personal and not scam or illegal accuse. i hope that admin will change the rule about trust feedback. maybe it is to have a reference proof before the trust feedback occur..

Half of the time, there is reference. Yeah.  For the ones with no reference or proper reference,  something should be done.