Bitcoin Forum
August 21, 2019, 10:33:33 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.0 [Torrent] (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Minor trust score algorithm change  (Read 6975 times)
Hippie Tech
aka Amenstop
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1624
Merit: 1001


All cryptos are FIAT digital currency. Do not use.


View Profile WWW
June 21, 2015, 10:21:08 PM
 #141

Where did you get your info on ??? ?

In my case, re-doing bobsag3's negative trust was not necessary and -ck's positive entry, posted 4 months later, had no effect.
That is not true. The first negative rating will cause the previous positive ratings to be disregarded if the net trust score would be positive if all positive trust ratings were to be taken into consideration. After the first negative rating, subsequent negative ratings will cause the negative trust score to increase by a factor of an exponent of 2. Any positive trust ratings after the first negative rating will count as normal.

You are right. Stupid mistake of mine. Thanks for correcting!

For those who may be interested, here is what changing the depth level can do ..

Default trust depth level 0                                        level 1                                                                 level 2
[ IMG]http://img.techpowerup.org/150621/lv0.jpg[/img] [ IMG]http://img.techpowerup.org/150621/lv1.jpg[/img] [ IMG]http://img.techpowerup.org/150621/lv2.jpg[/img]

level 3                                                                  level 4
[ IMG]http://img.techpowerup.org/150621/lv2.jpg[/img] [ IMG]http://img.techpowerup.org/150621/lv4.jpg[/img]


Others won't see in the way you see unless they add you to their trust list. When you view it, your negative feedback is seen as trusted and it affects trust rating but not for us(who haven't added you).

That part is obvious. What isn't is, what is actually causing the question marks to appear.

How do those user's appear to you ?




Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1566383613
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1566383613

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1566383613
Reply with quote  #2

1566383613
Report to moderator
CrackedLogic
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050
Merit: 1000



View Profile
June 22, 2015, 01:14:59 PM
 #142

TECSHARE appears green to me with a score of 124 in the green.

What I don't understand is this:


Why is Luke-Jr sitting at a -1 and cooldgamer sitting at "? ? ?".
Cooldgamer is in my trust list and not default trust, would this have a potential effect?

Shocked BUY GAMESWITHBTCITCOINFORDISCOUNTEDPRICES Shocked
dogie
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652
Merit: 1119


dogiecoin.com


View Profile WWW
June 22, 2015, 01:43:37 PM
 #143

TECSHARE appears green to me with a score of 124 in the green.

What I don't understand is this:


Why is Luke-Jr sitting at a -1 and cooldgamer sitting at "? ? ?".
Cooldgamer is in my trust list and not default trust, would this have a potential effect?

[According to his particular trust list:]
The consensus on that situation is that Luke is considered untrustworthy with -1/+1. he has no sigifnicaint history and recent evidence of things going wrong, and hence is red with a warning. With cooldgamer the system can't implicitly determine if he is a scammer or not, due to his established positive history, hence Huh = go read the trust ratings.

Muhammed Zakir
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 560
Merit: 504


I prefer Zakir over Muhammed when mentioning me!


View Profile WWW
June 25, 2015, 08:28:05 AM
 #144

TECSHARE appears green to me with a score of 124 in the green.

What I don't understand is this:


Why is Luke-Jr sitting at a -1 and cooldgamer sitting at "? ? ?".
Cooldgamer is in my trust list and not default trust, would this have a potential effect?

[According to his particular trust list:]
The consensus on that situation is that Luke is considered untrustworthy with -1/+1. he has no sigifnicaint history and recent evidence of things going wrong, and hence is red with a warning. With cooldgamer the system can't implicitly determine if he is a scammer or not, due to his established positive history, hence Huh = go read the trust ratings.

Is "+50 risked amount = additional count" still in trust algorithm? If yes, do you think it has to do anything with Luke-Jr's trust score?

mmmaybe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 462
Merit: 250



View Profile WWW
June 28, 2015, 12:56:04 AM
 #145

There are some useful changes, but the first score needs to be rescaled. It varies too much if one trust is added or removed. Makes anyone in Default trust much more powerful and those outside it more worthless.

Muhammed Zakir's rating shows as ???



Yes:



It is a bug.... theymos can surely fix it.

I am not surprised of a bug in the trust scores, the whole system is a bug and hardly usable Wink

master-P
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868
Merit: 1001


https://keybase.io/masterp FREE Escrow Service


View Profile WWW
June 28, 2015, 01:30:01 AM
 #146

I thought I read somewhere that the "???" trust score basically means the system is unable to help you determine a score so it is up to you to decide whether the user is trustworthy or not. On my end Muhammed Zakir's trusted ratings are all positive and he has a trust score of 9 currently, so I guess it also depends on who you have on your own trust list as it affects other people's trust scores. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong though.

Master-P's Free Escrow Service | 1% Fee for Multi-Party/Sig Campaigns | I Sign ALL of my addresses using PGP Key: https://keybase.io/masterp Verify
Tipping Address: 14PUWBwK854GLenxSa7MAuxXQUXK4DKKi5 | E-mail: masterp.bitcointalk {at} gmail {dot} com (for when/if the forum's offline)
Guide on How to Sign a Message
Muhammed Zakir
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 560
Merit: 504


I prefer Zakir over Muhammed when mentioning me!


View Profile WWW
June 28, 2015, 05:36:26 AM
 #147

-snip-
Why is Luke-Jr sitting at a -1 {...}

The answer was in first page.

-snip-
Doesn't that mean if someone receives a positive and a negative rating, they'll go negative if the negative is newer?

If someone has 1 positive and 1 negative, then the time doesn't matter. They'll have a score of -1.

There are some useful changes, but the first score needs to be rescaled. It varies too much if one trust is added or removed. Makes anyone in Default trust much more powerful and those outside it more worthless.

Muhammed Zakir's rating shows as ???

Yes:

[ img]http://i.imgur.com/VZfITNr.png[/img]

It is a bug.... theymos can surely fix it.

I am not surprised of a bug in the trust scores, the whole system is a bug and hardly usable Wink

Trust spam. Just below that post, that doubt was cleared.

I thought I read somewhere that the "???" trust score basically means the system is unable to help you determine a score so it is up to you to decide whether the user is trustworthy or not. On my end Muhammed Zakir's trusted ratings are all positive and he has a trust score of 9 currently, so I guess it also depends on who you have on your own trust list as it affects other people's trust scores. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong though.

??? is a valid score in the new algorithm.

Doesn't that mean if someone receives a positive and a negative rating, they'll go negative if the negative is newer?

If someone has 1 positive and 1 negative, then the time doesn't matter. They'll have a score of -1.

Examples:
Old -> New
+ - : -1
- + : -1
+ + - : ???
+ - + : 0
- + + : 1
+ + + : >=3
- - + : -3
+ - - : -3
- - - : -8

 -snip-

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!