Someone from DefaultTrust just killed my pot. Sr. Member account for no reason!

[Vitamin King]

I dunno this guy. How come these people are getting into DefaultTrust? Now-a-days no scam accusation or reference is required by DefaultTrust people to make someone red?

[1715312054]

1715312054

[1715312054]

1715312054

[1715312054]

1715312054

[Quickseller]

I think a better question is why is someone who has zero trade history (and thus no reputation to maintain) allowed to be on Default Trust?

Having this person on their trust list is a clear example of using shills with the trust system, however in this case the rating are going to show up by default to everyone.

[Athertle]

I think a better question is why is someone who has zero trade history (and thus no reputation to maintain) allowed to be on Default Trust?

Having this person on their trust list is a clear example of using shills with the trust system, however in this case the rating are going to show up by default to everyone.

Not exactly. cryptodevil has had an active presence on the forum for scam busting and apparently had trustable behavior, so someone on depth 1 added him to their trust list.

IMHO, I think that the trust rating was unfounded; the possibility that the OP was just a supporter of CloudMining.website is pretty plausible.

[Quickseller]

I think a better question is why is someone who has zero trade history (and thus no reputation to maintain) allowed to be on Default Trust?

Having this person on their trust list is a clear example of using shills with the trust system, however in this case the rating are going to show up by default to everyone.

Not exactly. cryptodevil has had an active presence on the forum for scam busting and apparently had trustable behavior, so someone on depth 1 added him to their trust list.

IMHO, I think that the trust rating was unfounded; the possibility that the OP was just a supporter of CloudMining.website is pretty plausible.

cryptodevil is a shill account whose sole purpose is to harass companies that he thinks is a scam as well as the customers of the companies that he thinks is a scam. It is one thing to warn others about a potential scam, but it is inappropriate to continuously harass a scammer, and even less so to harass someone who is doing business with such scammers.

cryptodevil has zero trading history and as a result if he is incorrect about a rating his reputation will not suffer (because he has zero reputation to start with), and as a result he has no incentive to give out ratings that are reasonable, supported by facts (instead of speculation), and to remove a rating when it turns out he is wrong.

[botany]

cryptodevil has zero trading history and as a result if he is incorrect about a rating his reputation will not suffer (because he has zero reputation to start with), and as a result he has no incentive to give out ratings that are reasonable, supported by facts (instead of speculation), and to remove a rating when it turns out he is wrong.

There is the threat of being removed from the default trust list, if his ratings are unreasonable.
That should be sufficient.

[Quickseller]

cryptodevil has zero trading history and as a result if he is incorrect about a rating his reputation will not suffer (because he has zero reputation to start with), and as a result he has no incentive to give out ratings that are reasonable, supported by facts (instead of speculation), and to remove a rating when it turns out he is wrong.

There is the threat of being removed from the default trust list, if his ratings are unreasonable.
That should be sufficient.

You have got to be kidding me 

Being on DefaultTust is a liability if anything because it attracts a lot of drama towards you when you leave a negative rating. Even if you never leave a negative rating, others will try to figure out what it takes to get a positive rating from you and then farm trust from you.

It is however unlikely that cryptodevil is going to get removed from DT because the ratings he leaves are nearly identical to those of ThePhwner and dooglus, except most of the time, only one of them will leave a negative rating. This means that none of them will attract sufficient attention so that other level 1 DT people will not exclude any of them, and that the level of controversy associated with each of them is reduced by roughly 2/3, which is substantial.

By having zero trading experience (at least from the account he is leaving ratings from), he lacks the experience to be able to reach a middle ground with others, and lacks the ability to show that he has a history of acting reasonable. 

[botany]

You have got to be kidding me 

Being on DefaultTust is a liability if anything because it attracts a lot of drama towards you when you leave a negative rating. Even if you never leave a negative rating, others will try to figure out what it takes to get a positive rating from you and then farm trust from you.

Different people have different motivations.
Some people might like the attention / drama that you talk of.

[ABitNut]

By having zero trading experience (at least from the account he is leaving ratings from), he lacks the experience to be able to reach a middle ground with others, and lacks the ability to show that he has a history of acting reasonable. 

1) You're sure they're a sockpuppet
2) You claim they lack experience

To be able to draw that conclusion you must know the owner behind the account and their experience level. Do you? Or are you jumping to conclusions.

In other news, there are no requirements for a position on default trust. Generally, if your feedback is spot on you'll get there. Regardless of any trading history, post/activity count, the number of hairs on your head. Stop imagining rules where there are none.

[Quickseller]

By having zero trading experience (at least from the account he is leaving ratings from), he lacks the experience to be able to reach a middle ground with others, and lacks the ability to show that he has a history of acting reasonable. 

1) You're sure they're a sockpuppet
2) You claim they lack experience

To be able to draw that conclusion you must know the owner behind the account and their experience level. Do you? Or are you jumping to conclusions.

In other news, there are no requirements for a position on default trust. Generally, if your feedback is spot on you'll get there. Regardless of any trading history, post/activity count, the number of hairs on your head. Stop imagining rules where there are none.

There is no evidence of any trading experience.

To say that someone should not have trading experience to be in the DefaultTrust network is ridiculous. If they have no experience trading then what would they be doing looking at marketplace threads where the scams are going to be taking place?

Even by your criteria, the feedback of cryptodevil is not spot on and as a result has no place on DefaultTrust.

[ndnh]

To say that someone should not have trading experience to be in the DefaultTrust network is ridiculous. If they have no experience trading then what would they be doing looking at marketplace threads where the scams are going to be taking place?

No, not having trading experience shouldn't be and is not a disqualification from being on DT.

[Quickseller]

To say that someone should not have trading experience to be in the DefaultTrust network is ridiculous. If they have no experience trading then what would they be doing looking at marketplace threads where the scams are going to be taking place?

No, having trading experience shouldn't be and is not a qualification for being on DT.

What would they be doing looking at Marketplace threads then? What incentive would they have to have to be reasonable with individual trust ratings? If they have no trading experience then why would they have sent any trust ratings?

[ndnh]

To say that someone should not have trading experience to be in the DefaultTrust network is ridiculous. If they have no experience trading then what would they be doing looking at marketplace threads where the scams are going to be taking place?

No, having trading experience shouldn't be and is not a qualification for being on DT.

What would they be doing looking at Marketplace threads then? What incentive would they have to have to be reasonable with individual trust ratings? If they have no trading experience then why would they have sent any trust ratings?

AFAIK the qualification should be that
the person is trustworthy and
the person leaves reasonable trust ratings.

Past trades may indicate trustworthiness but it isn't the only indicator. Well, theymos and BadBear isn't on DT because of trades.

There are DT members with 0 trust score and quite qualify being on Default trust than many others.

[Quickseller]

To say that someone should not have trading experience to be in the DefaultTrust network is ridiculous. If they have no experience trading then what would they be doing looking at marketplace threads where the scams are going to be taking place?

No, having trading experience shouldn't be and is not a qualification for being on DT.

What would they be doing looking at Marketplace threads then? What incentive would they have to have to be reasonable with individual trust ratings? If they have no trading experience then why would they have sent any trust ratings?

AFAIK the qualification should be that
the person is trustworthy and
the person leaves reasonable trust ratings
Past trades may indicate trustworthiness but it isn't the only indicator. Well, theymos and BadBear isn't on DT because of trades.

There are DT members with 0 trust score and quite qualify being on Default trust than many others.

How is anyone suppose to know that you are trustworthy if you have never been trusted in the past?

Theymos may not be on DT because of the trades he has done in the past, however he has conducted business on the forum in the past. For example he sold a TI-84 Plus with a Pink Faceplate, and he auctions off forum advertisements multiple times per month.

I am not sure what trades BadBear has conducted in the past, however he has been trusted with sensitive information in the past (and AFAIK continues to be trusted with such information). He also trades his services as an admin for several BTC every month. 

[TheGr33k]

To say that someone should not have trading experience to be in the DefaultTrust network is ridiculous. If they have no experience trading then what would they be doing looking at marketplace threads where the scams are going to be taking place?

No, not having trading experience shouldn't be and is not a disqualification from being on DT.

Yep, how come trust is developed only by doing trade? I used to trust Quickseller once, not because he had done a lot of trades, but because he was great in busting out scams.

[ndnh]

To say that someone should not have trading experience to be in the DefaultTrust network is ridiculous. If they have no experience trading then what would they be doing looking at marketplace threads where the scams are going to be taking place?

No, having trading experience shouldn't be and is not a qualification for being on DT.

What would they be doing looking at Marketplace threads then? What incentive would they have to have to be reasonable with individual trust ratings? If they have no trading experience then why would they have sent any trust ratings?

AFAIK the qualification should be that
the person is trustworthy and
the person leaves reasonable trust ratings
Past trades may indicate trustworthiness but it isn't the only indicator. Well, theymos and BadBear isn't on DT because of trades.

There are DT members with 0 trust score and quite qualify being on Default trust than many others.

How is anyone suppose to know that you are trustworthy if you have never been trusted in the past?

Theymos may not be on DT because of the trades he has done in the past, however he has conducted business on the forum in the past. For example he sold a TI-84 Plus with a Pink Faceplate, and he auctions off forum advertisements multiple times per month.

I am not sure what trades BadBear has conducted in the past, however he has been trusted with sensitive information in the past (and AFAIK continues to be trusted with such information). He also trades his services as an admin for several BTC every month.  

Trust is not equal to doing lot of successful trades.
Past trades is not a guarantee of trustworthiness, though it most of the times have to be taken so because there are only less things to base it on.

theymos isn't on DT because he sold a TI-84 plus with a Pink Faceplate.

It is more like:
the person is not untrustworthy, has not indulged in suspicious behavior and can be reasonably trusted; and most importantly
the person leaves reasonable trust ratings. (includes busting scammers and leaving negative trusts as well as leaving neutral and positive trusts)


Doing lot of solid successful trades might get a green trust score, but they wouldn't be added to DT for that.

[Quickseller]

To say that someone should not have trading experience to be in the DefaultTrust network is ridiculous. If they have no experience trading then what would they be doing looking at marketplace threads where the scams are going to be taking place?

No, not having trading experience shouldn't be and is not a disqualification from being on DT.

Yep, how come trust is developed only by doing trade? I used to trust Quickseller once, not because he had done a lot of trades, but because he was great in busting out scams.

The reason I came across the scams that I was able to bust was because I was active in trading. So although trading may not have been the direct reason for such trust, however it did play a roll (at least behind the scenes).

Also the scams I busted were not quite as obvious as the scams that the person who gave negative trust to the OP harasses about. I also don't go around in threads of scams posting repetitive information in an obsessive, and harassing way. I will warn others about what I believe to be suspicious behavior, and if someone has any questions or wants clarification, then I will most likely provide answers/clarification. I won't however accuse anyone who chooses to do business with a scammer to be a shill of that scam site, and the same is true for whoever chooses to take the risk of doing business with a likely scammer (although there is certain criteria that would make me believe that someone is actually a shill/alt of a scammer, and the OP does not match this criteria IMO)

[Quickseller]

To say that someone should not have trading experience to be in the DefaultTrust network is ridiculous. If they have no experience trading then what would they be doing looking at marketplace threads where the scams are going to be taking place?

No, having trading experience shouldn't be and is not a qualification for being on DT.

What would they be doing looking at Marketplace threads then? What incentive would they have to have to be reasonable with individual trust ratings? If they have no trading experience then why would they have sent any trust ratings?

AFAIK the qualification should be that
the person is trustworthy and
the person leaves reasonable trust ratings
Past trades may indicate trustworthiness but it isn't the only indicator. Well, theymos and BadBear isn't on DT because of trades.

There are DT members with 0 trust score and quite qualify being on Default trust than many others.

How is anyone suppose to know that you are trustworthy if you have never been trusted in the past?

Theymos may not be on DT because of the trades he has done in the past, however he has conducted business on the forum in the past. For example he sold a TI-84 Plus with a Pink Faceplate, and he auctions off forum advertisements multiple times per month.

I am not sure what trades BadBear has conducted in the past, however he has been trusted with sensitive information in the past (and AFAIK continues to be trusted with such information). He also trades his services as an admin for several BTC every month. 

Trust not equal to doing lot of successful trades.
Past trades is not a guarantee of trustworthiness, though it most of the times have to be taken so because there are only less things to base it on.

theymos isn't on DT because he sold a TI-84 plus with a Pink Faceplate.

It is more like:
the person is not untrustworthy, has not indulged in suspicious behavior and can be reasonably trusted; and most importantly
the person leaves reasonable trust ratings

You are not trustworthy by default, but rather the opposite.

No theymos is not considered trustworthy because of a single trade, and especially not that trade. However the fact that he completed that trade (apparently) is an indication that he might know how to act reasonably when dealing with others.

[Vitamin King]

Not exactly. cryptodevil has had an active presence on the forum for scam busting and apparently had trustable behavior, so someone on depth 1 added him to their trust list.

I would like to know who is this someone. I need to talk to him. Because, the person left me -ve did not communicate me anything yet. Its like he can make anyone -ve at his whim.

IMHO, I think that the trust rating was unfounded; the possibility that the OP was just a supporter of CloudMining.website is pretty plausible.

It is not about being shill/supporter or anything. When I was a newbie, I was doubtful about www.cloudmining.website and hence asked for people's opinion (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=852857.0). Since then I have only reported the facts I came across. Their payment with Tx ID, review by other cloud mining monitor. So, I am not allowed to post the facts I see or what? Lately, they had some issues with payment confirmation. I was the first to report that on the forum...

Why is today's payment hanging as unconfirmed Tx for so long ?

https://blockchain.info/tx/92161bd3fdd139d9f7a5a8f3fc1ef4ffeeae5e5ab8d636072c6e9c166bd64f34

Even I did the same before - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1014548.0. If I am their shill, why would I point out -ve things about them? Not only that, if you follow my post history, you'll find I was also active on CloudMinr.io thread, where I lost fund. If I am a shill of this cloud mining, why would I report payment on CloudMinr.io?

Given the above facts, how can someone point me as a shill for merely reporting my experience with www.cloudmining.website?

[cexi]

This is normal for the forum. I have been through it too.

you don't break a single rule and some dicklicker still leaves you bad trust.

#typical

[TheGr33k]

Normally people from DT will be reasonable if they gave you a false-rating. Try to talk it out with that member and see what they're willing to do; if you truly think it's unwarranted then you can make a thread in Meta to complain!