A new kind of trust farmers?

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Well, is there a better way to regulate this?

I don't have any good ideas on how to regulate something like this so that's why I opened the thread - also to give a heads up to loaners that they should be more wary with their trust distribution.

Gotcha.

One of the things I find attractive about bitcoin is that I don't need a bank and the gov't doesn't issue it.  A lot of people think like that.  But one of the consequences of this, obviously, is that there's little recourse when something goes wrong and one's trading partner needs to be vetted with much more diligence than would be necessary with a credit card, for instance.  And at bitcointalk, I guess it's always been the tradition that members police for scammers and I'm cool with that for the most part.

But two things bother me:  Nothing is done by admins about scammers.  I think there should be rules in place for this.  And the second is the trust system, which is just broken.  There's a reason why Ebay makes you complete a verifiable transaction before leaving someone feedback.  People have way too easy a time on this forum building up positive trust, and on the flip side there are idiots who spam negative trust feedback when no transaction took place (take a look at my trust feedback). 

If those two things could be improved, I think there would be a solution to the question you posed in this thread.

[1714183726]

1714183726

[1714183726]

1714183726

[Spoetnik]

I broke up a ring of these guys doing it with Paypal.
A ton of new accounts all doing $5 deal with BTC+Paypal.

If you see these guys doing it i say neg their ass hard !
Look for their ring-leader and nail that fucker hard LOL

[The Sceptical Chymist]

I broke up a ring of these guys doing it with Paypal.
A ton of new accounts all doing $5 deal with BTC+Paypal.

If you see these guys doing it i say neg their ass hard !
Look for their ring-leader and nail that fucker hard LOL

But why?  Why is it your fight to fight?  Why be concerned?  Ebay allows sales of cryptocurrency!  Wesellcrypto.com has been doing it for quite a while now and I don't see how they get away with it if Paypal forbids it.  How can they forbid it anyway?  They allow gift transfers of funds which can be for any reason.

[Spoetnik]

I broke up a ring of these guys doing it with Paypal.
A ton of new accounts all doing $5 deal with BTC+Paypal.

If you see these guys doing it i say neg their ass hard !
Look for their ring-leader and nail that fucker hard LOL

But why?  Why is it your fight to fight?  Why be concerned? Ebay allows sales of cryptocurrency! Wesellcrypto.com has been doing it for quite a while now and I don't see how they get away with it if Paypal forbids it.  How can they forbid it anyway?  They allow gift transfers of funds which can be for any reason.

Because i am in charge.

And ebay does NOT allow sales of Crypto-Currencies.
At least not that long ago when it was jointly owned with Paypal anyway.
Try using Google before spouting nonsense next time son

EDIT:
Way back i had even reported some guys doing it.
I also seen a TON of listings pulled by eBay.. so your an idiot full of shit Mr. Pharmacist.
Jeez you sure post a lot of stupid comments.. WOW !

[andulolika]

I did see that, it may become a problem but the trust rating should reflect that behavior at long term, i do take small loans myself from here when there is no shark around.

[Erkallys]

If this is really their aim, I won't help them to do so, because I'll only give a positive trust to someone if we had at least 3 loans that had no problem at all.

[CrackedLogic]

Feedback on loans should be given as neutral, or possibly a specific loan dedicated feedback rating.

[Robertt]

I only got negatives & neutrals on my loans lol
Looks like the user "paka" (if I remember correctly) is asking for multiple loans one after another. Suspicious, each loan amount is higher than the last. Might be trying to sell his account or scam.

[pjsonowal]

Well, is there a better way to regulate this?

I don't have any good ideas on how to regulate something like this so that's why I opened the thread - also to give a heads up to loaners that they should be more wary with their trust distribution.

I think lenders who give out loans should set up something in mind from starting up of lending service that

1)Lender will not leave a positive trust until it exceeds certain amt. [like I will not give a positive feedback if amount is >0.5BTC (example)]
2)Lender will not leave a positive trust until it exceeds certain interest (in percentage% or any amt) [like I will not give a positive feedback if interest amount is >15% or 0.025BTC (example)]
3)Also lender will give a positive feedback after some successive loan requests [like X giving a positive feedback after 5-6 successful lending transactions]

All of the points should be fulfilled to give out a positive feedback.

Also this thing must not be posted in the lender's thread.So far it is good as Mitchell posted

What do you think?

Note: I will not leave trust for micro-transactions. No trust farming here.

Pretty smart isn't he? Point to be noted: He didn't gave any hint to trust farmers about the range . He just posted it as micro-transactions.

~snip~  just the people who take loans out continuously every couple of weeks without real reasons - often things like "buying gifts" or "renewing a miner"... etc.

I have come over the point that there should be a loan request limitation per week/month per user(whichever suitable)[like a user say X can only request for loan twice a week]


(Am sorry there may be some grammatical errors . Hope you guys got it what I am trying to say.)

[andulolika]

Well, is there a better way to regulate this?

I don't have any good ideas on how to regulate something like this so that's why I opened the thread - also to give a heads up to loaners that they should be more wary with their trust distribution.

I think lenders who give out loans should set up something in mind from starting up of lending service that

1)Lender will not leave a positive trust until it exceeds certain amt. [like I will not give a positive feedback if amount is >0.5BTC (example)]
2)Lender will not leave a positive trust until it exceeds certain interest (in percentage% or any amt) [like I will not give a positive feedback if interest amount is >15% or 0.025BTC (example)]
3)Also lender will give a positive feedback after some successive loan requests [like X giving a positive feedback after 5-6 successful lending transactions]

All of the points should be fulfilled to give out a positive feedback.

Also this thing must not be posted in the lender's thread.So far it is good as Mitchell posted

What do you think?

Note: I will not leave trust for micro-transactions. No trust farming here.

Pretty smart isn't he? Point to be noted: He didn't gave any hint to trust farmers about the range . He just posted it as micro-transactions.

~snip~  just the people who take loans out continuously every couple of weeks without real reasons - often things like "buying gifts" or "renewing a miner"... etc.

I have come over the point that there should be a loan request limitation per week/month per user(whichever suitable)[like a user say X can only request for loan twice a week]


(Am sorry there may be some grammatical errors . Hope you guys got it what I am trying to say.)

I dont really care about it now but if i was limited to x times weekly id just find sharks somewhere else, they would lose many of the good users.
Edit: i completly forgot that the topic is about trust lol, eitherway maybe a whitelist would do the job, tough loans on crypto are mostly used to gamble which means that players will eventually default and end up in red trust

[pjsonowal]

~snip~

I dont really care about it now but if i was limited to x times weekly id just find sharks somewhere else, they would lose many of the good users.
Edit: i completly forgot that the topic is about trust lol, eitherway maybe a whitelist would do the job, tough loans on crypto are mostly used to gamble which means that players will eventually default and end up in red trust

But collateral is also there to secure the lender not to loose the money even if the person who took loan scams him. Also 150% collateral thing secures most of the lenders here.

[subSTRATA]

Feedback on loans should be given as neutral, or possibly a specific loan dedicated feedback rating.

i dont think feedback should be left at all, you took out a loan because you needed it for whatever reason, and youre obligated to pay that back anyways. paying back what you should doesnt really merit trust, youre just fulfilling the tacit agreement made when you took out the loan.

tough loans on crypto are mostly used to gamble which means that players will eventually default and end up in red trust

theres nothing that directly points to that being true, even if some borrowers do come forward and say its a gambling loan.

[DarkStar_]

Well, is there a better way to regulate this?

I don't have any good ideas on how to regulate something like this so that's why I opened the thread - also to give a heads up to loaners that they should be more wary with their trust distribution.

I have come over the point that there should be a loan request limitation per week/month per user(whichever suitable)[like a user say X can only request for loan twice a week]
-snip-

I really doubt the forum would make a rule regarding something like that. For that to happen, all the lenders would have to come to a censuses. Some people will also request loans via PM.

[bitcoin revo]

1)Lender will not leave a positive trust until it exceeds certain amt. [like I will not give a positive feedback if amount is >0.5BTC (example)]

Different people have varying degrees of what they think "trustworthy" is.

2)Lender will not leave a positive trust until it exceeds certain interest (in percentage% or any amt) [like I will not give a positive feedback if interest amount is >15% or 0.025BTC (example)]

Basically, being greedy and making people pay extra to get some positive feedback (or you could think of it as bribing, but that's probably stretching it)

3)Also lender will give a positive feedback after some successive loan requests [like X giving a positive feedback after 5-6 successful lending transactions]

See my first response.

[steveds]

Well, is there a better way to regulate this?

I don't have any good ideas on how to regulate something like this so that's why I opened the thread - also to give a heads up to loaners that they should be more wary with their trust distribution.

I have come over the point that there should be a loan request limitation per week/month per user(whichever suitable)[like a user say X can only request for loan twice a week]
-snip-

I really doubt the forum would make a rule regarding something like that. For that to happen, all the lenders would have to come to a censuses. Some people will also request loans via PM.

Why would the forum make such pity rules ? or why would they even involve in the high school drama.The trust doesn't requires trade and it has been discussed several times in the past.I can leave trust to anyone regardless of they repaying the loan or not.It's opinion based and people should stop sensationalizing others with their brand of logic.

[BTTrader]

You're allowed to leave positive trust if you had a positive experience trading with someone though, isnt that right?

This is how i see it aswell. I dont really see a problem with stating you had a positive transaction with someone if you did. I understand that this trust thing can get out of hand though, it just has not effected me much personally who has trust, who has given trust ect. that isn't going to make me just instantly trust a user.