bitcointalk trust system very stupid

[DaddyMonsi]

I did not see the negative feedback. The + and - were at 0 before I posted. I admit I should have checked past threads. The admins should also delete scammer accounts.

You cant rely on the feedback alone, you also also need to check trade history by looking at his past transactions through posts. Not everyone here leaves a positive or a negative feedback. That's why this trust system can help people like you and me as a guide but everyone needs to cooperate by using it when needed and using it properly.

[MargonCreatives]

I agree it's broken, but I accept it's what exists and that it's not my forum.  OP, start your own forum if the trust system is so bad you can't stand it.   Otherwise STFU, because people more intelligent than you have been arguing about this same issue since the system came into existence, and it apparently does no good.  So whining about it without offering an alternative is definitely just going to fall on deaf ears.

same I want to say to you, STFU if you cannot understand and bear with forum rules. Its clearly mentioned that selling/buying forum accounts is legal then why you tagged eddie ? Shall I ask a DT member to tag you, since you tag others because they did something you did not like while you are doign something ( signature spamming ) which is not loved by a majority. So you deserve a negative trust, right ?

[minifrij]

Its clearly mentioned that selling/buying forum accounts is legal then why you tagged eddie ?

Regardless of whether something is or isn't within the rules doesn't change whether this act is seen as trustworthy or untrustworthy. Scamming isn't against the rules of the forum, does that mean that scammers should not be tagged?
In addition, The Pharmacist isn't on the DT network; his feedbacks do not hold much weight on your profile. I don't understand why people get so pissy about Untrusted feedback.

Shall I ask a DT member to tag you, since you tag others because they did something you did not like while you are doign something ( signature spamming ) which is not loved by a majority. So you deserve a negative trust, right ?

Selling accounts is untrustworthy by nature, signature spamming isn't as much. Considering it is the trust system, it makes sense that people would tag you for doing something untrustworthy.

[suchmoon]

I agree it's broken, but I accept it's what exists and that it's not my forum.  OP, start your own forum if the trust system is so bad you can't stand it.   Otherwise STFU, because people more intelligent than you have been arguing about this same issue since the system came into existence, and it apparently does no good.  So whining about it without offering an alternative is definitely just going to fall on deaf ears.

same I want to say to you, STFU if you cannot understand and bear with forum rules. Its clearly mentioned that selling/buying forum accounts is legal then why you tagged eddie ? Shall I ask a DT member to tag you, since you tag others because they did something you did not like while you are doign something ( signature spamming ) which is not loved by a majority. So you deserve a negative trust, right ?

Account sales is a gray area at best and trust is not supposed to enforce forum rules anyway. If anything the trust system covers areas not covered by forum rules.

while account trades are tolerated here, they are strongly discouraged

A user posting a neg trust for a "discouraged" behavior is fine as far as the trust system is concerned.

However asking a DT member to neg someone just because you don't like them or their opinion would be likely frowned upon. Even more puzzling is the fact that you haven't negged The Pharmacist yourself.

[ajareselde]

I am a bit confused here -

And I think you are stupid for not knowing that none of those feedbacks count unless they are from DT, which you can be only if you are a very trusted member of the community.

Account sales is a gray area at best and trust is not supposed to enforce forum rules anyway. If anything the trust system covers areas not covered by forum rules.

while account trades are tolerated here, they are strongly discouraged

A user posting a neg trust for a "discouraged" behavior is fine as far as the trust system is concerned.
However asking a DT member to neg someone just because you don't like them or their opinion would be likely frowned upon. Even more puzzling is the fact that you haven't negged The Pharmacist yourself.

So, one of you is saying that account sales are a bad thing , and untrustworthy, while many DT members like mexxer above say that they are "very trusted members",
even thou they were selling accounts.

I took him just as an example, there are a bunch of DT members that were selling accounts.

tl:dr cases

How is trust rating fair when someone on DT can give negative for account selling and his vote counts, and someone who's not on DT can't negg DT member and have his vote to count.
Who is there to control DT members ?  - No one is. Why the double standards ?


A lot of you make valid cases, and in theory it all sounds good, but in reality things are not black and white as you would think.

[Lutpin]

Who is there to control DT members ?  - No one is. Why the double standards ?

Theymos is there to control DT1, the collective of DT1 controls and selects DT2 (via includes and excludes), and so on, all the way down to DT4 (or even further to DTXYZ).
If there was a major problem, a thread in Reputation could be started, gathering either the attention of the one including the person, or enough others to exclude the person.
Yes, the trust system isn't perfect, it's merely the best we have, but saying DT is fully uncontrolled is wrong.

So, one of you is saying that account sales are a bad thing , and untrustworthy, while many DT members like mexxer above say that they are "very trusted members", even thou they were selling accounts.

We're talking about a group of users here, they don't have to be of the same opinion on everything.
You'll find a great deal of users with very different individual opinions on DT, and it's good this way.
DT doesn't function as a uni-opinion device, it doesn't have to.

[Quickseller]

Like I said before, people in the DT network are much less likely to receive a negative rating from a non-scammer, out of fear of receiving a retaliation negative rating, regardless of if they played a part in a scam or not.

Just look at all the people who tag everyone who even posts in a ponzi thread, then when Dooglus actually gives material support to a ponzi, they all look the other way. Or how Dooglus helped multiple multimillion dollar scams, yet still has no negative feedback that really counts.

[ajareselde]

Who is there to control DT members ?  - No one is. Why the double standards ?

Theymos is there to control DT1, the collective of DT1 controls and selects DT2 (via includes and excludes), and so on, all the way down to DT4 (or even further to DTXYZ).
If there was a major problem, a thread in Reputation could be started, gathering either the attention of the one including the person, or enough others to exclude the person.
Yes, the trust system isn't perfect, it's merely the best we have, but saying DT is fully uncontrolled is wrong.

Is DT system been enforcing a double set of rules - big fat yes.
Do i think it's fully uncontrolled - no, i don't.

The main thing about it is that in practice that what u wrote above isn't working - it isn't being done. And if it's needed to open up a reputation thread each time
DT member does something.. we could write about it every day.

One more VERY important problem is use of multiple alt-accounts that are on DT. For a single person to have more than one account on DT should never be allowed.
There is no legit sense or purpose where that could be used for anything good.

[BAGOBO]

....

One more VERY important problem is use of multiple alt-accounts that are on DT. For a single person to have more than one account on DT should never be allowed.
....

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=822764.0

It's surely has high chance for happening, right ?
People always being greed. (Not for now, maybe later or happening on the future)

[suchmoon]

I am a bit confused here -

And I think you are stupid for not knowing that none of those feedbacks count unless they are from DT, which you can be only if you are a very trusted member of the community.

Account sales is a gray area at best and trust is not supposed to enforce forum rules anyway. If anything the trust system covers areas not covered by forum rules.

while account trades are tolerated here, they are strongly discouraged

A user posting a neg trust for a "discouraged" behavior is fine as far as the trust system is concerned.
However asking a DT member to neg someone just because you don't like them or their opinion would be likely frowned upon. Even more puzzling is the fact that you haven't negged The Pharmacist yourself.

So, one of you is saying that account sales are a bad thing , and untrustworthy, while many DT members like mexxer above say that they are "very trusted members",
even thou they were selling accounts.

I took him just as an example, there are a bunch of DT members that were selling accounts.

tl:dr cases

How is trust rating fair when someone on DT can give negative for account selling and his vote counts, and someone who's not on DT can't negg DT member and have his vote to count.
Who is there to control DT members ?  - No one is. Why the double standards ?


A lot of you make valid cases, and in theory it all sounds good, but in reality things are not black and white as you would think.

I'm not saying it's "black and white", in fact I used the word "gray" in the post you quoted. I don't see a problem with someone considering account sales a "bad thing" and posting neg trust for that, and I don't see a problem if someone DOESN'T think that way. I can then choose which of those users I want to be included in my trust network. That's how you control it. Build your own trust list and ignore the dramas.

Like I said before, people in the DT network are much less likely to receive a negative rating from a non-scammer, out of fear of receiving a retaliation negative rating, regardless of if they played a part in a scam or not.

Just look at all the people who tag everyone who even posts in a ponzi thread, then when Dooglus actually gives material support to a ponzi, they all look the other way. Or how Dooglus helped multiple multimillion dollar scams, yet still has no negative feedback that really counts.

You need to get on with Chapter 3. It's taking too long, we're Netflix binge generation, come on.

One more VERY important problem is use of multiple alt-accounts that are on DT. For a single person to have more than one account on DT should never be allowed.
There is no legit sense or purpose where that could be used for anything good.

Do you have any proof of this happening? Sounds like something DT1 members would want to look into. I think you should post it as a new thread in Meta.

[eddie13]

you deal in accounts so I don't pity or feel sorry for you

Selling accounts is untrustworthy by nature

I agree that farming accounts and buying/selling accounts if you are dealing with accounts in specific for profit is somewhat untrustworthy because the high likelihood of them being used for nefarious purposes..

I am not in the account dealing business, I am in the lending business.. Basically providing liquidity to this forum's economy..

I have taken a few accounts collateral, without escrow, on my own trust, and never scammed a single one or even came close.. So some would say that I am trusted with holding a small amount of value that belongs to someone else and I will return it when it is time..
Sometimes defaults happen..

You are selling an account which is probably a scammers wet dream. Shame on you. Selling accounts is promoting a whole buffet of corrupt activities on the forum.

To me this reads like he would rather trust me to keep this "scammers wet dream" account rather than for me to put it in someone elses hands..

So I own this "scammers wet dream", it is in good standing because I don't scam, and he want's me to keep it so the account can't be used to scam because he knows if I have it it won't scam because I don't scam..

But he doesn't trust me (see red trust), because I don't want to keep/have a "scammers wet dream"..


Ok buddie, don't change it, leave it right exactly like it is..

Sorry, it looked like you were gunning for DT to me, if you aren't then I don't mind it being there.. It actually almost reads like a compliment to me and if it's staying in untrusted then cool..

Just some character, you do any amount of any sort of anything around here and your going to wind up with a few red marks.. 


Hey Pharmacist, to be more efficient in your approach why don't you take a little stroll over to the lending section and tag all the lenders that accept accounts as collateral. Any that have been in business for any amount of time have surely sold an account or two.. Probably more than me..

You got one on whywefight there? Nope you don't.. Better get him, he's close by, right in this thread..

He even has + DT for "User bought a person's 'lost' account"...

"put up this forum account for collateral"
"my account as collateral for loan"

There's your proof!! Tag him!!

This will be like watching shark week!! Get your tag on a Great white!!

I'll help some more

epicrate
DarkStar_
zazarb
knightkon
marcotheminer
Quickseller

That should keep you busy for a bit..

[whywefight]

Please dont wake me up... we had this before: Yes i accepted accounts as collateral, i changed my terms on it and didnt grant a loan for a while. Yes, i also sold at least one account from a defaulted loan to cover my loss. Unless most others, i try to keep an eye on an acc if i sell it.

As stated before: If you dont agree with me or think i am a scammer feel fre to -ve me. Please leave a reference and a proper message so people wont laugh about you. Once in a while i print all my -ve's and put them on my wall. Everytime i need to cheer up ill look at it. If people dont like what i do, they are free to do so.

hey eddie13, bought that acc?

EDIT: Yes i purchased ruggedman_dans acc when it became worthless and gave it back to its owner without making profit, what exactly did you do to solve the situation? Ah yeah: nothing

[eddie13]

hey eddie13, bought that acc?

This is the original and only owner of eddie13

1PdgT8CBVictLmD2B7vDq2RoKerizmbe5Y

HwSoDI9OlMFdZjYY6c46515v7vdUgwea1dWleCTNVH1/dR9hHLtNHZpqS5sa5Ktbxfs2/NFBXmilZ5DE/yeOmjA=

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=996318.msg13087124#msg13087124

I have bought zero accounts..

BTW I have no problem at all with what you do..

[whywefight]

hey eddie13, bought that acc?

This is the original and only owner of eddie13

1PdgT8CBVictLmD2B7vDq2RoKerizmbe5Y

HwSoDI9OlMFdZjYY6c46515v7vdUgwea1dWleCTNVH1/dR9hHLtNHZpqS5sa5Ktbxfs2/NFBXmilZ5DE/yeOmjA=

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=996318.msg13087124#msg13087124

I have bought zero accounts..

BTW I have no problem at all with what you do..

just a shot in the dark, ill ask for signed messages with those:

15jYgRVym33hQyHBXiq1sjFdQLgLaU4udZ
1HKnuXP3RZDLjHPuDcj4EzaDtEH94FMbgB
1HHyZDSTZf1Xc8yhtS3jFeNu9NnbCWv6hQ  
114uF5PUbG6Gqf5hvaiJhmd68AYkeorJ2G  
17t9jJkx1XoVXXVR5kBkF34Dv14rQkzFHH
1HimeaBzh2HkneyNpWsFWhN3raWNiyaJnk
18gbWnuj3aVXokBb4jr6s7uP9yaSuFJaij
14HBf3NqJhfj8Y7gXto2rE4potaLbpjTp4
1JVMphzLjBVijh6wgnV4UaUWCcoWicEcx6

later busy atm. gnahahaha

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Eddie, it's not my fault you take accounts as collateral.  I think the whole lemding section should get nuked, but that's just me.   As to the rest, methink thou doth protest too much.

Changed my mind about the red tag, removed it.  You are trusted otherwise with deals you've done,  and we'll see how your current loan request goes.  Still don't support your account selling, but a wee voice in my head is telling me to look past it in this case. 

[eddie13]

hey eddie13, bought that acc?

This is the original and only owner of eddie13

1PdgT8CBVictLmD2B7vDq2RoKerizmbe5Y

HwSoDI9OlMFdZjYY6c46515v7vdUgwea1dWleCTNVH1/dR9hHLtNHZpqS5sa5Ktbxfs2/NFBXmilZ5DE/yeOmjA=

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=996318.msg13087124#msg13087124

I have bought zero accounts..

BTW I have no problem at all with what you do..

just a shot in the dark, ill ask for signed messages with those:

15jYgRVym33hQyHBXiq1sjFdQLgLaU4udZ
1HKnuXP3RZDLjHPuDcj4EzaDtEH94FMbgB
1HHyZDSTZf1Xc8yhtS3jFeNu9NnbCWv6hQ  
114uF5PUbG6Gqf5hvaiJhmd68AYkeorJ2G  
17t9jJkx1XoVXXVR5kBkF34Dv14rQkzFHH
1HimeaBzh2HkneyNpWsFWhN3raWNiyaJnk
18gbWnuj3aVXokBb4jr6s7uP9yaSuFJaij
14HBf3NqJhfj8Y7gXto2rE4potaLbpjTp4
1JVMphzLjBVijh6wgnV4UaUWCcoWicEcx6

later busy atm. gnahahaha

15jyg-udz is my polo account that I use for pretty much everything..


Asking qustions about dust transactions..

Couldn't someone have just imported the 1HKnuXP3RZDLjHPuDcj4EzaDtEH94FMbgB into there wallet and then used it as an input in there next transaction they were going to make anyway therefore it paying 7740 sat of the 10,00 sat miner fee that they were going to have to pay to send any BTC anyway?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1314190.msg13567583#msg13567583

Quote from: lolgato on January 15, 2016, 07:50:33 PM
Loan amount : 0.017 BTC
Collateral : This account
Loan reason : Discount on an item for limited time
Your BTC address : 1HHyZDSTZf1Xc8yhtS3jFeNu9NnbCWv6hQ
Repayment offered : 0.020
Date of repayment : 17/01/2016
...
Can you sign a message from a staked address?

an hour or 2

Sounds great...

Send the DOGE here DPYYXub8hNQnp6YEfR4P42v9QeEMEafJaL to my polo account and I'll send your .02BTC to your addy 114uF5PUbG6Gqf5hvaiJhmd68AYkeorJ2G as soon as the doge finishes confirming to my account..

You only want it for an hour or 2 but lets make it within a week repayment so you can pay back any time you like within a week to stay on the safe side for ya.

your repayment amount will be .022BTC @ 10% to 15jYgRVym33hQyHBXiq1sjFdQLgLaU4udZ and when you do that I'll send your DOGE back to whatever address you want me to.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1316750.msg13461728#msg13461728

Message verified..

Please confirm you want the loan funded to this address 17t9jJkx1XoVXXVR5kBkF34Dv14rQkzFHH

The rules are simple:

1. Go to https://www.cryptolotto.xyz/
2. In "Your account tab" copy deposit address from field "Deposit with BTC".
3. Post your address in this topic.
4. After that, 0.0001 BTC will be credited to your account.

Giveaway ended.

14HBf3NqJhfj8Y7gXto2rE4potaLbpjTp4

Coinbase for my first sig campaign earnings..

I would be very grateful if you would let me join your signature campaign.

Name: eddie13
Post count: 63
Rank: Jr. Member
Bitcoin address: 1JVMphzLjBVijh6wgnV4UaUWCcoWicEcx6

Thank you very much

[eddie13]

Eddie, it's not my fault you take accounts as collateral.  I think the whole lemding section should get nuked, but that's just me.   As to the rest, methinks thou doth protest too much.

If you don't give somebody a hard time when they fuck with you then everyone will fuck with you.. Sorry, it's just standard protocol..

[whywefight]

hey eddie13, bought that acc?

This is the original and only owner of eddie13

1PdgT8CBVictLmD2B7vDq2RoKerizmbe5Y

HwSoDI9OlMFdZjYY6c46515v7vdUgwea1dWleCTNVH1/dR9hHLtNHZpqS5sa5Ktbxfs2/NFBXmilZ5DE/yeOmjA=

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=996318.msg13087124#msg13087124

I have bought zero accounts..

BTW I have no problem at all with what you do..

just a shot in the dark, ill ask for signed messages with those:

15jYgRVym33hQyHBXiq1sjFdQLgLaU4udZ
1HKnuXP3RZDLjHPuDcj4EzaDtEH94FMbgB
1HHyZDSTZf1Xc8yhtS3jFeNu9NnbCWv6hQ  
114uF5PUbG6Gqf5hvaiJhmd68AYkeorJ2G  
17t9jJkx1XoVXXVR5kBkF34Dv14rQkzFHH
1HimeaBzh2HkneyNpWsFWhN3raWNiyaJnk
18gbWnuj3aVXokBb4jr6s7uP9yaSuFJaij
14HBf3NqJhfj8Y7gXto2rE4potaLbpjTp4
1JVMphzLjBVijh6wgnV4UaUWCcoWicEcx6

later busy atm. gnahahaha

15jyg-udz is my polo account that I use for pretty much everything..


Asking qustions about dust transactions..

Couldn't someone have just imported the 1HKnuXP3RZDLjHPuDcj4EzaDtEH94FMbgB into there wallet and then used it as an input in there next transaction they were going to make anyway therefore it paying 7740 sat of the 10,00 sat miner fee that they were going to have to pay to send any BTC anyway?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1314190.msg13567583#msg13567583

Quote from: lolgato on January 15, 2016, 07:50:33 PM
Loan amount : 0.017 BTC
Collateral : This account
Loan reason : Discount on an item for limited time
Your BTC address : 1HHyZDSTZf1Xc8yhtS3jFeNu9NnbCWv6hQ
Repayment offered : 0.020
Date of repayment : 17/01/2016
...
Can you sign a message from a staked address?

an hour or 2

Sounds great...

Send the DOGE here DPYYXub8hNQnp6YEfR4P42v9QeEMEafJaL to my polo account and I'll send your .02BTC to your addy 114uF5PUbG6Gqf5hvaiJhmd68AYkeorJ2G as soon as the doge finishes confirming to my account..

You only want it for an hour or 2 but lets make it within a week repayment so you can pay back any time you like within a week to stay on the safe side for ya.

your repayment amount will be .022BTC @ 10% to 15jYgRVym33hQyHBXiq1sjFdQLgLaU4udZ and when you do that I'll send your DOGE back to whatever address you want me to.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1316750.msg13461728#msg13461728

Message verified..

Please confirm you want the loan funded to this address 17t9jJkx1XoVXXVR5kBkF34Dv14rQkzFHH

The rules are simple:

1. Go to https://www.cryptolotto.xyz/
2. In "Your account tab" copy deposit address from field "Deposit with BTC".
3. Post your address in this topic.
4. After that, 0.0001 BTC will be credited to your account.

Giveaway ended.

14HBf3NqJhfj8Y7gXto2rE4potaLbpjTp4

Coinbase for my first sig campaign earnings..

I would be very grateful if you would let me join your signature campaign.

Name: eddie13
Post count: 63
Rank: Jr. Member
Bitcoin address: 1JVMphzLjBVijh6wgnV4UaUWCcoWicEcx6

Thank you very much

well done, well done.

[Lutpin]

Coinbase for my first sig campaign earnings..

Bitcoin address: 1JVMphzLjBVijh6wgnV4UaUWCcoWicEcx6

You can sign from coinbase receiving addresses, not that I would care whether or not you purchased this account at any point, but if you want to proof it to wwf, go sign a message from it.


Also, double posts...

[TookDk]

....

One more VERY important problem is use of multiple alt-accounts that are on DT. For a single person to have more than one account on DT should never be allowed.
....

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=822764.0

It's surely has high chance for happening, right ?
People always being greed. (Not for now, maybe later or happening on the future)

This "scheme" will not last for long, in the example in your link, then will it not take long before "Otong" is no longer on DT.
It does not take many misstep before you are not on DT, actually even a single misstep is rarely forgiven.

doogie used to publish graphical representation of the DT network, they are real interesting:  
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1062052.0

It becomes very clear from the pictures if someone DT member are "isolated" in his/her own personal cluster.