Official Tribunal for Forum Trust Abuse

[Wendigo]

It has come to my attention that certain people are using their Default Trust privileges to act as judge, jury, and executioner without knowing all the facts and jump to conclusions based on their own assumptions. We, as a community, have the right to defend ourselves when we are the victims of false, uncalled for and baseless allegations. I have decided to found a tribunal where people who feel that they have been wronged in the past or are currently being harassed by such individuals, could present their cases and provide proof for being the targets of injustice.
Unjust treatment of forum members is a violation of their rights and this should not be tolerated. If you feel scared of getting negative feedback attached to your account for standing up for yourself you can write here. Stop letting people walk all over you just because they feel like they can.

Tribunal Mechanics

The Tribunal is not intended to issue punishments to violators of trust abuse. The sole purpose of the Tribunal is to review cases, assess and validate the information contained in the reports.
Victims of trust abuse should collect as many details as possible before submitting their cases here. The information should be arranged chronologically so as to be easier to follow. The list of events (screenshots, quotes, PMs, links etc.) must be presented in a clear, concise and to the point manner.
Only appeal before the Tribunal if you believe you have the evidence to support your claims. You can request a formal change to your trust rating only if you are sure you have been accused wrongfully and you can defend your case successfully.
If you know your trust ratings are justified, simply don't appeal here. Another failure will most likely make it worse for you.


This is a work in progress and the thread will be expanded upon.

I have also a case in the pipeline which is my own.

[Wendigo]

Reserved.

[Joel_Jantsen]

A nice initiative.However,let's just assume I post a case here and it is supported by the community members that I  were targeted personally and the negative feedback shouldn't be there.Whats next ? You are going to call out the DT member for removing the feedback ?Or with the community help force him to be dropped from their trust level ? Either way ,very slime chances of that happening.Also does it apply for any trust level rating or only DT1/DT2 ? Watching this thread...

[KWH]

So who is on this "tribunal", who is overseeing their "judgements" and how is this thread any different from the Reputation thread or Scam Accusations threads?
As for DT Trust abuse, it's been well established they can and will be removed from DT. It's happened a few times in the past.

[Zepher]

Interesting. Watching.

[unamis76]

The ideia for this thread is interesting. But for this to work, the second post has to be constantly updated with whatever's happening further ahead on the thread, otherwise a possible case or complaint will get lost within posts and will have less effect than having a thread solely for that case. There's also the problem of having two cases happening at the same time and their posts just get scattered on the thread... It would be difficult for most to follow up on whatever that's happening.

DT users abusing trust WILL be removed, I am pretty sure of this. That being said I am pretty interested to know whatever is happening regarding this... If there's someone on DT abusing trust, this should be publicly known immediately.

[Quickseller]

How exactly is this official?

While I do agree that many are greatly expanding when a negative rating will be left to far beyond when a user is a scammer, I am not so sure that this type of thing is the answer.

(Similarly concerning is that anyone who questions this set of people will generally get trolled and brushed to the side by almost everyone).

[Lauda]

How exactly is this official?

It is most certainly not official. Title is misleading.

Unjust treatment of forum members is a violation of their rights and this should not be tolerated.

This must be a (bad) joke that I did not understand? Rights under whose authority? UN?

I have also a case in the pipeline which is my own.

So that's what this is about? Let's hear it.

[darklus123]

A system could always have it loopholes. Power abused may be rampant but how could we do a proper judgement here? we our self makes decisions not by jurisdictions but much likely with regards to our emotions. This is also the main reason why i do love that this trust system would be removed(Don't get me wrong tho i like the trust system idea but it just needs a proper moderation just like the moderating a posts)

[Lutpin]

DT1 is responsible for DT2, theymos is responsible for DT1. That is the official way, anything else is just a concept/experiment.

You can request a formal change to your trust rating only if you are sure you have been accused wrongfully and you can defend your case successfully.

How would that work? Has your "tribunal" support in the DT ranks to leave counter ratings that will "change" those ratings on users you deem being victim to abuse?
Have you any other ways making the "abuser" change their ratings?

(Don't get me wrong tho i like the trust system idea but it just needs a proper moderation just like the moderating a posts)

Trust is unmoderated and it's good it is. Moderation doesn't get involved with scams anymore, which I think is the right way to go.

[darklus123]

Trust is unmoderated and it's good it is. Moderation doesn't get involved with scams anymore, which I think is the right way to go.

I am not actually just talking about the scams, yes  i do agree that trust system can really be a good tool to tag a scammer. But what am i actually concerned about was the abuse(just dont have to mention) and i guess that you are aware of that and it surely needs to be moderated(im talking about the abuse)

[Lutpin]

I am not actually just talking about the scams, yes  i do agree that trust system can really be a good tool to tag a scammer. But what am i actually concerned about was the abuse(just dont have to mention) and i guess that you are aware of that and it surely needs to be moderated(im talking about the abuse)

No. Any kind of moderation of trust feedbacks is bad (with very few single case exceptions, may it be spam feedback, feedback that is threatening or inappropriate in other ways).
Even determining wheter a left feedback is "legit" or not (and should hence be removed) is going to far. The feedback system is yours to use, and it is to be used at your own discretion.

I also think we're too easy on the definition of "abuse" here. The system was designed so that users can leave their feedbacks, can leave them freely, up to their own decisions.
That's how it is intended to be, you're supposed to leave your trust feedbacks, it was build for it, and hence doing so can't be an "abuse" of the system.

[botany]

If a user in DT doesn't remove unfair negative trust, the only way out for you is to get that user removed from DT.
It would have to be blatant trust abuse for that happen.
Having a thread for people to debate individual feedback is just not going to help.

[Quickseller]

Having a thread for people to debate individual feedback is just not going to help.

How else do you propose that those who received blainant trust abuse to make the case that the negative rating was unjust?

[chixka000]

Having a thread for people to debate individual feedback is just not going to help.

How else do you propose that those who received blainant trust abuse to make the case that the negative rating was unjust?

Removed trust system? Or only allow moderators or admins to give a certain feedback to its user?(although this sounds a very bad idea tho lol so i giuess we better removed the trust system or removed DT users? just my opinion tho

[botany]

Having a thread for people to debate individual feedback is just not going to help.

How else do you propose that those who received blainant trust abuse to make the case that the negative rating was unjust?

Removed trust system? Or only allow moderators or admins to give a certain feedback to its user?(although this sounds a very bad idea tho lol so i giuess we better removed the trust system or removed DT users? just my opinion tho

We have moved forward from those ideas. At one point of time, there was a "scammer tag" which was manually applied.
Default Trust is supposed to be an improvement from those methods.

[chixka000]

We have moved forward from those ideas. At one point of time, there was a "scammer tag" which was manually applied.
Default Trust is supposed to be an improvement from those methods.

Or maybe find some alternative ways to tag a scammer? Like it should be agreed by or witnessed by the moderator during tagging. That does not sound easy tho as it needs too much moderators to do so.

[Timelord2067]

This popped-corn needs more salt... and a tad more butter...

Funny watching Wendigo and the Alt known as quickseller talking to each-other.

I will wait out your investigation. Then I will have someone with a lot of green trust paint you in deep red. For libel.
You aren't getting out of this unscathed  ; )

http://archive.is/qTfdn

Seems it was just the other day Wendigo was threatening my person with physical harm - http://archive.is/GfOwJ#selection-5622.0-5648.0 -

[c enter][/center]

now they want to be judge, jury as well as executioner.

I must be getting really under their skin...

[Wendigo]

Have you taken your pills this morning Timelord? I am very concerned with your psychopathic tendencies. Don't show your face again in this thread. Ignored.

[darklus123]

I am not actually just talking about the scams, yes  i do agree that trust system can really be a good tool to tag a scammer. But what am i actually concerned about was the abuse(just dont have to mention) and i guess that you are aware of that and it surely needs to be moderated(im talking about the abuse)

No. Any kind of moderation of trust feedbacks is bad (with very few single case exceptions, may it be spam feedback, feedback that is threatening or inappropriate in other ways).
Even determining wheter a left feedback is "legit" or not (and should hence be removed) is going to far. The feedback system is yours to use, and it is to be used at your own discretion.

I also think we're too easy on the definition of "abuse" here. The system was designed so that users can leave their feedbacks, can leave them freely, up to their own decisions.
That's how it is intended to be, you're supposed to leave your trust feedbacks, it was build for it, and hence doing so can't be an "abuse" of the system.

As you have said there were also exceptions and that is what i am trying to emphasize as well, just like what happen to yahoo recently https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1722426.0 iF that was being moderated before the tagging happens there could be a better review first of what really happens.

Being Free anyway is the best thing that i human being should have. Yet limitations were also been a part of it.