Negative feedback based on someone's personal dislike

[-Greed-]

Recently I was left a negative feedback by devthedev based on his personal dislike toward me: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1696031.msg17388605#msg17388605

This forum has always attracted me with free speech - it is one of the places where it's possible freely discuss different things/issues which other "free speech" forums do not tolerate. Well, maybe I'm a bigot and racist but it's not a reason to leave negative feedback for it because it's supposed to be used to show one's trust, not political/religious views or personal dislikes.

What if I leave someone a negative feedback for being a feminist just because I don't like feminists? I conciser this movement harmful.  Would it be fair?

What do you thank about such "feedback"? Any comment from mods/admins?

"Something you don't like doesn't mean bad."

[1714983325]

1714983325

[1714983325]

1714983325

[1714983325]

1714983325

[1714983325]

1714983325

[1714983325]

1714983325

[unholycactus]

I added a trust system to the marketplace sections. When you're logged in, you'll now see something like this next to Marketplace posts:

Trust: 1: -0 / +12(3)

The first number is the user's trust score calculated based on how consistently they've received positive feedback. Probably no one will get a score above 0 until the system has been around for at least a month. The second number is the number of reported scams. The third number increases with the number of positive reports, as does the fourth number in parenthesis, though the fourth number is more resistant to abuse. This text changes color depending on the score. Users with a negative score (attainable through scamming) get a red warning attached to their posts.

These scores are taken from your trust network. They are not global scores. You can edit your trust network here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust
If your trust depth is set to 2 (the default), you will trust feedback by people you trust, people they trust, and people they trust. I might change the default in the future; we'll see how this works. Your trust list is public.

On feedback pages, you can leave trade feedback. There are no rules for this, but here are some guidelines:
- List all of the trades that you do with people (or at least the major ones). This is not like #bitcoin-otc where you give people just one score.
- Do not rate people based on the quality of their posts.
- Older ratings count for more, so don't delete old ratings if you can avoid it.
- "Risked BTC" is how much money you could have lost if the person you're rating had turned out to be a scammer. Or, if they are a scammer, it's how much you lost. Use the BTC value at the time of reporting.
- It's OK to post a rating about the person in general, not tied to a specific trade.
- If you want to make a rating stronger, increase "Risked BTC". 50 extra risked BTC is equivalent to an additional rating.

If your trust list is totally empty, you trust "DefaultTrust", which includes some trustworthy people that I'll select. But if you add anyone to your trust list, even if they don't trust anyone, DefaultTrust will no longer be considered part of your trust list.

In the near future I'll add these same ratings to PMs.

Tell me if you see any bugs. I didn't test this much yet.

Or more specifically

It's OK to post a rating about the person in general, not tied to a specific trade.

I would actually have a harder time trusting someone that makes comments similar to yours.
In that sense, I'm okay with someone pointing it out with the trust system.

[-Greed-]

I added a trust system to the marketplace sections. When you're logged in, you'll now see something like this next to Marketplace posts:

Trust: 1: -0 / +12(3)

The first number is the user's trust score calculated based on how consistently they've received positive feedback. Probably no one will get a score above 0 until the system has been around for at least a month. The second number is the number of reported scams. The third number increases with the number of positive reports, as does the fourth number in parenthesis, though the fourth number is more resistant to abuse. This text changes color depending on the score. Users with a negative score (attainable through scamming) get a red warning attached to their posts.

These scores are taken from your trust network. They are not global scores. You can edit your trust network here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust
If your trust depth is set to 2 (the default), you will trust feedback by people you trust, people they trust, and people they trust. I might change the default in the future; we'll see how this works. Your trust list is public.

On feedback pages, you can leave trade feedback. There are no rules for this, but here are some guidelines:
- List all of the trades that you do with people (or at least the major ones). This is not like #bitcoin-otc where you give people just one score.
- Do not rate people based on the quality of their posts.
- Older ratings count for more, so don't delete old ratings if you can avoid it.
- "Risked BTC" is how much money you could have lost if the person you're rating had turned out to be a scammer. Or, if they are a scammer, it's how much you lost. Use the BTC value at the time of reporting.
- It's OK to post a rating about the person in general, not tied to a specific trade.
- If you want to make a rating stronger, increase "Risked BTC". 50 extra risked BTC is equivalent to an additional rating.

If your trust list is totally empty, you trust "DefaultTrust", which includes some trustworthy people that I'll select. But if you add anyone to your trust list, even if they don't trust anyone, DefaultTrust will no longer be considered part of your trust list.

In the near future I'll add these same ratings to PMs.

Tell me if you see any bugs. I didn't test this much yet.

Or more specifically

It's OK to post a rating about the person in general, not tied to a specific trade.

I would actually have a harder time trusting someone that makes comments similar to yours.
In that sense, I'm okay with someone pointing it out with the trust system.

In other words, a racist can't be trusted meanwhile let's say an anti-racist should be trusted by default. Am I getting right your words?
You cannot trade with a racist thinking that he/she is tend to be scammer and no suspicion to a normal user. What does it have to do with reality?

Update:

About the person in general? How in general? Let's say a user is a woman. Women tend to lie. Should I leave a negative feedback like "don't trust this member; might be a liar".

[-Greed-]

First of all, the feedback I got was completely based on one's subjective opinion ("We are all just different shades of brown, we are one race") and personal dislike ("I don't like him I will leave him a negative feedback"). That's what I'm trying to say.

[unholycactus]

I added a trust system to the marketplace sections. When you're logged in, you'll now see something like this next to Marketplace posts:

Trust: 1: -0 / +12(3)

The first number is the user's trust score calculated based on how consistently they've received positive feedback. Probably no one will get a score above 0 until the system has been around for at least a month. The second number is the number of reported scams. The third number increases with the number of positive reports, as does the fourth number in parenthesis, though the fourth number is more resistant to abuse. This text changes color depending on the score. Users with a negative score (attainable through scamming) get a red warning attached to their posts.

These scores are taken from your trust network. They are not global scores. You can edit your trust network here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust
If your trust depth is set to 2 (the default), you will trust feedback by people you trust, people they trust, and people they trust. I might change the default in the future; we'll see how this works. Your trust list is public.

On feedback pages, you can leave trade feedback. There are no rules for this, but here are some guidelines:
- List all of the trades that you do with people (or at least the major ones). This is not like #bitcoin-otc where you give people just one score.
- Do not rate people based on the quality of their posts.
- Older ratings count for more, so don't delete old ratings if you can avoid it.
- "Risked BTC" is how much money you could have lost if the person you're rating had turned out to be a scammer. Or, if they are a scammer, it's how much you lost. Use the BTC value at the time of reporting.
- It's OK to post a rating about the person in general, not tied to a specific trade.
- If you want to make a rating stronger, increase "Risked BTC". 50 extra risked BTC is equivalent to an additional rating.

If your trust list is totally empty, you trust "DefaultTrust", which includes some trustworthy people that I'll select. But if you add anyone to your trust list, even if they don't trust anyone, DefaultTrust will no longer be considered part of your trust list.

In the near future I'll add these same ratings to PMs.

Tell me if you see any bugs. I didn't test this much yet.

Or more specifically

It's OK to post a rating about the person in general, not tied to a specific trade.

I would actually have a harder time trusting someone that makes comments similar to yours.
In that sense, I'm okay with someone pointing it out with the trust system.

In other words, a racist can't be trusted meanwhile let's say an anti-racist should be trusted by default. Am I getting right your words?

Update:

About the person in general? How in general? Let's say a user is a woman. Women tend to lie. Should I leave a negative feedback like "don't trust this member; might be a liar".

I like to think that it's up to whoever reviews the feedback left to validate it.
For instance, not trusting someone because of their sex is a ridiculous claim to me. I will disregard the negative rating.
The same goes for someone leaving positive feedback to someone else because they are "anti-racist".

It's unfortunate that your trust blatantly shows red because a single person on default trust left a negative.
I wish something would change about that.

[tippytoes]

I added a trust system to the marketplace sections. When you're logged in, you'll now see something like this next to Marketplace posts:

Trust: 1: -0 / +12(3)

The first number is the user's trust score calculated based on how consistently they've received positive feedback. Probably no one will get a score above 0 until the system has been around for at least a month. The second number is the number of reported scams. The third number increases with the number of positive reports, as does the fourth number in parenthesis, though the fourth number is more resistant to abuse. This text changes color depending on the score. Users with a negative score (attainable through scamming) get a red warning attached to their posts.

These scores are taken from your trust network. They are not global scores. You can edit your trust network here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust
If your trust depth is set to 2 (the default), you will trust feedback by people you trust, people they trust, and people they trust. I might change the default in the future; we'll see how this works. Your trust list is public.

On feedback pages, you can leave trade feedback. There are no rules for this, but here are some guidelines:
- List all of the trades that you do with people (or at least the major ones). This is not like #bitcoin-otc where you give people just one score.
- Do not rate people based on the quality of their posts.
- Older ratings count for more, so don't delete old ratings if you can avoid it.
- "Risked BTC" is how much money you could have lost if the person you're rating had turned out to be a scammer. Or, if they are a scammer, it's how much you lost. Use the BTC value at the time of reporting.
- It's OK to post a rating about the person in general, not tied to a specific trade.
- If you want to make a rating stronger, increase "Risked BTC". 50 extra risked BTC is equivalent to an additional rating.

If your trust list is totally empty, you trust "DefaultTrust", which includes some trustworthy people that I'll select. But if you add anyone to your trust list, even if they don't trust anyone, DefaultTrust will no longer be considered part of your trust list.

In the near future I'll add these same ratings to PMs.

Tell me if you see any bugs. I didn't test this much yet.

Or more specifically

It's OK to post a rating about the person in general, not tied to a specific trade.

I would actually have a harder time trusting someone that makes comments similar to yours.
In that sense, I'm okay with someone pointing it out with the trust system.

@ -Greed- I read your comments about that topic & oppss that's something derogatory. Anyway, that's your opinion & I have nothing to do with that. And if someone is leaving you a negative feedback, then, it's their own judgment call.

And it has been stated that there are no rules on leaving such feedback, only guidelines. So I think it is his prerogative to do such act (maybe he has reasons to do that).

[-Greed-]

I like to think that it's up to whoever reviews the feedback left to validate it.
For instance, not trusting someone because of their sex is a ridiculous claim to me. I will disregard the negative rating.
The same goes for someone leaving positive feedback to someone else because they are "anti-racist".

It's unfortunate that your trust blatantly shows red because a single person on default trust left a negative.
I wish something would change about that.

That is right because the feedback exactly is "Racist and bigot. See reference". It has NOTHING to do with trading. Being a racist/anti-feminist/gay/Muslim doesn't make any sense when it comes to trading (exchanging , buying, etc). And this "trust" is supposed to be  a system you can lean on when you trade with a member. If someone needs to find out if I'm a racist and bigot or something he/she can find my messages and make a decision whether deal with me or not. This feedback should be removed.

@ -Greed- I read your comments about that topic & oppss that's something derogatory. Anyway, that's your opinion & I have nothing to do with that. And if someone is leaving you a negative feedback, then, it's their own judgment call.

And it has been stated that there are no rules on leaving such feedback, only guidelines. So I think it is his prerogative to do such act (maybe he has reasons to do that).

I'm glad to hear that you have nothing to with my views no matter how bad they are in your eyes.

Well, if there are no rules on the system it can be easily abused and needs to be fixed.

[SaltySpitoon]

Recently I was left a negative feedback by devthedev based on his personal dislike toward me: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1696031.msg17388605#msg17388605

This forum has always attracted me with free speech - it is one of the places where it's possible freely discuss different things/issues which other "free speech" forums do not tolerate. Well, maybe I'm a bigot and racist but it's not a reason to leave negative feedback for it because it's supposed to be used to show one's trust, not political/religious views or personal dislikes.

What if I leave someone a negative feedback for being a feminist just because I don't like feminists? I conciser this movement harmful.  Would it be fair?

What do you thank about such "feedback"? Any comment from mods/admins?

"Something you don't like doesn't mean bad."

Sure, why not? Leave negative feedback for anyone who has ever used the letter "z" in any of their posts if you want. If you are on default trust, you will probably quickly be removed, otherwise, you are completely entitled to your opinions. If someone shares the same opinion and doesn't find you trustworthy because you have used the letter "z" in your posts, then they will value that feedback. Else, they will disregard it.

I refuse to believe that feedback has a numerical score. If someone want to judge someone's trustworthiness based on the letters they use in their posts, their gender, or any offensive comments they make, that is completely on them. I don't typically think someone's personal beliefs are a good indicator of trustworthiness, but sometimes it can play a factor.

There are very few rules when it comes to feedback. People can interpret it however they way.

[Anduck]

It's a trust system - not necessarily related to trading activity. Trust paths matter (or should matter..). You can show what you think about persons trust ratings in your own rating towards the person.

[minifrij]

There are three ways to get your feedback back to neutral:

• Have a counter rating put on your account.
  A counter rating will be a positive trust rating from another DT member that trusts you. This will counter the negative and should (I think) revert your feedback to 0. This probably isn't the best though, as the negative would still be there.
• Ask the user to remove it.
  No one else removes trust ratings other than the person that put them there originally.
• Have the person that included the user in the DT network remove them.
  In this case, it would be Blazed. If you can persuade them (or two other DT1 members) to remove/exclude the user from the DT network. This will automatically remove your feedback from being seen by default.

Other than that, there is little you can do. Sorry.

[xhomerx10]

Recently I was left a negative feedback by devthedev based on his personal dislike toward me: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1696031.msg17388605#msg17388605

This forum has always attracted me with free speech - it is one of the places where it's possible freely discuss different things/issues which other "free speech" forums do not tolerate. Well, maybe I'm a bigot and racist but it's not a reason to leave negative feedback for it because it's supposed to be used to show one's trust, not political/religious views or personal dislikes.

What if I leave someone a negative feedback for being a feminist just because I don't like feminists? I conciser this movement harmful.  Would it be fair?

What do you thank about such "feedback"? Any comment from mods/admins?

"Something you don't like doesn't mean bad."

 This reads to me as though you want to have your free speech while simultaneously censoring another's.
"Smells like leftist butthurt" - Greed

[-Greed-]

Recently I was left a negative feedback by devthedev based on his personal dislike toward me: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1696031.msg17388605#msg17388605

This forum has always attracted me with free speech - it is one of the places where it's possible freely discuss different things/issues which other "free speech" forums do not tolerate. Well, maybe I'm a bigot and racist but it's not a reason to leave negative feedback for it because it's supposed to be used to show one's trust, not political/religious views or personal dislikes.

What if I leave someone a negative feedback for being a feminist just because I don't like feminists? I conciser this movement harmful.  Would it be fair?

What do you thank about such "feedback"? Any comment from mods/admins?

"Something you don't like doesn't mean bad."

Sure, why not? Leave negative feedback for anyone who has ever used the letter "z" in any of their posts if you want. If you are on default trust, you will probably quickly be removed, otherwise, you are completely entitled to your opinions. If someone shares the same opinion and doesn't find you trustworthy because you have used the letter "z" in your posts, then they will value that feedback. Else, they will disregard it.

I refuse to believe that feedback has a numerical score. If someone want to judge someone's trustworthiness based on the letters they use in their posts, their gender, or any offensive comments they make, that is completely on them. I don't typically think someone's personal beliefs are a good indicator of trustworthiness, but sometimes it can play a factor.

There are very few rules when it comes to feedback. People can interpret it however they way.

So you are ok with me leaving random people negative fb? A reason for it can be like "a shitty person; don't trade with it" and it would be fair to leave such a feedback if I don't like that person.

It's a trust system - not necessarily related to trading activity. Trust paths matter (or should matter..). You can show what you think about persons trust ratings in your own rating towards the person.

Actually it's totally related to it! "Warning: Trade with extreme caution!" - do you see that? I can't be traded with because I'm racist!

Also, the thread was moved to "Trading Discussion > Reputation".

There are three ways to get your feedback back to neutral:

• Have a counter rating put on your account.
  A counter rating will be a positive trust rating from another DT member that trusts you. This will counter the negative and should (I think) revert your feedback to 0. This probably isn't the best though, as the negative would still be there.
• Ask the user to remove it.
  No one else removes trust ratings other than the person that put them there originally.
• Have the person that included the user in the DT network remove them.
  In this case, it would be Blazed. If you can persuade them (or two other DT1 members) to remove/exclude the user from the DT network. This will automatically remove your feedback from being seen by default.

Other than that, there is little you can do. Sorry.

Thanks. Might try that.

Edit:

I'm wondering what if a trusted member leaves a negative fb for a member whose account is suspected to be hacked and later the user proves it's not hacked. But the trusted member dies/leaves the forum. What's that user supposed to do?

Recently I was left a negative feedback by devthedev based on his personal dislike toward me: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1696031.msg17388605#msg17388605

This forum has always attracted me with free speech - it is one of the places where it's possible freely discuss different things/issues which other "free speech" forums do not tolerate. Well, maybe I'm a bigot and racist but it's not a reason to leave negative feedback for it because it's supposed to be used to show one's trust, not political/religious views or personal dislikes.

What if I leave someone a negative feedback for being a feminist just because I don't like feminists? I conciser this movement harmful.  Would it be fair?

What do you thank about such "feedback"? Any comment from mods/admins?

"Something you don't like doesn't mean bad."

 This reads to me as though you want to have your free speech while simultaneously censoring another's.
"Smells like leftist butthurt" - Greed

Censoring what truth? I ain't removing any messages - you can easily find out that I'm racist and bigot by searching my posts. Well, I can even leave a note in my sig like "I'm a racist and I'm proud of it".

[xhomerx10]

^^
  It is quite clear that I was pointing out the hypocrisy of your stance on free speech.  "Truth" and "free speech" are not synonymous.  That being said, devthedev actually wrote the truth by your own admission and you're bitching about it.  You might change your sig to "I'm a hypocrite and I'm proud of it".

[-Greed-]

^^
  It is quite clear that I was pointing out the hypocrisy of your stance on free speech.  "Truth" and "free speech" are not synonymous.  That being said, devthedev actually wrote the truth by your own admission and you're bitching about it.  You might change your sig to "I'm a hypocrite and I'm proud of it".

I either don't understand you or we live in different dimensions.

"False" accusations are free speech too, then. So if I leave a negative feedback to an "innocent" user claiming it's a scammer, it is "truth". So it might be in the future.

[Lauda]

Did you try talking about this privately with the user that has left you the rating?

What do you thank about such "feedback"? Any comment from mods/admins?

Trust ratings are unmoderated besides in cases of extreme abuse (e.g. spam).