Marketplace trust

[crumbs]

Theymos, you do not have a fair and complete trust system until rebuttal comments are allowed from users -in-thread- (at least 1 comment deep) to explain things. All you have so far is a spammable system where people can create 1000 sockpuppets (as you allow here) and lie to paint a negative picture of someone for their own personal gain.

Don't mean to go off on a tangent, but the fact that socks are allowed & condoned by moderators breaks the trust system if nothing else does.  
I realize enforcing "no socks allowed" rule is impractical, but watching a moderator enter a thread to announce "this is an alternate account of a respected user with over 500 posts" is a bit disconcerting.  

The general intent behind alt accounts is deception -- if anyone feels there are other valid uses for unlinked alt accounts (as in "fusion@home.com & vasya@ural.ru" opposed to "vasya.trolling@home & vasya.selling@home"), i'd love to hear them.

Ineffective enforcement and open collusion are not the same.  The first could be due to circumstances, the second  If we must have sockpuppets who are known to the mods, does a link to their other accounts in sigs & profiles seem unreasonable?  

Edit:  Link to see how it's done (for the curious):  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=224763.msg2368173#msg2368173

[1713873973]

1713873973

[1713873973]

1713873973

[1713873973]

1713873973

[1713873973]

1713873973

[1713873973]

1713873973

[1713873973]

1713873973

[greyhawk]

I think I'll hide untrusted feedback by default using Javascript. It'll be like:

Trusted feedback

...

Untrusted feedback

Click here to show Untrusted feedback

If I do it this way, I'll add an option to always show untrusted feedback in your profile settings.

Done.

This is borked now. It will not show untrusted feedback, even when you click the show ratings button.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

This is the function:

function show() {
   document.getElementById("untrusted").style.display="inherit";
   document.getElementById("hidelink").innerHTML="";
}

Are you sure the user has untrusted feedback?

[greyhawk]

This is the function:

function show() {
   document.getElementById("untrusted").style.display="inherit";
   document.getElementById("hidelink").innerHTML="";
}

Are you sure the user has untrusted feedback?

Yes. I checked several that I know have untrusted feedback. But I suspect it's my browser to blame here. I'm forced to use IE 8.0.7601 where I'm sitting right now. I'll check later when I'm at a real machine.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

Oh, IE8 quirk then - similar to this one: http://jhop.me/tests/bugs/ie8/visibilityinherited.html

[sublime5447]

Man you guys are f@#$%d... I didnt realize what was meant by default trust.... f!@# you I dont trust any off you insiders. Especially TradeFortress there are numerous scammer threads about him... He is a lender! I dont trust lenders of coin!  I trust who I trust not who you think I should trust. Shit is bullshit. 

[TomUnderSea]

Man you guys are f@#$%d... I didnt realize what was meant by default trust.... f!@# you I dont trust any off you insiders. Especially TradeFortress there are numerous scammer threads about him... He is a lender! I dont trust lenders of coin!  I trust who I trust not who you think I should trust. Shit is bullshit. 

Seems he would prefer that the Default Trust list be the Empty Set.

[greyhawk]

Oh, IE8 quirk then - similar to this one: http://jhop.me/tests/bugs/ie8/visibilityinherited.html

Yeah, it's IE8. It works on my home machines.

[theymos]

This is borked now. It will not show untrusted feedback, even when you click the show ratings button.

Does it work now? I changed display:inherit to display:block.

[greyhawk]

This is borked now. It will not show untrusted feedback, even when you click the show ratings button.

Does it work now? I changed display:inherit to display:block.

I'm on another machine now. I'll have a look tomorrow.

[theymos]

Man you guys are f@#$%d... I didnt realize what was meant by default trust.... f!@# you I dont trust any off you insiders. Especially TradeFortress there are numerous scammer threads about him... He is a lender! I dont trust lenders of coin!  I trust who I trust not who you think I should trust. Shit is bullshit. 

Then change your trust list. That's the point of this complicated trust network system.

[Matthew N. Wright]

Man you guys are f@#$%d... I didnt realize what was meant by default trust.... f!@# you I dont trust any off you insiders. Especially TradeFortress there are numerous scammer threads about him... He is a lender! I dont trust lenders of coin!  I trust who I trust not who you think I should trust. Shit is bullshit. 

Then change your trust list. That's the point of this complicated trust network system.

Until you allow in-line rebuttals, your "complicated trust network system" is nothing more than a libel/slander spam tool.

[greyhawk]

Man you guys are f@#$%d... I didnt realize what was meant by default trust.... f!@# you I dont trust any off you insiders. Especially TradeFortress there are numerous scammer threads about him... He is a lender! I dont trust lenders of coin!  I trust who I trust not who you think I should trust. Shit is bullshit. 

Then change your trust list. That's the point of this complicated trust network system.

Until you allow in-line rebuttals, your "complicated trust network system" is nothing more than a libel/slander spam tool.

Actually no, because untrusted feedback doesn't seem to influence trust ratings (and the typical slanderer wouldn't really be part of most people's trust network)

[Matthew N. Wright]

Man you guys are f@#$%d... I didnt realize what was meant by default trust.... f!@# you I dont trust any off you insiders. Especially TradeFortress there are numerous scammer threads about him... He is a lender! I dont trust lenders of coin!  I trust who I trust not who you think I should trust. Shit is bullshit.  

Then change your trust list. That's the point of this complicated trust network system.

Until you allow in-line rebuttals, your "complicated trust network system" is nothing more than a libel/slander spam tool.

Actually no, because untrusted feedback doesn't seem to influence trust ratings (and the typical slanderer wouldn't really be part of most people's trust network)

Untrusted feedback doesn't "seem" to influence trust ratings according to whom? Would you like me to get 100 accounts here to write that you defrauded them on your trust page and see how many times you need to explain yourself publicly whenever it's brought up? Don't be so narrow minded to think what's fine with you is fine for everyone else.

[greyhawk]

Untrusted feedback doesn't "seem" to influence trust ratings according to whom?

According to Glorious Leader:

These scores are taken from your trust network. They are not global scores.

This corresponds to the trust scores I'm seeing on other peoples profiles. If I see someone in the red, then there's always someone from my trust network directly negatively  commenting on the user. There's lots of users that I do not see in the red, even though they have scores of negative comments, because the commentators are not in my trust network.

[bernard75]

Where did my trust go?!?
I had the same trust i sent and its all gone(or i cant see it?)

[Welsh]

Where did my trust go?!?
I had the same trust i sent and its all gone(or i cant see it?)

You can't see it here.

[bernard75]

I missed the "Show ratings":

I guess thats new...

[greyhawk]

This is borked now. It will not show untrusted feedback, even when you click the show ratings button.

Does it work now? I changed display:inherit to display:block.

That solved it. 

[theymos]

Good, thanks for checking.