Ah, I just bumped into another trust system abuser: actmyname.
Trust system abuse is epidemic. And it should therefore be anchored in clear principal rules, equalized for all, or otherwise be fully removed.
LOOKS like NOTIN2 is just another VICTIM of the POWER ABUSER @ACTMYNAME, that guys must be insane and banned here in DT.
but there is a SHIT POST THERE MADE BY A LEGENDARY MEMBER!
name: hilariousandco and that one is a rank: LEGENDARY
NO REDTRUST FOR THAT MAN!
WHY? possible answer: LAUDA GAVE GREEN TRUST on that one and @ACTMYNAME is afraid to give NEGATIVE
Another one: GLOBAL MODERATOR!
THEYMOS: "
DONT JUDGE PEOPLE BY THE QUALITY OF THEIR POST"
Wrong, wrong and wrong again. The trust system cannot be "anchored in clear rules, equalized for all", because it is as it sounds "trust"; you cannot force someone to trust you, and you cannot control those that do not trust you. You're not going to get someone removed from DT by disagreeing with their ratings, because in all feasibility those ratings are at least partly the reason they are on DT to begin with; these people will only be removed if those that put them there feel they are no longer, trustworthy. The Trust system will not be removed, because that would cause chaos unless it is simultaneously replaced by something better or at least equally bad.
Your reasoning for Lauda not being tagged by actmyname is weak.
Do you believe Lauda is a shitposting spammer? They do their job better than you do yours and yours is much easier.
Lauda was not tagged by actmyname for being a shitposting spammer, because they are not a shitposting spammer. There is no fear or exploitation, you are digging. Instead of flailing like a toddler during a tantrum, analyse yourself and get your rating removed. This is an option in front of you, improve your posting quality; do not be angry that your terrible posting quality is not satisfactory.
They are not judging you simply on the quality of your posts, if I were to take a guess at their reasoning or justification I would probably arrive at the fact that you guys are maliciously posting in this manner in an attempt to farm signature campaign income. This is not how the forum is intended to be used and therefore they feel you are abusing the forum, tearing it to pieces, lowering it's value and making it impossible to find a post worth reading. You are putting obstacles in the way of everyone else enjoying the forum as it is intended to be enjoyed for your own financial gain. You are willing to harm everyone else, while not reading threads, ignoring rules and guidelines, posting disingenuous questions and everything else that comes along with it simply to make a quick, unsustainable, buck.
I agree with these ratings, if you at least followed the guidelines and rules you wouldn't receive these ratings. The quality of the post is not necessarily the problem, it is (among other things) the intention behind it, the frequency and how it affects the experience of other users.
Does a trust rating risk of 50btc or more still count as an additional rating? Might want to lower that number now...
I was unaware that BTC Risked counted as an additional rating until I reread theymos' post about trust just last night; I've got to agree, because it was obviously intended that the greater the amount scammed/risked the greater the trust-factor. It doesn't do us very much good if the threshold is such that it will not commonly be reached, and in such a way that it will be insignificantly incremental. At the point where this would be activated the additional trust rating would be irrelevant.
