Bitcoin Forum
October 03, 2022, 06:12:56 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 23.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 [26] 27 28 29 30 31 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Marketplace trust  (Read 82722 times)
BRPINDIA
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 63
Merit: 10


View Profile
January 21, 2018, 04:45:50 AM
 #501

I would like this a lot more if Default settings were
Trust list == satoshi
Trust depth == 0

Anything else implements a bias from the board administration.  If the board moderators and who they trust deserve the level of trust that Default would give them, it should be obvious to the user, not forced on them.

If you MUST put a real person on the default trust list why not use someone who is truly trusted by the community like John (John K.)?



Thanks
1664820776
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1664820776

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1664820776
Reply with quote  #2

1664820776
Report to moderator
Make sure you back up your wallet regularly! Unlike a bank account, nobody can help you if you lose access to your BTC.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1664820776
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1664820776

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1664820776
Reply with quote  #2

1664820776
Report to moderator
1664820776
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1664820776

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1664820776
Reply with quote  #2

1664820776
Report to moderator
1664820776
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1664820776

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1664820776
Reply with quote  #2

1664820776
Report to moderator
BRPINDIA
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 63
Merit: 10


View Profile
January 21, 2018, 04:47:43 AM
 #502

Can we please get some sort of reasoning behind there not being Trust displayed in the Newbie forums?  This is one place that needs that system the most.

I know I've posted about it more than once, and no one will give a good explanation.

Thanks.

Still have this question, but I'm posting because I have another one:

Is it possible to remove a single user from your trust circle?  There's one that's added through someone I *do* trust, whose input I simply don't take seriously, and I'd rather not see them under "Trusted" feedback.  Nothing personal against the user, I just don't find their ratings to be reliable.

(e.g.  Can I list them as -username instead on the Trust Settings page?)

Thanks
Deena
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 238
Merit: 49


View Profile
January 21, 2018, 11:45:52 AM
 #503

Someone put a negative trust rating on my profile but I haven't done any transaction with him. Where can I report it? I don't like seeing red on my trust rating Sad. Why would anyone mark a user with -trust when all I did was post comments in forums.

You can't report it. Certain forum members with a faul nature have been installed with extra trust powers which they abuse. It's a mystery why the opinion of members like The Pharmacist or Lauda, both equipped with very faul mouths and natures, would lead to red trust points while the opinions of the myriads of other members lead to no consequences. I don't like spam posts, but I dislike calling members "Filipino shitposter" even more. It's disrespectful. But what would The Pharmacist or Lauda know about human values like 'respect'? 'Not much' would be the answer when you look at their behaviour in this forum.
actmyname
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2422
Merit: 2459


Spear the bees


View Profile WWW
January 22, 2018, 04:18:33 PM
 #504

@The Pharmacist - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=487418
@actmyname - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=465017

ABUSE OF POWER! RACIST!

kindly read the #1 post in this thread!
Racist? The fuck?

Way to go and push everything into a completely ridiculous territory. It's completely detrimental to whatever argument you try to propose.

2girls
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 866
Merit: 253


Trident Protocol | Simple «buy-hold-earn» system!


View Profile
January 22, 2018, 04:53:35 PM
Last edit: January 22, 2018, 05:36:09 PM by 2girls
 #505

@The Pharmacist - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=487418
@actmyname - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=465017

ABUSE OF POWER! RACIST!

kindly read the #1 post in this thread!
Racist? The fuck?

Way to go and push everything into a completely ridiculous territory. It's completely detrimental to whatever argument you try to propose.

you actmyname, loser !!
Another example of abuse of power.

Deena
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 238
Merit: 49


View Profile
January 22, 2018, 10:36:25 PM
 #506

- Do not rate people based on the quality of their posts.

Quote from: The pharmacist
Typical Filipino shitposter.

It's just one small example of abuse of the trust system by members like The Pharmacist and Lauda. However forum wide the abuse is epidemic.
Deena
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 238
Merit: 49


View Profile
January 22, 2018, 10:54:38 PM
 #507

Ah, I just bumped into another trust system abuser: actmyname.

Just look here where he spoiled Notin2's profile only because in a thread where forum rankings are discussed Notin2 mentioned he was waiting to get promoted to Sr Member. It's really ridiculous to spoil a member's profile like that.

But like I stated above: Trust system abuse is epidemic. And it should therefore be anchored in clear principal rules, equalized for all, or otherwise be fully removed.
bill gator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372
Merit: 1123



View Profile
January 24, 2018, 01:29:45 AM
 #508

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 Cheesy
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.

     ▄█
   ▄██▌
 ▄████
▀▀▀█████▀
  ▐███▀
  ██▀
  ▀
..
▄▄▄███████▄▄▄
▄▄█████████████████▄▄
▄███████████████████████▄
███████████████████████████
██████████
███████████████████
██████████
█████████████████████
█████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████████
██
███████████████████████████
██
█████████████████████████
███████████████████████
▀▀█████████████████▀▀

▀▀▀███████▀▀▀
▄▄▄███████▄▄▄
▄▄█▀▀███████████▀▀█▄▄
▄████▄▄███████████▄▄████▄
█████
███▀▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▀▀████████
█████
██▀▄██████▀████▄▀███████
███████▀▄█████▀ ▐█████▄▀███████
██  ███ ████▀   ▀▀█████ ███  ██
██████▄▀█████  ▄█████▀▄██████
██████▄▀███▌▄██████▀▄██████
██
██████▄▄▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄▄████████
▀█
███▀▀███████████▀▀████▀
▀▀█▄▄███████████▄▄█▀▀
▀▀▀███████▀▀▀
▄▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀█████████
▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
█████████████████████

██████████▄▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀

▄▄▄████████████████████▄▄▄
████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
▀██
█████████▀   ▀███████████▀
▀▀█████▀▀       ▀▀█████▀▀
.
..SPORTS  │  CASINO  │  ESPORTS..
...
..BET NOW..
Deena
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 238
Merit: 49


View Profile
January 24, 2018, 10:40:14 AM
 #509


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.

Then if the trust system is all about subjectivity it should stay like that and not result in objective scores that exclude people from using the forum to the full. Either you use a subjective rating (no rules no consequences) or an objective rating (rules with consequences), but not a subjective rating with objective results (in the case of a few chosen ones)!
actmyname
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2422
Merit: 2459


Spear the bees


View Profile WWW
January 24, 2018, 10:44:16 AM
 #510

Then if the trust system is all about subjectivity it should stay like that and not result in objective scores that exclude people from using the forum to the full.
Your trust score literally does not change how you post or what you post. If you are referring to signature campaigns, then you have to realize that they are a privilege, not a right.

And red trust regarding spam shouldn't affect anything that you do on the forum apart from that. You can still remain an active participant in discussions. You can still frequent the Marketplace and Bitcoin Discussion sections.

hilariousandco
Global Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3220
Merit: 2231


Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!


View Profile WWW
January 24, 2018, 10:48:05 AM
 #511

Is that a good post? the one in RED!

It's better than this one:

YES! soon it will, and i wanna see that happening..
bitcoin will be our primary currency in the near future .

It's called a joke, which was in response to a moronic question. You shitposters need to get a sense of humour.

  ▄▄███████▄███████▄▄▄
 █████████████
▀▀▀▀▀▀████▄▄
███████████████
       ▀▀███▄
███████████████
          ▀███
 █████████████
             ███
███████████▀▀               ███
███                         ███
███                         ███
 ███                       ███
  ███▄                   ▄███
   ▀███▄▄             ▄▄███▀
     ▀▀████▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄████▀▀
         ▀▀▀███████▀▀▀
▄▄▄▄▄█████████▄▄▄▄▄
█▌▐███████████████▌▐█
▐█ █▀▄▀ ▀▀▀ ▀ ▀ ▀  █ █▌
██ █ ▄   ▀▄ ▀  █ ▄ █ ██
███████████████████
████████████████████
██████▀ █ ▀███████
██████▀▀█▀▀██████
█████▄▄█▄▄█████
█████████████
▀█ █████████ █▀
▀█ █████ █▀
▀▀███▀▀
▄▄██████▄▄
▀█▀
█  █▀█▀
  ▄█  ██  █▄  ▄
█ ▄█ █▀█▄▄█▀█ █▄ █
▀▄█ █ ███▄▄▄▄███ █ █▄▀
▀▀ █    ▄▄▄▄    █ ▀▀
   ██████   █
█     ▀▀     █
▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄
▄ ██████▀▀██████ ▄
▄████████ ██ ████████▄
▀▀███████▄▄███████▀▀
▀▀▀████████▀▀▀
█▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀█
█ ██▀▀▀▀█▀▀▀▀█▀▀▀▀█▀▀▀▀██ █
█ ██ ▀▀▀█ ▀▀ █ ▀▀██ ██▄██ █
█ ██▀▀▀ █ ████ ████ ▀▀ ██ █
█ ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ █
██████████   ██████████ █
▀▄ ▀████████   ████████▀ ▄▀
▀▄ ▀██████   ██████▀ ▄▀
▀▄ ▀████   ████▀ ▄▀
▀▄ ▀██   ██▀ ▄▀
▀▄    ▀ ▄▀
▀▄   ▄▀
▀▄▀
█████████████LEADING CRYPTO SPORTSBOOK & CASINO█████████████
MULTI
CURRENCY
1500+
CASINO GAMES
CRYPTO EXCLUSIVE
CLUBHOUSE
FAST & SECURE
PAYMENTS
.
..PLAY NOW!..
sapta
aka BitRentX
Staff
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1718
Merit: 1203


YIELD.app


View Profile WWW
January 24, 2018, 12:41:48 PM
 #512

You shitposters need to get a sense of humour.

No! How could you make a joke like that to our lord and savior satoshi nakamoto?!!!!11 It's not about freakin' fastfoodchain!!!!!!!1!!1!!11

BIGGEST AND MOST
TRUSTED FULLY LICENSED
CRYPTO CASINO
▄▄▄▄█▄█▄▄▄▄
▄█████████████▄
███▀▀███████▀▀███
█▀      ▀█▀      ▀█
███████████████████
███████████████████
█████████████████
███████████████
█████████████
███████████████
███████████████
███████████
▀▀███▀▀
█▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀█
█   ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄   █
█   █   ▄  ███    ███   █
█▀▄▀█ ▄███▄ █  ███ █▀▄▀█
█▀ ▀██▀█▀█▀██████  ██▀ ▀█
█   ▄▀▄▀▄███  ██  █   █
█    █▄█  ██  ██ █    █
█    ██  ██  ███    █
█    █  ██  ██    █
▀▄   ▀▄██ ▄▀   ▄▀
▀▄   ▀█▀   ▄▀
▀▄     ▄▀
▀▀▄▀▀
▀▄ ▄▀▄ ▄▀
█▄ ▀█▄▄▀▄▄█▀ ▄█
▀█▀███▀███▀█▀
▄█████████████▄
█████████████████
█████████████████
███████████████
█████████████████
▀█████████████▀
▀██████████████▀
▀█████████████▀
▀█████████▀
▀▀▀█▀▀▀
SPANISH CLUBS
OFFICIAL ASIAN
BETTING PARTNER
ACCEPT
MULTIPLE
CURRENCIES
..JOIN US..
Deena
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 238
Merit: 49


View Profile
January 24, 2018, 05:13:20 PM
 #513

Then if the trust system is all about subjectivity it should stay like that and not result in objective scores that exclude people from using the forum to the full.
Your trust score literally does not change how you post or what you post. If you are referring to signature campaigns, then you have to realize that they are a privilege, not a right.

And red trust regarding spam shouldn't affect anything that you do on the forum apart from that. You can still remain an active participant in discussions. You can still frequent the Marketplace and Bitcoin Discussion sections.

The possibility to participate in bounty campaigns may be a privilage in the present forum situation, but not by definition. A privilage is a possibility for only a few. But participating in bounty campaigns is not a logical or ethical possibility for only a few. On top of that the privilage of participating in bounty campaigns (not being tagged with red trust points) is determined by a few privilaged. Thus privilage is built on privilage. And unfortunately those latter privilaged do not have a very ethical disposition, to word it carefully. That is the exact problem I'm adressing here and elsewhere.
Lieldoryn
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 630
Merit: 272


View Profile
January 27, 2018, 06:14:53 PM
 #514

"DO NOT JUDGE PEOPLE ON THE QUALITY OF THEIR POSTS"
I received negative trust for bad English. What's it? My opinion is abuse. Why are some members arrogated to themselves the right of moderation? I can see it becoming a mass phenomenon. Why there is no appeal mechanism?
Deena
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 238
Merit: 49


View Profile
January 27, 2018, 06:35:46 PM
 #515

"DO NOT JUDGE PEOPLE ON THE QUALITY OF THEIR POSTS"
I received negative trust for bad English. What's it? My opinion is abuse. Why are some members arrogated to themselves the right of moderation? I can see it becoming a mass phenomenon. Why there is no appeal mechanism?

I guess you need to experience it to believe it. Unless you're one of the abusers. Then you know it, practise it and deny it.
Deena
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 238
Merit: 49


View Profile
January 27, 2018, 06:40:06 PM
 #516

"DO NOT JUDGE PEOPLE ON THE QUALITY OF THEIR POSTS"
I received negative trust for bad English. What's it? My opinion is abuse. Why are some members arrogated to themselves the right of moderation? I can see it becoming a mass phenomenon. Why there is no appeal mechanism?

By the way an absolutely ridiculous reason again by The Pharmacist to destory your account: "This user doesn't know English and should not be paid to post on bitcointalk." As if the bounty manager of this user cannot decide upon that. Really disgusting behaviour again.
minifrij
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2282
Merit: 1226


In Memory of Zepher


View Profile WWW
January 27, 2018, 06:43:16 PM
 #517

As if the bounty manager of this user cannot decide upon that. Really disgusting behaviour again.
Just because a campaign manager can decide upon someone's post quality doesn't mean that they do. If campaign managers could be trusted to do their jobs then this forum wouldn't have had anywhere near as bad of a spam problem, however (in some cases) they cannot.
hilariousetc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2450
Merit: 2724


Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!


View Profile
January 27, 2018, 06:52:34 PM
 #518

"DO NOT JUDGE PEOPLE ON THE QUALITY OF THEIR POSTS"
I received negative trust for bad English. What's it? My opinion is abuse. Why are some members arrogated to themselves the right of moderation? I can see it becoming a mass phenomenon. Why there is no appeal mechanism?

By the way an absolutely ridiculous reason again by The Pharmacist to destory your account: "This user doesn't know English and should not be paid to post on bitcointalk." As if the bounty manager of this user cannot decide upon that. Really disgusting behaviour again.

Most bounty campaign managers do nothing other than pay for this spam... that's if they even have a manager at all and most of the alt coin campaigns don't. They accept anyone and pay for anything and that's why the forum is such the shitshow that it is.

"DO NOT JUDGE PEOPLE ON THE QUALITY OF THEIR POSTS"
I received negative trust for bad English. What's it? My opinion is abuse. Why are some members arrogated to themselves the right of moderation? I can see it becoming a mass phenomenon. Why there is no appeal mechanism?

Some members have had enough of the wall-to-wall shitposts and decided to do something about it. I'm glad they did because this system was now meant to prevent people feeling the need to do that and using the feedback system to police poor posters will likely stop in favour of the merit system.

Deena
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 238
Merit: 49


View Profile
January 27, 2018, 06:53:26 PM
 #519

Just because a campaign manager can decide upon someone's post quality doesn't mean that they do. If campaign managers could be trusted to do their jobs then this forum wouldn't have had anywhere near as bad of a spam problem, however (in some cases) they cannot.

It is not upon anyone else but the project management to decide about the pay worthiness of a post. This has nothing to do with trust anymore but everything with destroying people's accounts just for subjective morbid reasons.
Deena
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 238
Merit: 49


View Profile
January 27, 2018, 06:55:59 PM
 #520

Most bounty campaign managers do nothing other than pay for this spam... that's if they even have a manager at all and most of the alt coin campaigns don't. They accept anyone and pay for anything and that's why the forum is such the shitshow that it is.

The trust moderation is a shitshow. Nowhere in forum rules or even trust instructions is negative tagging related to post quality. It has nothing to do with trustability. Such taggings are abuse.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 [26] 27 28 29 30 31 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!