How do you guys feel about trust farming?

[Decoded]

I would like the Atriz=decoded discussion reopened myself just because I feel that could be possible.

I would disagree, but you never know.

Yes I could be 100% wrong but the thread did pose some interesting thoughts before it turned into xxxx=xxxxx=xxxxx=xxxxx and went way off topic.

I don't wanna hijack this thread any longer with my offtopic bs, so i'll stick to the topic on hand from here on out.

 

Feel free to open up another investigation thread. If I owned aTriz's account, I would've started all the signature campaign jobs on the account with trade history, a higher rank and more posts. Why use one that was inactive for a long period of time?

(Hehe no offence aTriz, just taking a kick at you while I can  )

Instead, since I don't understand how DT works & probably never will, here are the newest additions to my trust list that I appended & got mixed in after I hit Update (or maybe I should just replace my entire trust list with "~DefaultTrust" or whatever will fuck the entire membership out, because you assholes can't or won't properly manage & read feedback):
-snip-

Excluding them doesn't do what you think it does IMO. Adding ~ to someone's name, as a DT2 member has the following effects:
1) It makes their ratings worthless from your perspective. This does nothing if they are not DT1, DT2 and you don't use any lower tiers (whichever they may be on). It does not affect what others see.
2) It may discredit their own ratings.
3) Your rating still has an effect on their total trust score and will be seen by others by default.

WTF!? So that, plus "Risked BTC amount", plus "or had a successful trade"...

Can Bitcointalk's feedback system have just a single feature that isn't a steaming pile of useless shit?

I do remember reading theymos' post somewhere that the new forum was going to be released "next year". That was multiple years ago.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[BlockEye]

I never thought that renting avatar of a trusted member will be an issue? I just want to advertise my Article writing and Campaign management service due to positive effect when I purchase an ads space on Freebitcoins.com, Of course, I'm targeting famous people so that my ads have a high chance of being view. In my opinion, there is no issue with it as long as I never ask for trust feedback for my purchase, Anyway, this is a wake-up call to not try renting avatar/signature space here in the forum.


Feel free to remove + feedback to me, I never ask for it and that color green trust will not gonna make me rich here. Collecting +1 is nonsense because, at the end, The user works and achievement will matter. Ciao

[Lauda]

WTF!? So that, plus "Risked BTC amount", plus "or had a successful trade"...

Well, it seems that you are confused about it. I tried to clarify that there's a huge difference between adding a ~¨and keeping/removing a rating from someone. I tend to rarely leave positive ratings, regardless of whether there were deals with someone or not.

Can Bitcointalk's feedback system have just a single aspect that isn't a steaming pile of useless shit?

IMO it isn't too difficult to understand if you give it some time and think it really through.

I do remember reading theymos' post somewhere that the new forum was going to be released "next year". That was multiple years ago.

That doesn't necessarily imply a completely revamped trust system.

[TheButterZone]

WTF!? So that, plus "Risked BTC amount", plus "or had a successful trade"...

Well, it seems that you are confused about it. I tried to clarify that there's a huge difference between adding a ~¨and keeping/removing a rating from someone. I tend to rarely leave positive ratings, regardless of whether there were deals with someone or not.

Can Bitcointalk's feedback system have just a single aspect that isn't a steaming pile of useless shit?

IMO it isn't too difficult to understand if you give it some time and think it really through.

So, you understand it well enough to rarely use 1/3 of the steaming pile of useless shit. Why then, should the forum have any rating level other than negative?

I do remember reading theymos' post somewhere that the new forum was going to be released "next year". That was multiple years ago.

That doesn't necessarily imply a completely revamped trust system.

With this much donated & ongoing transactional BTC at stake, why in the fuck would we want not only to keep Bitcointalk SMF's feedback system a steaming pile of useless shit because dev time is ostensibly focused on the new forum, but to also celebrate the release of the new forum with a similarly-steaming pile of useless shit for its feedback system?

[Taras]

I do remember reading theymos' post somewhere that the new forum was going to be released "next year". That was multiple years ago.

That doesn't necessarily imply a completely revamped trust system.

The new forum software's Github organization has a repository with the BitcoinTalk trust system (or something very similar) so it doesn't look like there are any plans to change it. If it is genuine, this script appears to tell more about how scores are calculated than any other source I could find.
edit: Here's a rundown of the algorithm, from my understanding of the script linked above:

The variable s is the trust score, and it starts at 0.
1. For every unique positive trusted feedback, add the age of the feedback in months (up to 10 months each) to s.
2. Round s down to the nearest whole number.
3. If n is positive, subtract 2ⁿ from s, where n is the number of unique negative trusted feedbacks.
4. If either s is negative or n is 0, skip to step 7 now.
5. Set s to the number of unique positive trusted feedbacks left since the time of the earliest negative trusted feedback minus the number of unique negative trusted feedbacks left since the time of the earliest negative trusted feedback.
6. If s is negative, in this scenario the trust score will display as "???" instead of a number. If s is not negative, keep going.
7. If s has 5 or more digits, then cap it out at either 9999 or -9999, depending on if it is positive or negative.

The trust scores are displayed as s: -n / +p, where p is the number of unique positive trusted feedbacks. If s is negative, then it is "red trust" and the "trade with extreme caution" tag appears. If s shows as ??? then it is "yellow trust". If s is at least 5, then it is "light green trust". If s is at least 15, then it is "dark green trust". If n is not zero, it will be bold, italic, and yellow, so that it is more visible.

I ran through the steps for a bunch of people in this thread and it all adds up right so far.

[Decoded]

I do remember reading theymos' post somewhere that the new forum was going to be released "next year". That was multiple years ago.

That doesn't necessarily imply a completely revamped trust system.

The new forum software's Github organization has a repository with the BitcoinTalk trust system (or something very similar) so it doesn't look like there are any plans to change it. If it is genuine, this script appears to tell more about how scores are calculated than any other source I could find.
edit: Here's a rundown of the algorithm, from my understanding of the script linked above:

The variable s is the trust score, and it starts at 0.
1. For every unique positive trusted feedback, add the age of the feedback in months (up to 10 months each) to s.
2. Round s down to the nearest whole number.
3. If n is positive, subtract 2ⁿ from s, where n is the number of unique negative trusted feedbacks.
4. If either s is negative or n is 0, skip to step 7 now.
5. Set s to the number of unique positive trusted feedbacks left since the time of the earliest negative trusted feedback minus the number of unique negative trusted feedbacks left since the time of the earliest negative trusted feedback.
6. If s is negative, in this scenario the trust score will display as "???" instead of a number. If s is not negative, keep going.
7. If s has 5 or more digits, then cap it out at either 9999 or -9999, depending on if it is positive or negative.

The trust scores are displayed as s: -n / +p, where p is the number of unique positive trusted feedbacks. If s is negative, then it is "red trust" and the "trade with extreme caution" tag appears. If s shows as ??? then it is "yellow trust". If s is at least 5, then it is "light green trust". If s is at least 15, then it is "dark green trust". If n is not zero, it will be bold, italic, and yellow, so that it is more visible.

I ran through the steps for a bunch of people in this thread and it all adds up right so far.

Pretty much how it works, yeah.

I do remember reading theymos' post somewhere that the new forum was going to be released "next year". That was multiple years ago.

That doesn't necessarily imply a completely revamped trust system.

Dunno of it was some rumor on reddit, but supposedly the 4 Devs working on epochtalk have been working full-time since 2015.

If they're just transferring current functionality and the exact same broken, manipulative and hateful trust system to a totally new one built from the ground up, what have they been doing for the past 3 years?

Cool. New CSS, probably mySQL integration, and - what else? Some PHP scripts?

Come on. What's going on, really?

Anyway, I'm going off topic. The forum trust system is broken. Most people use it wrongly, and the people who use it right are in a ways helping them. This leads to people abusing the system, and those people who try to fix it themselves by not giving out trust go against the original reason it existed.

It's a trust/feedback system, not a list of kings and queens.

[criptix]

Another trust thread.
It is always the same.
Bitcointalk.org priority:

1. Shitposters
2. Trust farmers
3. Bitcoin
4. Shitcoins


Btw can anyone explain me how different trust reports for user x from the same user y counts?

I was going through the "Zepher" account and saw that he is giving out 10 positives for the same guy even though it was on different occasions (he does that with several users).

Edit

Do "Zepher" and "minerjones" have some sort of connection? Like siblings parted at birth?  

Code:

minerjones	2017-01-04	10.00000000	Reference	PIZZA!!!!!!!! yum

The reference is a pizza picture...

Edit 2

It looks for me like a circlejerk of trust trading or maybe all these accounts are just owned by one guy - this is definitely fishy.

I hope some more ppl will check this out.

[criptix]

Anyway, I'm going off topic. The forum trust system is broken. Most people use it wrongly, and the people who use it right are in a ways helping them. This leads to people abusing the system, and those people who try to fix it themselves by not giving out trust go against the original reason it existed.

It's a trust/feedback system, not a list of kings and queens.

I would rather have 5 trustful people on DT then 100 shady idiots.

Also looking at your trust page i get the strong feeling you just wanted green trust for your campaign management business  

Jesus kids this days...

[Lauda]

I was going through the "Zepher" account and saw that he is giving out 10 positives for the same guy even though it was on different occasions (he does that with several users).

Your point being? If I successfully traded big amount of money with someone, I am not allowed to leave them a rating for each time?

Do "Zepher" and "minerjones" have some sort of connection? Like siblings parted at birth?  

Code:

minerjones	2017-01-04	10.00000000	Reference	PIZZA!!!!!!!! yum

The reference is a pizza picture...

It's an internal thing, and a very valid rating. I can't exactly remember what the deal was with that Pizza, but I do remember it.

It looks for me like a circlejerk of trust trading or maybe all these accounts are just owned by one guy - this is definitely fishy.

I hope some more ppl will check this out.

No. These people are literally trading thousands, tens of thousands (USD) worth of coins every month.

[TMAN]

Another trust thread.
It is always the same.
Bitcointalk.org priority:

1. Shitposters
2. Trust farmers
3. Bitcoin
4. Shitcoins


Btw can anyone explain me how different trust reports for user x from the same user y counts?

I was going through the "Zepher" account and saw that he is giving out 10 positives for the same guy even though it was on different occasions (he does that with several users).

Edit

Do "Zepher" and "minerjones" have some sort of connection? Like siblings parted at birth?  

Code:

minerjones	2017-01-04	10.00000000	Reference	PIZZA!!!!!!!! yum

The reference is a pizza picture...

Edit 2

It looks for me like a circlejerk of trust trading or maybe all these accounts are just owned by one guy - this is definitely fishy.

I hope some more ppl will check this out.

what drugs are you on?? many of us have traded $100K plus with both of these guys - they are on different continents and are both super trusted.. MJ holds physicals for me and on some occasions has shipped $50K plus deliveries on my behalf.

also - there is a world outside of this forum where many of us transact.... 

[criptix]

I was going through the "Zepher" account and saw that he is giving out 10 positives for the same guy even though it was on different occasions (he does that with several users).

Your point being? If I successfully traded big amount of money with someone, I am not allowed to leave them a rating for each time?

Do "Zepher" and "minerjones" have some sort of connection? Like siblings parted at birth?  

Code:

minerjones	2017-01-04	10.00000000	Reference	PIZZA!!!!!!!! yum

The reference is a pizza picture...

It's an internal thing, and a very valid rating. I can't exactly remember what the deal was with that Pizza, but I do remember it.

It looks for me like a circlejerk of trust trading or maybe all these accounts are just owned by one guy - this is definitely fishy.

I hope some more ppl will check this out.

No. These people are literally trading thousands, tens of thousands (USD) worth of coins every month.

If this is the case it is fine.

Not knowing them seeing a pizza picture as reference for a 10 btc trade in 2017 was a pretty big red flag.

Another trust thread.
It is always the same.
Bitcointalk.org priority:

1. Shitposters
2. Trust farmers
3. Bitcoin
4. Shitcoins


Btw can anyone explain me how different trust reports for user x from the same user y counts?

I was going through the "Zepher" account and saw that he is giving out 10 positives for the same guy even though it was on different occasions (he does that with several users).

Edit

Do "Zepher" and "minerjones" have some sort of connection? Like siblings parted at birth?  

Code:

minerjones	2017-01-04	10.00000000	Reference	PIZZA!!!!!!!! yum

The reference is a pizza picture...

Edit 2

It looks for me like a circlejerk of trust trading or maybe all these accounts are just owned by one guy - this is definitely fishy.

I hope some more ppl will check this out.

what drugs are you on?? many of us have traded $100K plus with both of these guys - they are on different continents and are both super trusted.. MJ holds physicals for me and on some occasions has shipped $50K plus deliveries on my behalf.

also - there is a world outside of this forum where many of us transact....  

See the reference i quoted.
Having successful trades in the past is no guarantee. We had more then one of these mr. Long cons.
Maybe you are on drugs or just arent here long enough?


Of course there is the real world - but this is the internet and most people here dont know each other in real life. The only things they can check are the digital history and the reference i quoted without further information is a red flag - no buts here.

[yahoo62278]

I was going through the "Zepher" account and saw that he is giving out 10 positives for the same guy even though it was on different occasions (he does that with several users).

Your point being? If I successfully traded big amount of money with someone, I am not allowed to leave them a rating for each time?

Do "Zepher" and "minerjones" have some sort of connection? Like siblings parted at birth? 

Code:

minerjones	2017-01-04	10.00000000	Reference	PIZZA!!!!!!!! yum

The reference is a pizza picture...

It's an internal thing, and a very valid rating. I can't exactly remember what the deal was with that Pizza, but I do remember it.

It looks for me like a circlejerk of trust trading or maybe all these accounts are just owned by one guy - this is definitely fishy.

I hope some more ppl will check this out.

No. These people are literally trading thousands, tens of thousands (USD) worth of coins every month.

If this is the case it is fine.

Not knowing them seeing a pizza picture as refrence for a 10 btc trade in 2017 was a pretty big flag.

Another trust thread.
It is always the same.
Bitcointalk.org priority:

1. Shitposters
2. Trust farmers
3. Bitcoin
4. Shitcoins


Btw can anyone explain me how different trust reports for user x from the same user y counts?

I was going through the "Zepher" account and saw that he is giving out 10 positives for the same guy even though it was on different occasions (he does that with several users).

Edit

Do "Zepher" and "minerjones" have some sort of connection? Like siblings parted at birth? 

Code:

minerjones	2017-01-04	10.00000000	Reference	PIZZA!!!!!!!! yum

The reference is a pizza picture...

Edit 2

It looks for me like a circlejerk of trust trading or maybe all these accounts are just owned by one guy - this is definitely fishy.

I hope some more ppl will check this out.

what drugs are you on?? many of us have traded $100K plus with both of these guys - they are on different continents and are both super trusted.. MJ holds physicals for me and on some occasions has shipped $50K plus deliveries on my behalf.

also - there is a world outside of this forum where many of us transact.... 

See the reference i quoted.
Having successful trades in the past is no guarantee. We had more then one of these mr. Long cons.
Maybe you are on drugs or just arent here long enough?


Of course there is the real world - but this is the internet and most people here dont know each other in real life. The only things they can check are the digital history and the reference i quoted without further information is a red flag no buts here.

If you were referencing 2 regular users i'd have a problem with the rating but MJ is pretty legit. No reason to doubt his rating even though it might look fishy. I'm sure he would explain the reference if absolutely necessary but I doubt it comes to that.

[criptix]

If you were referencing 2 regular users i'd have a problem with the rating but MJ is pretty legit. No reason to doubt his rating even though it might look fishy. I'm sure he would explain the reference if absolutely necessary but I doubt it comes to that.

Like i already replied to lauda: as long as there exist a good explanation this is all fine especially when longstanding members that traded with them do vouche that these are legit users (real names and addresses known).

I do not trade often myself here on the forums for various reason so i can really only check the trust page and references, but indeed that would be the exact case for every newbie starting trading here.
He can only check these two things.

[Lauda]

If this is the case it is fine. Not knowing them seeing a pizza picture as reference for a 10 btc trade in 2017 was a pretty big red flag.

IMO it is not much different for leaving ratings for private trades. You can't really leave anything as a reference, can you?

If you were referencing 2 regular users i'd have a problem with the rating but MJ is pretty legit. No reason to doubt his rating even though it might look fishy. I'm sure he would explain the reference if absolutely necessary but I doubt it comes to that.

Both of them are legitimate to the point where there is no need to doubt such a trade occurred.

[magneto]

I was going through the "Zepher" account and saw that he is giving out 10 positives for the same guy even though it was on different occasions (he does that with several users).

Your point being? If I successfully traded big amount of money with someone, I am not allowed to leave them a rating for each time?

Do "Zepher" and "minerjones" have some sort of connection? Like siblings parted at birth?  

Code:

minerjones	2017-01-04	10.00000000	Reference	PIZZA!!!!!!!! yum

The reference is a pizza picture...

It's an internal thing, and a very valid rating. I can't exactly remember what the deal was with that Pizza, but I do remember it.

It looks for me like a circlejerk of trust trading or maybe all these accounts are just owned by one guy - this is definitely fishy.

I hope some more ppl will check this out.

No. These people are literally trading thousands, tens of thousands (USD) worth of coins every month.

If this is the case it is fine.

Not knowing them seeing a pizza picture as reference for a 10 btc trade in 2017 was a pretty big red flag.

Another trust thread.
It is always the same.
Bitcointalk.org priority:

1. Shitposters
2. Trust farmers
3. Bitcoin
4. Shitcoins


Btw can anyone explain me how different trust reports for user x from the same user y counts?

I was going through the "Zepher" account and saw that he is giving out 10 positives for the same guy even though it was on different occasions (he does that with several users).

Edit

Do "Zepher" and "minerjones" have some sort of connection? Like siblings parted at birth?  

Code:

minerjones	2017-01-04	10.00000000	Reference	PIZZA!!!!!!!! yum

The reference is a pizza picture...

Edit 2

It looks for me like a circlejerk of trust trading or maybe all these accounts are just owned by one guy - this is definitely fishy.

I hope some more ppl will check this out.

what drugs are you on?? many of us have traded $100K plus with both of these guys - they are on different continents and are both super trusted.. MJ holds physicals for me and on some occasions has shipped $50K plus deliveries on my behalf.

also - there is a world outside of this forum where many of us transact....  

See the reference i quoted.
Having successful trades in the past is no guarantee. We had more then one of these mr. Long cons.
Maybe you are on drugs or just arent here long enough?


Of course there is the real world - but this is the internet and most people here dont know each other in real life. The only things they can check are the digital history and the reference i quoted without further information is a red flag - no buts here.

I think that it doesn't really matter. Zepher obviously trusts minerjones and minerjones trusts Zepher as well. Apart from the "pizza" trust rating, zepher has gotten 5 other pos trusts from minerjones. So it really has no tangible affect of having or not having the "pizza" trust rating.


I personally think that it's fine to give trust, even for a trade like the email forward contract. Trust is all about opinion anyways. That's why you always have to look into what exactly a person did to get his trust, instead of relying on the score only. But i think that changing the trust to neutral may be more appropriate.

[criptix]

If this is the case it is fine. Not knowing them seeing a pizza picture as reference for a 10 btc trade in 2017 was a pretty big red flag.

IMO it is not much different for leaving ratings for private trades. You can't really leave anything as a reference, can you?

I can half agree to that.
A thread with (possible) information on the trade is always better then a picture with a mantis eating pizza even though you cant be sure of the truth content of said thread.

(But before we might end up discussing off-topic i do understand it is probaly just a joke between friends)

[TMAN]

If this is the case it is fine. Not knowing them seeing a pizza picture as reference for a 10 btc trade in 2017 was a pretty big red flag.

IMO it is not much different for leaving ratings for private trades. You can't really leave anything as a reference, can you?

I can half agree to that.
A thread with (possible) information on the trade is always better then a picture with a mantis eating pizza even though you cant be sure of the truth content of said thread.

(But before we might end up discussing off-topic i do understand it is probaly just a joke between friends)

I once sent kebabs and burgers to Zepher to wake him up and I know Z has sent MJ Pizza... Trust is sometimes left based on multiple trades with "private joke" inserted...

[criptix]

If this is the case it is fine. Not knowing them seeing a pizza picture as reference for a 10 btc trade in 2017 was a pretty big red flag.

IMO it is not much different for leaving ratings for private trades. You can't really leave anything as a reference, can you?

I can half agree to that.
A thread with (possible) information on the trade is always better then a picture with a mantis eating pizza even though you cant be sure of the truth content of said thread.

(But before we might end up discussing off-topic i do understand it is probaly just a joke between friends)

I once sent kebabs and burgers to Zepher to wake him up and I know Z has sent MJ Pizza... Trust is sometimes left based on multiple trades with "private joke" inserted...

I wish my friends would do that some day for me 

Yeah i can understand that - it just wasnt obvious for me to see because based on my amount of trading here these two members were pretty unknown to me, hence i asked for other community members to look into them.

[TMAN]

If this is the case it is fine. Not knowing them seeing a pizza picture as reference for a 10 btc trade in 2017 was a pretty big red flag.

IMO it is not much different for leaving ratings for private trades. You can't really leave anything as a reference, can you?

I can half agree to that.
A thread with (possible) information on the trade is always better then a picture with a mantis eating pizza even though you cant be sure of the truth content of said thread.

(But before we might end up discussing off-topic i do understand it is probaly just a joke between friends)

I once sent kebabs and burgers to Zepher to wake him up and I know Z has sent MJ Pizza... Trust is sometimes left based on multiple trades with "private joke" inserted...

I wish my friends would do that some day for me 

Yeah i can understand that - it just wasnt obvious for me to see because based on my amount of trading here these two members were pretty unknown to me, hence i asked for other community members to look into them.

no drama bud... people like QS attack a number of us constantly, so you will see that many of us will stick up for each other as we are all mates off the forum!

[Randoldude]

So there will be no action against the offenders? Their 'Apology' is enough? How many Account Sellers will get their red paint removed if they publicly apologized? I believe the answer is none. So in this case why are Atriz and Aventhe not getting their red paint? Just because they are managing a campaign is that the reason behind this? Or the DT/DT2 members have double standards? They have literally admitted that they bought the emails to gain trust. Why no red brushes are being painted? It's just annoying at this stage. Ahg! The way i see it is that these users will do anything to get their trust up, so that they can earn from Signature campaigns. This behavior is shady as hell and deserve negative trust right away.