Bitcoin Forum
January 22, 2022, 09:26:14 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 22.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Poll
Question: Bitcoin Forums should eliminate all references to 'scammer' and 'trust'
Yes. - 9 (10.2%)
No. - 59 (67%)
You're still dumb. - 20 (22.7%)
Total Voters: 88

Pages: 1 2 3 [All]
  Print  
Author Topic: Bitcoin Forums should eliminate 'Scammer' ratings and 'Trust' ratings  (Read 3736 times)
wolverine.ks
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 375
Merit: 250



View Profile
July 07, 2013, 02:30:13 AM
 #1

One of the reasons people use bitcoin or any crypto currency is to eliminate the need to trust the other party.

The use of scammer ratings and trust ratings increases the ability of people to rely on trust in their transactions.

BitcoinTalk forums should remove all references to scamming, scammers, scams, trust and the like, in order to decrease the community's ability to rely on trust, and encourage business models that are transparent and do not rely on trust.

Thoughts?
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1642843574
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1642843574

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1642843574
Reply with quote  #2

1642843574
Report to moderator
🏰 TradeFortress 🏰
Bitcoin Veteran
VIP
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1036

👻


View Profile
July 07, 2013, 02:34:01 AM
 #2

BitcoinTalk forums should remove all references to scamming, scammers, scams, trust and the like, in order to decrease the community's ability to rely on trust, and encourage business models that are transparent and do not rely on trust.

That's very difficult to do for most business models.
wolverine.ks
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 375
Merit: 250



View Profile
July 07, 2013, 03:25:53 AM
 #3

That's very difficult to do for most business models.

agreed.
Foxpup
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3528
Merit: 2367


Vile Vixen


View Profile
July 07, 2013, 07:21:09 AM
 #4

One of the reasons people use bitcoin or any crypto currency is to eliminate the need to trust the other party.
No, silly, we use it to eliminate the need to trust a central bank or government. You still have to trust the person you're actually doing business with; anyone who says otherwise is an idiot.

Will pretend to do unspeakable things (while actually eating a taco) for bitcoins: 1K6d1EviQKX3SVKjPYmJGyWBb1avbmCFM4
I am not on the scammers' paradise known as Telegram! Do not believe anyone claiming to be me off-forum without a signed message from the above address! Accept no excuses and make no exceptions!
wolverine.ks
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 375
Merit: 250



View Profile
July 07, 2013, 07:40:56 AM
 #5

look up Nash x. it's a trust less exchange in beta.

there has never been proof offered that you cannot get around trust.

the central govt and bank are just people.

I'm not suggesting that people don't have to use trust. merely trust math and economics. neither of those deal with reputation or morals or ethics. math and economics man. that's where the future is at.
🏰 TradeFortress 🏰
Bitcoin Veteran
VIP
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1036

👻


View Profile
July 07, 2013, 07:53:45 AM
 #6

look up Nash x. it's a trust less exchange in beta.

there has never been proof offered that you cannot get around trust.

the central govt and bank are just people.

I'm not suggesting that people don't have to use trust. merely trust math and economics. neither of those deal with reputation or morals or ethics. math and economics man. that's where the future is at.
Lol no. nashx is not a trustless exchange. You need to trust the exchange operator. You deposit coins into nashx.

It's just slightly different than localbitcoins's escrow system.
wolverine.ks
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 375
Merit: 250



View Profile
July 07, 2013, 10:12:26 AM
 #7

OK now that I read closer it says p2p but requires a Nash x account or something. but the point still stands. it is possible to make things that require less trust if not eliminate trusting humans altogether.

I think eliminating trusting humans is a good thing for everyone that isn't operating a business that requires trust, and may benefit those people as well in some cases.

one way to encourage that is to eliminate the crutch of a trust/scammer rating system.
🏰 TradeFortress 🏰
Bitcoin Veteran
VIP
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1036

👻


View Profile
July 07, 2013, 12:57:51 PM
 #8

OK now that I read closer it says p2p but requires a Nash x account or something. but the point still stands. it is possible to make things that require less trust if not eliminate trusting humans altogether.
No, it is not. You always have to trust the humans who write the code, the humans who control the machines the code is being run on.

Bitcoin is decentralized but it is not trust less. You are trusting that BTC guild and ASICMINER does not decide (or get forced to) double spend transactions.
Oldgamer
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 134
Merit: 100


View Profile
July 07, 2013, 01:25:22 PM
 #9

That thread makes me laugh. Some say that bitcoin specifically was made to avoid need for trust... Are you serious? Actually bitcoin is BASED ON TRUST. That's why bitcoin has its major problem, it REQUIRES TRUST. Just read all these posts about scam and number of people loosing their money. Who of you made transaction with the bank just to know that it was scam? Anybody?
I never lose 1 cent as a scam having deals with banks. But I scare to make one small bitcoin transaction because I CAN NOT TRUST to other party. Why should I trust to somebody with no name and address? Just because I was told that " in order to decrease the community's ability to rely on trust, and encourage business models that are transparent and do not rely on trust"? Are you kidding me?

"One of the reasons people use bitcoin or any crypto currency is to eliminate the need to trust the other party."
Hell no. People use bitcoin in order to hide their names and addresses. Which is requires more trust. It is not eliminates need to trust, but does just the opposite.

I think,(but probably I am mistaken) that if there was some build in bitcoin mechanism of automatically controlling transactions the way as escrow party does, bitcoin would be much better currency.

Ira H. Fuchs
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 14
Merit: 0



View Profile WWW
July 07, 2013, 01:33:03 PM
 #10

One of the reasons people use bitcoin or any crypto currency is to eliminate the need to trust the other party.

The use of scammer ratings and trust ratings increases the ability of people to rely on trust in their transactions.

BitcoinTalk forums should remove all references to scamming, scammers, scams, trust and the like, in order to decrease the community's ability to rely on trust, and encourage business models that are transparent and do not rely on trust.

Thoughts?


good morning, Yes if you care to read the white paper it will make more sense. Bitcoin eliminates the need for trust by instead relying on science and proof of work. This forum is a circus...Ira
TomUnderSea
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 126
Merit: 100



View Profile
July 07, 2013, 07:25:16 PM
 #11

More important than "trust" or "scammer" tags and the like is proof of identity.

Essentially the presence of alt accounts reduces trust.

A long time forum member, on average, is more trustworthy simply due to the invested time on the forum.  An alt account in inherently untrustworthy.

Forum accounts can still be anonymous but they should be unique for each person.

Every little BTC helps.  14P3TfbttSpQ3BxUjwrUrmNU6F4mB9aMS5
escrow.ms
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1274
Merit: 1004


View Profile
July 07, 2013, 07:38:00 PM
 #12

wolverine.ks i want you to lend me 1 btc for 1 hour without checking my trust rating or anything else.

1AMQnRXYDyNi75QXa6F3YGqKhcGjWs49tM

Let's see.
wolverine.ks
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 375
Merit: 250



View Profile
July 07, 2013, 07:42:11 PM
 #13

wolverine.ks i want you to lend me 1 btc for 1 hour without checking my trust rating or anything else.

1AMQnRXYDyNi75QXa6F3YGqKhcGjWs49tM

Let's see.

that would be a business proposition that requires trust.

if you can give me collateral so I wouldn't have to trust you or your rating (an age old trust reducing business tactic), it would be a different story.
escrow.ms
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1274
Merit: 1004


View Profile
July 07, 2013, 07:43:37 PM
Last edit: July 07, 2013, 07:56:48 PM by escrow.ms
 #14

wolverine.ks i want you to lend me 1 btc for 1 hour without checking my trust rating or anything else.

1AMQnRXYDyNi75QXa6F3YGqKhcGjWs49tM

Let's see.

that would be a business proposition that requires trust.

if you can give me collateral so I wouldn't have to trust you or your rating (an age old trust reducing business tactic), it would be a different story.

You need collateral because you don't trust me without my trust ratings.
Please read your own first post again and then this one..


/Thread.
wolverine.ks
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 375
Merit: 250



View Profile
July 07, 2013, 09:43:21 PM
 #15

You need collateral because you don't trust me without my trust ratings.

i would agree that i need collateral because i dont trust you, however, im not looking to trust you, and even if i were, trust ratings and scammer tags only have some correlation with previously documented behavior, but they do not have a causal relationship to future behavior.

economic incentives do have a causal relationship to future behavior.
Oldgamer
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 134
Merit: 100


View Profile
July 08, 2013, 03:09:02 AM
 #16

wolverine.ks i want you to lend me 1 btc for 1 hour without checking my trust rating or anything else.

1AMQnRXYDyNi75QXa6F3YGqKhcGjWs49tM

Let's see.
Absolutely!
Great answer!

CoinsForTech
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 698
Merit: 500


5% Bitcoin Discount - All Orders


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2013, 03:39:04 AM
 #17

Although they make it somewhat tough to enter the marketplace, I think you'll find most people agree that the trust rating are 100% required in the current climate.

Unfortunately as this industry matures there is still a huge issue with scammers and illegitimate startups, and while the community can be overzealous in calling out scammers, it is necessary given how final BTC transaction are.

Now hurry up and use CoinsForTech.com so I can improve my trust rating!!

Dealer
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 41
Merit: 0



View Profile
July 08, 2013, 02:07:17 PM
 #18

I don't agree. It's a good way to warn people for potentional scammers. Trust is always needed, and escrow should be something everyone uses, but the ratings add extra security.
Ira H. Fuchs
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 14
Merit: 0



View Profile WWW
July 08, 2013, 02:15:28 PM
 #19

I don't agree. It's a good way to warn people for potentional scammers. Trust is always needed, and escrow should be something everyone uses, but the ratings add extra security.


good morning, I encourage you to review Satoshis' paper and explain to us how he defines trust...Ira
jackjack
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1113


May Bitcoin be touched by his Noodly Appendage


View Profile
July 08, 2013, 02:45:45 PM
Last edit: July 09, 2013, 07:24:35 AM by jackjack
 #20

This forum is not satoshipaper.org

Own address: 19QkqAza7BHFTuoz9N8UQkryP4E9jHo4N3 - Pywallet support: 1AQDfx22pKGgXnUZFL1e4UKos3QqvRzNh5 - Bitcointalk++ script support: 1Pxeccscj1ygseTdSV1qUqQCanp2B2NMM2
Pywallet: instructions. Encrypted wallet support, export/import keys/addresses, backup wallets, export/import CSV data from/into wallet, merge wallets, delete/import addresses and transactions, recover altcoins sent to bitcoin addresses, sign/verify messages and files with Bitcoin addresses, recover deleted wallets, etc.
tinus42
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 770
Merit: 501



View Profile
July 08, 2013, 02:50:58 PM
 #21

The scammer tag should go. Old scammers will still bear the tag but new ones won't get them. That may fool some newbs that someone isn't a scammer because they don't have a scammer tag.
PrintMule
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 980
Merit: 500


FREE $50 BONUS - STAKE - [click signature]


View Profile
July 09, 2013, 02:48:07 AM
 #22

So far trust ratings were really helpful for me personally.

It's a fastest way to tag/report someone too.


██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
████████▀▀▀        ▀▀█████████████████████████████████████████████████
██████▀    ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄    ███████████████████████████████████████████████
█████    ▄█████████▌   ▐█████▀  ▐███████████████▌  ▀██████████████████
████▌   ▐██████████    █████    ████████████████    ██████████████████
████▌   ▐█████████▄▄▄▄█████▌   ▐███████████████▌   ▐███▀▀█████████████
█████    ▀███████████████▀▀        ▄███████████    ██▀   ▐████████████
██████▄     ▀▀███████▀▀         ▄▄███▀▀▀▀█████▌   ▐▀   ▄███▀▀   ▀█████
█████████▄▄     ▀▀███▄  ▄▄    ████▀    ▄   ███       ▄███▀   ▄█  ▐████
█████████████▄▄     ▀████▌   ▐███▀   ███   ██▌      ████    ██▀  █████
██████▀▀   ▀█████▄    ███    ████   ███▌  ▐██    ▌  ▐██▌      ▄▄██████
█████    ▄████████    ▐██    ██▀▀   ██▀   ▐▀    ▐█   ██▌   ▀██▀▀  ████
████▌   ▐████████▀    ███▄     ▄▄▄     ▄    ▄   ▐██   ██▄      ▄▄█████
████▌   ███████▀    ▄███████████████████████████████▄  ▀▀██████▀▀ ████
█████    ▀▀▀▀     ▄█████████▀    ▀█▀    ▀█       ▀████▄▄         ▄████
██████▄▄    ▄▄▄▄████████████  █████  ██  █  █  █  ████████████████████
█████████████████████████  █▄    ▄█▄    ▄█  █  █  ████████████████████
██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
▄▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄
█  ▄▀▄             █▀▀▐▀▄▄
█  █▀█             █  ▐  ▐▌
█       ▄██▄       █  ▌  █
█     ▄██████▄     █  ▌ ▐▌
█    ██████████    █ ▐  █
█   ▐██████████▌   █ ▐ ▐▌
█    ▀▀██████▀▀    █ ▌ █
█     ▄▄▄██▄▄▄     █ ▌▐▌
█                  █▐ █
█                  █▐▐▌
█                  █▐█
▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▀█
▄▄█████████▄▄
▄█▀▀▀█████████▀▀▀█▄
▄█▀    ▄▀█████▀     ▀█▄
▄█▄    █        ▀▄   ███▄
▄████▀▀▀▀▄       ▄▀▀▀▀▀███▄
████      ▀▄▄▄▄▄▀       ███
███     ▄▄███████▄▄     ▄▀█
█  ▀▄ ▄▀ ▀███████▀ ▀▄ ▄▀  █
▀█   █     ▀███▀     ▀▄  █▀
▀█▄▄█▄      █        █▄█▀
▀█████▄ ▄▀▀ ▀▀▄▄ ▄▄███▀
▀█████        ████▀
▀▀█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▀▀
● OVER 1000 GAMES
● DAILY RACES AND BONUSES
● 24/7 LIVE SUPPORT
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1020


Gerald Davis


View Profile
July 09, 2013, 02:57:32 AM
 #23

Satoshi never said Bitcoin eliminates the need to trust the OTHER party.  I mean think about it, you always need to trust the other party.  You send me coins, I don't send you good.  Oops you lose.  Or you send goods, I don't send coins.  Oops you lose again.


If you are going to quote the "man" at least quote him correctly.

Quote
1. Introduction
Commerce on the Internet has come to rely almost exclusively on financial institutions serving as
trusted third parties to process electronic payments. While the system works well enough for
most transactions, it still suffers from the inherent weaknesses of the trust based model.
Completely non-reversible transactions are not really possible, since financial institutions cannot
avoid mediating disputes. The cost of mediation increases transaction costs, limiting the
minimum practical transaction size and cutting off the possibility for small casual transactions,
and there is a broader cost in the loss of ability to make non-reversible payments for non-reversible
services. With the possibility of reversal, the need for trust spreads. Merchants must be wary of
their customers, hassling them for more information than they would otherwise need.  A certain
percentage of fraud is accepted as unavoidable. These costs and payment uncertainties can be
avoided in person by using physical currency, but no mechanism exists to make payments over
a communications channel without a trusted party.

What is needed is an electronic payment system based on cryptographic proof instead of trust,
allowing any two willing parties to transact directly with each other without the need for a trusted
third party
.

Without a trusted third party.  i.e.

You <----> Me

vs

You <----> PayPal <----> Me

Bitcoin eliminates the need for the trusted third part (as in not the buyer or seller) it doesn't and never will eliminate the need for trust in commerce.





wolverine.ks
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 375
Merit: 250



View Profile
July 09, 2013, 03:51:58 AM
 #24

lets assume a few things...

(1) a transaction occurs
(2) both parties benefit if the transaction occurs.
(3) if either party (attempts or successfully) scams the other, each party will be less well off than if neither party scammed.
(4) there is no additional cost as compared to an identical transaction that does not include item (3).

would this transaction be preferable to an identical transaction that does not include item (3)?
ahfs6298
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 11
Merit: 0


View Profile
October 19, 2013, 06:46:43 AM
 #25

One of the reasons people use bitcoin or any crypto currency is to eliminate the need to trust the other party.

The use of scammer ratings and trust ratings increases the ability of people to rely on trust in their transactions.

BitcoinTalk forums should remove all references to scamming, scammers, scams, trust and the like, in order to decrease the community's ability to rely on trust, and encourage business models that are transparent and do not rely on trust.

Thoughts?
I'm pretty sure the whole world economy and pretty much every business that ever existed is built on trust, I mean even being friends with someone means to trust in them, so if you have a better idea, feel free to say so, but removing the scammer tag will only cause other issues, and also how can anybody trade if they cannot trust one another?
Flashman
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 500


Hodl!


View Profile
October 19, 2013, 01:35:31 PM
 #26

You don't have to trust that a bitcoin isn't counterfeit, or will evaporate like fairy gold, or a central bank will devalue it overnight, or that the other party will reverse the transaction after completion... but you DO have to trust that they will give you the coin or the goods in the first place!

TL;DR See Spot run. Run Spot run. .... .... Freelance interweb comedian, for teh lulz >>> 1MqAAR4XkJWfDt367hVTv5SstPZ54Fwse6

Bitcoin Custodian: Keeping BTC away from weak heads since Feb '13, adopter of homeless bitcoins.
theonewhowaskazu
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 448
Merit: 250


View Profile
October 19, 2013, 06:09:06 PM
 #27

One of the reasons people use bitcoin or any crypto currency is to eliminate the need to trust the other party.

The use of scammer ratings and trust ratings increases the ability of people to rely on trust in their transactions.

BitcoinTalk forums should remove all references to scamming, scammers, scams, trust and the like, in order to decrease the community's ability to rely on trust, and encourage business models that are transparent and do not rely on trust.

Thoughts?

I think that users should be able to post 'scam'/'trust' etc... because (1) preventing them from doing so == censorship =/= good, and (2) trust is an important part of any financial deal.

That said, I think trust ratings don't work remotely well. If possible, we could have some forum where people can open up ONE THREAD PER USER either posting positive feedback or negative feedback, or just have the existing trust system but without the 'default trust' users.


Stunna
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2996
Merit: 1234


Advisor @ Primedice.com, Stake.com


View Profile WWW
October 19, 2013, 07:20:51 PM
 #28

Unfortunately not all deals can or do involve collateral which is why these ratings are invaluable. There are countless inaccurate ratings made daily, but as a whole the system seems to work decently at protecting newbies from scammers.

Stake.com Fastest growing crypto casino & sportsbook
Primedice.com The original bitcoin instant dice game
waqas
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 378
Merit: 250



View Profile
October 21, 2013, 11:20:34 AM
 #29

Unfortunately not all deals can or do involve collateral which is why these ratings are invaluable. There are countless inaccurate ratings made daily, but as a whole the system seems to work decently at protecting newbies from scammers.

most of peoples talking about eliminate or system is not good but no person giving good feedbacks for this system how this could be good and secure its more important then elimination or something like this

Dealer
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 41
Merit: 0



View Profile
October 22, 2013, 02:41:43 PM
 #30

It's designed to remove the need to put all your trust in banks and governments. People never started using Bitcoins thinking they can just freely send it around in trades and never get scammed. Something has to be there to encourage trading with the right person. In this case, scammer and trust ratings. I think it's a good idea.
Oldgamer
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 134
Merit: 100


View Profile
October 26, 2013, 11:39:09 PM
 #31

Okay if you want people to scam you for your money, then you ignore the rating and trade with everyone (incl. the ones with a scammer tag).
I know that I wanna have the lowest possible risk when trading.
+1
Exactly, if you think that scam tag is not good - just do not pay attention on this tag and trade like it is not there.

moderate
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 98
Merit: 10

nearly dead


View Profile
October 27, 2013, 06:52:35 PM
 #32

Please keep these tags and always show the trust rating. You might also want to add a TROLL tag, as it is impossible to stand certain sub-forums around here. People might stop replying to trolls if they are clearly tagged as such.
gweedo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1498
Merit: 1000


View Profile
October 27, 2013, 07:02:53 PM
 #33

Please keep these tags and always show the trust rating. You might also want to add a TROLL tag, as it is impossible to stand certain sub-forums around here. People might stop replying to trolls if they are clearly tagged as such.

Can you define a troll? Cause what some people call a troll, other people call a smart person. In my case people call me a troll and some people call me a very smart visionary of the future of bitcoins Wink You can't tag something that has a very loose definition.
moderate
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 98
Merit: 10

nearly dead


View Profile
October 27, 2013, 07:18:52 PM
 #34

Please keep these tags and always show the trust rating. You might also want to add a TROLL tag, as it is impossible to stand certain sub-forums around here. People might stop replying to trolls if they are clearly tagged as such.

Can you define a troll? Cause what some people call a troll, other people call a smart person. In my case people call me a troll and some people call me a very smart visionary of the future of bitcoins Wink You can't tag something that has a very loose definition.

The same applies to the scammer and trust ratings. The scammer might have had personal issues that caused him to be marked as a scammer, but maybe he was a very honest person. Since you are creating situations, I'm feeling free to create them too. The trust rating may be applied among a group of friends, creating the illusion that a person is trusted by the whole community. You can't tag something that goes beyond what you can evaluate here, uhm ?

Here is an actual troll: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=140852
darkmule
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1005



View Profile
October 27, 2013, 08:11:39 PM
 #35

Trust ratings are important, but I'm not convinced the ones on BCT are worth anything.  The "scammer" tag seems reserved only for people who rip off the people who run the site.  You can rip off anyone else with impunity, as I've found, and no matter how blatant the scam (basically a MoneyPak trader who NEVER delivered and was a pure ripoff), they don't get a scammer tag.
malevolent
can into space
Staff
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3178
Merit: 1656



View Profile
October 27, 2013, 09:32:41 PM
Last edit: October 27, 2013, 11:03:17 PM by malevolent
 #36

Trust ratings are important, but I'm not convinced the ones on BCT are worth anything.  The "scammer" tag seems reserved only for people who rip off the people who run the site.  You can rip off anyone else with impunity, as I've found, and no matter how blatant the scam (basically a MoneyPak trader who NEVER delivered and was a pure ripoff), they don't get a scammer tag.

Scammer tags are no longer "awarded" since the introduction of the trust ratings which serves as a replacement for the scammer tags, and people can now rely on their own due diligence and the judgement of people within their trust lists. Theymos now also doesn't need to spend time on looking through the evidence and deciding whether someone deserves a tag or not, which could have eventually become dull with more scam artists flooding the forums this spring.

moderate
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 98
Merit: 10

nearly dead


View Profile
October 27, 2013, 11:00:15 PM
 #37

Please keep these tags and always show the trust rating. You might also want to add a TROLL tag, as it is impossible to stand certain sub-forums around here. People might stop replying to trolls if they are clearly tagged as such.

Can you define a troll? Cause what some people call a troll, other people call a smart person. In my case people call me a troll and some people call me a very smart visionary of the future of bitcoins Wink You can't tag something that has a very loose definition.

The same applies to the scammer and trust ratings. The scammer might have had personal issues that caused him to be marked as a scammer, but maybe he was a very honest person. Since you are creating situations, I'm feeling free to create them too. The trust rating may be applied among a group of friends, creating the illusion that a person is trusted by the whole community. You can't tag something that goes beyond what you can evaluate here, uhm ?

Here is an actual troll: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=140852

No cause a scammer can always talk to the lender and try to work out a payment plan or even better give up an item of the value they are trying to seek. If they have issues and don't communicate them, then they should be a scammer, they took money and due to the situation they couldn't pay. A troll is someone who voices an opinion and is labeled that cause people don't like him for that opinion very different things here.

It could be that the supposed scammer just lost internet connection, for whatever reason. A troll can be clearly labeled, just like a scammer supposedly can.
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1020


Gerald Davis


View Profile
October 28, 2013, 04:43:34 AM
 #38

One of the reasons people use bitcoin or any crypto currency is to eliminate the need to trust the other party.

Starting from a flawed premise.  The stated purpose of Bitcoin is to allow transactions without a TRUSTED THIRD PARTY.   Most transactions involve trust of the counterparty.  Even if it is a cash for BTC trade in person in a public place you need to trust the other party isn't going to hit you over the head with a crowbar and take both the BTC and cash.
wolverine.ks
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 375
Merit: 250



View Profile
October 28, 2013, 05:50:46 PM
 #39

correct. my mistake.
 that is what I was intending.

in the case of scammer tags and trust ratings the user must trust bitcoin talks approval of the scammer tag and the people making the ratings.

my understanding is that the scammer tags are no longer in use, and a distributed evaluation in the form of trust ratings are less easily corruptible.

I think the trust ratings are a step in the right direction, but they might be a little misleading. I think it would be easily perceived as a probability that a user is a scammer or probability that a user is not a scammer. this is definitely not the case.

it should be viewed as reputational currency. how much RC do they stand to lose if they scam, and compare that to the actual gains of a scam. this calculation is nearly impossible to calculate. at least with the current rating system.
Oldgamer
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 134
Merit: 100


View Profile
October 28, 2013, 06:05:51 PM
 #40

correct. my mistake.
 that is what I was intending.

in the case of scammer tags and trust ratings the user must trust bitcoin talks approval of the scammer tag and the people making the ratings.

my understanding is that the scammer tags are no longer in use, and a distributed evaluation in the form of trust ratings are less easily corruptible.

I think the trust ratings are a step in the right direction, but they might be a little misleading. I think it would be easily perceived as a probability that a user is a scammer or probability that a user is not a scammer. this is definitely not the case.

it should be viewed as reputational currency. how much RC do they stand to lose if they scam, and compare that to the actual gains of a scam. this calculation is nearly impossible to calculate. at least with the current rating system.

I believe that scammer tag should stay forever, does not matter if it is happened only once. That way people will think twice before scam. Also, I want to know if the party scammed even once. No need to have "Not a scammer" tag, cause it does not mean anything. Yesterday was not a scammer - today is.

crumbs
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 210
Merit: 100



View Profile
October 30, 2013, 06:10:45 PM
 #41

You need collateral because you don't trust me without my trust ratings.

i would agree that i need collateral because i dont trust you, however, im not looking to trust you, and even if i were, trust ratings and scammer tags only have some correlation with previously documented behavior, but they do not have a causal relationship to future behavior.

economic incentives do have a causal relationship to future behavior.

Causation is simply correlation with a good backstory, so correlation is better than nothing.
Sure, behaving honorably in the past doesn't preclude the possibility of scamming in the future.  All other things being equal though, i'd still bet on someone who hasn't scammed before than an established scammer.
darkmule
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1005



View Profile
November 01, 2013, 02:38:07 PM
 #42

Sure, behaving honorably in the past doesn't preclude the possibility of scamming in the future.  All other things being equal though, i'd still bet on someone who hasn't scammed before than an established scammer.

True, but you're more likely to get scammed BIG by someone who was previously trusted, because you simply wouldn't trust someone for a lot of money without some reputational background.  A good con artist knows to build a reputation before the big score.
crumbs
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 210
Merit: 100



View Profile
November 01, 2013, 03:06:06 PM
 #43

Sure, behaving honorably in the past doesn't preclude the possibility of scamming in the future.  All other things being equal though, i'd still bet on someone who hasn't scammed before than an established scammer.

True, but you're more likely to get scammed BIG by someone who was previously trusted, because you simply wouldn't trust someone for a lot of money without some reputational background.  A good con artist knows to build a reputation before the big score.

You do have a point -- if we have cops, we become less vigilant in protecting ourselves.  I simply don't see it as a strong argument for getting rid of cops altogether.

Even if you feel that the scammer labels/negative trust have 50/50 chance of being rigged, you should still avoid trading with tagged users if non-tagged users are available.  Not necessarily fair, simply statistically sound.

*There are possible scenarios in which this doesn't hold true, but those are pretty contrived.
darkmule
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1005



View Profile
November 01, 2013, 04:15:41 PM
 #44

Even if you feel that the scammer labels/negative trust have 50/50 chance of being rigged, you should still avoid trading with tagged users if non-tagged users are available.  Not necessarily fair, simply statistically sound.

*There are possible scenarios in which this doesn't hold true, but those are pretty contrived.

Well, despite the unreliable criteria used to determine those 'scammer tags' you can at least be fairly certain if someone has one of those tags, it's probably deserved.  I suppose they at least have some historic value.
Flashman
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 500


Hodl!


View Profile
November 01, 2013, 08:50:55 PM
 #45

If you feel that scam tags might be undeserved and you want to rehab the poor innocent luser with some high BTC transactions, go nuts.

TL;DR See Spot run. Run Spot run. .... .... Freelance interweb comedian, for teh lulz >>> 1MqAAR4XkJWfDt367hVTv5SstPZ54Fwse6

Bitcoin Custodian: Keeping BTC away from weak heads since Feb '13, adopter of homeless bitcoins.
Oldgamer
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 134
Merit: 100


View Profile
November 03, 2013, 02:27:41 AM
 #46

Sure, behaving honorably in the past doesn't preclude the possibility of scamming in the future.  All other things being equal though, i'd still bet on someone who hasn't scammed before than an established scammer.

True, but you're more likely to get scammed BIG by someone who was previously trusted, because you simply wouldn't trust someone for a lot of money without some reputational background.  A good con artist knows to build a reputation before the big score.
A good con artist at first was a bad con artist in the beginning. And became a good one only because he had the opportunity.
Listen to you all background checking everywhere has no sense. If background checking was good enough, probably con artist would never be a good one.

deodecagone
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490
Merit: 250



View Profile
November 07, 2013, 06:10:02 PM
 #47

agreed trust shouldn't be part of the equation. Please send me your bitcoins here :
165sBm8mohPjjF1oxmXNbK36kgc9SpPD23

I'll give it to you back plus a bonus.

A no-need-to-trust-me fellow,
whiskers75
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658
Merit: 500


Doesn't use these forums that often.


View Profile
November 07, 2013, 06:11:17 PM
 #48

agreed trust shouldn't be part of the equation. Please send me your bitcoins here :
165sBm8mohPjjF1oxmXNbK36kgc9SpPD23

I'll give it to you back plus a bonus.

A no-need-to-trust-me fellow,
I don't trust you.

Elastic.pw Elastic - The Decentralized Supercomputer
ELASTIC ANNOUNCEMENT THREAD | ELASTIC SLACK | ELASTIC FORUM
wolverine.ks
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 375
Merit: 250



View Profile
November 07, 2013, 06:20:50 PM
 #49

perhaps a complete definition of trust is needed. any takers?

it seems like there are at least two different definitions being used and if any progress is to be made, then agreeing on the terms may be beneficial.
Pages: 1 2 3 [All]
  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!