TRUST ABUSE BY NEW DT MEMBERS.. Theymos should review the trust system.

[Lauda]

If my perception is right, then red-tagging is not 100% accurate? And some of the tagged members might not be involved in shitposting or any event that had led to tagging?

The rate of false convictions in the US is over 1%.

By massively red-tagging users without a proper analysis for each case, i believe that rate is by far higher in this forum.

By randomly doing statistical analysis based on nothing other than your own belief, you surely are going to get some very accurate estimates.

Do you have any suggestions on how to restore my status? I can't believe my 2013 account got redflagged for no reasons whatsoever.

Your posts are horrible. You should never be allowed in a campaign of any kind again.

[1713284482]

1713284482

[1713284482]

1713284482

[1713284482]

1713284482

[1713284482]

1713284482

[1713284482]

1713284482

[1713284482]

1713284482

[xxxgoodgirls]

Your posts are horrible. You should never be allowed in a campaign of any kind again.

So what? That's your personal opinion, I ask questions mostly (that can be useful to other persons if replied).
As I stated before, I am here since 2013 and this has been my second signature campaign in 4 years. I joined it because I am supporting the project (I invested in it as well). I do not join campaigns on a mothly basis nor I will.
I don't understand why my account should be labeled as negative trusted.
I will try to improve my forum cointribution tho.

[xxxgoodgirls]

In addition, I should have been given a warning at least.

[donbraz]

If my perception is right, then red-tagging is not 100% accurate? And some of the tagged members might not be involved in shitposting or any event that had led to tagging?

The rate of false convictions in the US is over 1%.

By massively red-tagging users without a proper analysis for each case, i believe that rate is by far higher in this forum.

By randomly doing statistical analysis based on nothing other than your own belief, you surely are going to get some very accurate estimates.

"randomly statistical analysis based on nothing other than your own belief". What is this, a stretch from Mein Kampf?
looks exactly the justice model and parameters used by Nazi Germany or USSR. Quite unfair in my opinion 

[Lauda]

In addition, I should have been given a warning at least.

Your *warning* was received on    2018-01-10.

"randomly statistical analysis based on nothing other than your own belief". What is this, a stretch from Mein Kampf?
looks exactly the justice model and parameters used by Nazi Germany or USSR. Quite unfair in my opinion  

It looks like you don't really understand English. I implied that you did this for your statement, and the accuracy part was sarcastic. Do I really need to explain this? Maybe you should go back to school.

[aquantivis86]

Anyone have any idea how many DT members are abusing the trust system?

We could come together to re-establish trust for people who are DT targets, but that would be a somewhat time consuming manual process.

[Lauda]

Anyone have any idea how many DT members are abusing the trust system?

There are a *few* for which you could argue that, none of which were mentioned in Meta recently as they do not affect shitposters nor ICO bumpers.

[xxxgoodgirls]

In addition, I should have been given a warning at least.

Your *warning* was received on    2018-01-10.

The *warning* as you intend it, it was not supposed to be used the way The Pharmacist used it. It now makes my account less if not completely eligible with future trades.  Which is completely unfair, as I already performed smooth trades in the past.
My "one-line shitposting" is not intended as what you guys are fighting against because I never join signature campaigns nor I need to rank up.

[donbraz]

"randomly statistical analysis based on nothing other than your own belief". What is this, a stretch from Mein Kampf?
looks exactly the justice model and parameters used by Nazi Germany or USSR. Quite unfair in my opinion  

It looks like you don't really understand English. I implied that you did this for your statement, and the accuracy part was sarcastic. Do I really need to explain this? Maybe you should go back to school.

I'm sure that we've fully understood each other. Language is not a barrier in this case.
If you're being sarcastic about your accuracy rate, maybe you should try to improve it.

[Bachelorrd]

If my perception is right, then red-tagging is not 100% accurate? And some of the tagged members might not be involved in shitposting or any event that had led to tagging?

The rate of false convictions in the US is over 1%. What makes you think that forum members, especially with such different backgrounds, can reach an accuracy of 100%? You lack common sense.

I have seen a few wrongly given negatives.

Sorry if I lack the common sense your saying.

But that's where the problem is since accuracy is not perfect. Some of the DT members haven't given the chance to these "ShitPosters" to redeem themselves. Instead of giving them a chance to speak, they will get a ton of "English Lessons" as to why they should never react. Creating a scare to the whole community that "when reacting to a DT member you will get tagged".


Has it crossed their mind the "DT members" to check and evaluate if the imposed RED trust they have given is accurate? I think no.

[DarkStar_]

Has it crossed their mind the "DT members" to check and evaluate if the imposed RED trust they have given is accurate? I think no.

I'm sure that they've checked before leaving the feedback (duh), but of course false positives can occur, and they can be easily fixed if it is in fact false by PMing that user who left the trust, or by creating a thread in Reputation if they don't respond or refuse to change, even if you are obviously right.

[Bachelorrd]

Has it crossed their mind the "DT members" to check and evaluate if the imposed RED trust they have given is accurate? I think no.

I'm sure that they've checked before leaving the feedback (duh), but of course false positives can occur, and they can be easily fixed if it is in fact false by PMing that user who left the trust, or by creating a thread in Reputation if they don't respond or refuse to change, even if you are obviously right.

Are you certain of that? How thorough have they checked an Account before leaving a feedback? At least give a decent more accepting feedback as to why they have been tagged.

[Lauda]

...

Stop trolling.

But that's where the problem is since accuracy is not perfect. Some of the DT members haven't given the chance to these "ShitPosters" to redeem themselves. Instead of giving them a chance to speak, they will get a ton of "English Lessons" as to why they should never react. Creating a scare to the whole community that "when reacting to a DT member you will get tagged".

Maybe instead of:
a) Instantly sending complaints via PM in the form of: "Please sir, remove trust I need money from this job".
b) Opening complaint threads in different sections;

you should take the time to improve yourself and ask for a review. Is that so hard?

[Bachelorrd]

...

Stop trolling.

But that's where the problem is since accuracy is not perfect. Some of the DT members haven't given the chance to these "ShitPosters" to redeem themselves. Instead of giving them a chance to speak, they will get a ton of "English Lessons" as to why they should never react. Creating a scare to the whole community that "when reacting to a DT member you will get tagged".

Maybe instead of:
a) Instantly sending complaints via PM in the form of: "Please sir, remove trust I need money from this job".
b) Opening complaint threads in different sections;

you should take the time to improve yourself and ask for a review. Is that so hard?

No not for me. I am not one of the "Cry-babies" who had been posting complaints about their Red Trust nor sent a PM to a DT member, I can still move and post freely even I have been tagged and I have no problem with that.

The problem is DT members should actually recheck and evaluate their tagging to be more accurate. Which I think they wouldn't do since they are not paid for doing so. The tagging should be improved and only be tagging the worst of the worst as VOD said. And at least give a more specific reason as to why he/she is being tagged to make it more acceptable rather "shitposter 3rd World spammers", "non-English speaking shitposter".

Being polite does not harm one's pride anyway.

[Lauda]

No not for me.

I meant *you* as in *everyone* who got tagged and is complaining right away.

The problem is DT members should actually recheck and evaluate their tagging to be more accurate.

Rechecking of all ratings periodically is not possible unless you the development of an AI for me as that is not constrained by organic limits.

The tagging should be improved and only be tagging the worst of the worst as VOD said.

Disagreed. We should be tagging anyone who deserves it.

Being polite does not harm one's pride anyway.

TBH, it's an outright waste of time.

[Bachelorrd]

No not for me.

I meant *you* as in *everyone* who got tagged and is complaining right away.

The problem is DT members should actually recheck and evaluate their tagging to be more accurate.

Rechecking of all ratings periodically is not possible unless you the development of an AI for me as that is not constrained by organic limits.

The tagging should be improved and only be tagging the worst of the worst as VOD said.

Disagreed. We should be tagging anyone who deserves it.

Being polite does not harm one's pride anyway.

TBH, it's an outright waste of time.

LOL. If you think I one of them who came here complaining and whining about my Red Trust, think otherwise. Don't think too highly of yourself it's as if you're the only one who got a masters degree in here.

I admire your move on cleaning this forum of those shitposters (and I am one of them). But don't you think its too vague and generalized to tag anyone without a thorough investigation?

[Lauda]

Don't think too highly of yourself it's as if you're the only one who got a masters degree in here.

A master's degree is next to worthless. What exactly is your point?

But don't you think its too vague and generalized to tag anyone without a thorough investigation?

Where have I said that ratings should be given out on a whim? Nowhere. There is a reason some things taken longer than others. It took me over a month to get to the ICO bumpers. If you believe some things were improperly handled, then make your case. Just make sure you do it *properly*.

[Brunus Januensis]

There is no point in this discussion: I was redflagged because I was in the wrong thread; I tried to argue with Lauda, and he made me "an idiot", he said I've "a backwards morals" and he gave me more penality flags. Oh, well...

I suspect that in a face to face meeting he would have a very different attitude, but this is not the point.

I only want to say that my argument was - and still is - this one: if you make undiscriminated redflagging, just by your arbitrary opinion, without a clear criterion, anyone will feel insecure, and will start to open more an more accounts just to go on with campaigns, with an explosion of shitposts.
I didn't say that I "find it acceptable to avoid ratings with alt accounts", I just said that this is what will happen, and there is an evident confirmation.

If you want to stop shitpost, and get rid of all these "3rd world cancer", as you defined the rest of us, a very simple solution exists: take off signatures from any profiles and let people make promotion only on other channels.
Shitpost will stop immediately and your forum will be the elitistic club that you all are dreaming about.

Is this opinion "shit"? May be, but I'd like to hear at least some logical explainations and not insults (and may be, some more redflagging...)

[Brunus Januensis]

Sorry, just a technical question: why in this thread the red trust doesn't appear? Just curious.

[Wendigo]

Sorry, just a technical question: why in this thread the red trust doesn't appear? Just curious.

Some sections of the forum have the showing of trust disabled so you can't see the ratings. It's not just this thread it's entire sub-forums.