The chaos on the forum! Judge, please

[IvanBerkut]

Removed

[1715181710]

1715181710

[1715181710]

1715181710

[1715181710]

1715181710

[1715181710]

1715181710

[SaltySpitoon]

Whenever a new feature, like merit or the feedback system is added, it takes the community a few weeks or months to figure out what is or isn't acceptable. I'm personally of the opinion that merit issues aren't related to feedback, and you shouldn't get negative feedback even for "abuse" of the merit system, whatever that ends up meaning.

Its kind of a rough position to be in, but you shouldn't worry about it too much.

[Crypington]

In the first image you posted, it appears that large sums of merit are being exchanged between 3 addresses.  Hypnose and IvanBerkut and You.

The DT members are flagging accounts that fit that profile, under the assumption that they are farmed alt accounts.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

I'm still on the fence with regards to the merit system, which is why I haven't been slinging the red trust much lately.  We all knew good & well that merit was going to get traded, but I do believe there are some people here who don't understand how the system works and who may have sent more merit points than usual.  I know I did at first when the system came into existence.  Having said that, there are some rather obvious merit sales, or exchanges between alt accounts, and those probably deserve a negative trust.  I fully support Lauda & actmyname in their crusade against these abominable jokers.

I'm not going to get involved in this just yet, but it may happen.  I think even with the shenanigans, it's still a good system that can work to limit shitposters' ability to rank up, and it'll be much harder to farm accounts this way.

[SaltySpitoon]

I'm still on the fence with regards to the merit system, which is why I haven't been slinging the red trust much lately.  We all knew good & well that merit was going to get traded, but I do believe there are some people here who don't understand how the system works and who may have sent more merit points than usual.  I know I did at first when the system came into existence.  Having said that, there are some rather obvious merit sales, or exchanges between alt accounts, and those probably deserve a negative trust.  I fully support Lauda & actmyname in their crusade against these abominable jokers.

I'm not going to get involved in this just yet, but it may happen.  I think even with the shenanigans, it's still a good system that can work to limit shitposters' ability to rank up, and it'll be much harder to farm accounts this way.

I agree, when a system doesn't have explicitly stated rules, that typically means that how it works is up for the community to decide. Unless you are a merit source, in a sense I think its fair game how you want to use your merit. You have to earn it in the first place, so if you want to sell it, transfer it to your friends or your other account, or whatever, so be it. However on the other hand, people have always left negative feedback for account farmers to try and dissuade their accompanying spammy behavior, so with merit making it pretty openly apparent which accounts have ties to one another, its not outrageous to say that strange merit behavior could be linked to less than ideal account behavior.

More than anything, I really think it comes down to whether or not its typically acceptable to tag owners of multiple accounts with negative trust, just because they own multiple accounts. Second comes whether or not trading/selling merit is generally acceptable, and to what extents.

[Quickseller]

This is an example as to why the trust system is in serious need of reform.

Trust is not moderated individually, however it should be clear the trust system has taken a turn in a way that was not intended. This is an example of trust being given out based on speculation and conjecture with little to no basis in fact, and even if factual, the conclusion that those receiving negative trust is a “scammer” is doubious.

[diatamariono]

Maybe the thing you post is not appropriate for post ,,
Just like me,i am in forum can not post avatar logo or link, syllable vocabulary is still limited, can not be more than the specified vocabulary ,,
Maybe that's my opinion

[hilariousetc]

Whenever a new feature, like merit or the feedback system is added, it takes the community a few weeks or months to figure out what is or isn't acceptable. I'm personally of the opinion that merit issues aren't related to feedback, and you shouldn't get negative feedback even for "abuse" of the merit system, whatever that ends up meaning.

Its kind of a rough position to be in, but you shouldn't worry about it too much.

Ironically the merit system was introduced to try prevent people from leaving negative feedback on poor posters. It's a tricky situation to police but people shouldn't be allowed to trade merit or leave it for their alts as it's deceptive and defeats the purpose of the system in the first place. I can't really see any other way than negative really but users shouldn't be allowed to get away with it otherwise everyone will just do it. At least if there's the threat of negative for users caught engaging in it then most people will think twice about it. If there's nothing to lose by attempting to trade merit then the practice will become rife.

[Lauda]

More than anything, I really think it comes down to whether or not its typically acceptable to tag owners of multiple accounts with negative trust, just because they own multiple accounts. Second comes whether or not trading/selling merit is generally acceptable, and to what extents.

The general consensus between the remaining active DT members that do attempt to  *improve* the forum (not the DT members that are active and don't really do anything in that regard) is yes. It was explained properly over here:

untrustworthy behavior = negative tag
asking for/buying trust/reputation = untrustworthy behavior
buying accounts = trying to buy reputation
begging for merit = trying to ask for reputation

These correspondences should be accepted by all members... but unfortunately, some do not view it this way (typically account traders).

Non malicious false positives are going to occur in pretty much every system. As long as the rate is very low, it is fine.

[Quickseller]

Whenever a new feature, like merit or the feedback system is added, it takes the community a few weeks or months to figure out what is or isn't acceptable. I'm personally of the opinion that merit issues aren't related to feedback, and you shouldn't get negative feedback even for "abuse" of the merit system, whatever that ends up meaning.

Its kind of a rough position to be in, but you shouldn't worry about it too much.

Ironically the merit system was introduced to try prevent people from leaving negative feedback on poor posters. It's a tricky situation to police but people shouldn't be allowed to trade merit or leave it for their alts as it's deceptive and defeats the purpose of the system in the first place. I can't really see any other way than negative really but users shouldn't be allowed to get away with it otherwise everyone will just do it. At least if there's the threat of negative for users caught engaging in it then most people will think twice about it. If there's nothing to lose by attempting to trade merit then the practice will become rife.

I think you are wrong about this, and I will explain why.

Ignoring the merit that everyone received at the introduction of the merit system, users will receive merit because someone believed they in some way made a good post, and decided this person should receive a portion of the limited number of merit points this person can send. The fact that there are a limited number of merit points, along with the fact that merit points ultimately allow someone to earn money via signature campaigns means that merit points give value to the person receiving said merit. I don't think it is appropriate to tell people they have to use their valuable property in only certain ways, especially when these "rules" will frequently change (often after the fact), and will not be applied evenly.

If someone were to buy merit to participate in a signature campaign (or otherwise), and are a crappy poster, they will either get banned, will not be hired to participate in a signature campaign, or both. The buying of merit would serve as somewhat of a non-refundable deposit allowing them to participate in a signature campaign.


At the end of the day, a person will not be able to receive merit if at one point, a merit source (who cannot --in theory-- sell merit) decides it will be appropriate to issue merit to someone.

In reality, when you are sending 1 merit to someone, you are effectively sending them ~1.9934 merit including the merit they can send to others.

[Lauda]

If someone were to buy merit to participate in a signature campaign (or otherwise), and are a crappy poster, they will either get banned, will not be hired to participate in a signature campaign, or both. The buying of merit would serve as somewhat of a non-refundable deposit allowing them to participate in a signature campaign.

Practice has shown that your theoretical reasoning is wrong. The forum is flooded with shitposters who: a) Are not banned. b) Are hired by crappy or non existing signature campaign managers.

[IvanBerkut]

Please tell me what should I do? How can I remove the red trust? actmyname does not accept my messages. To whom may I contact? Please give advice.

[Lauda]

Please tell me what should I do? How can I remove the red trust? actmyname does not accept my messages. To whom may I contact? Please give advice.

He's the only user who can remove your trust rating.

[IvanBerkut]

Please tell me what should I do? How can I remove the red trust? actmyname does not accept my messages. To whom may I contact? Please give advice.

He's the only user who can remove your trust rating.

But he doesn't listen to me. Blocked your personal message. I he can't write! Can you help me?

[Lauda]

Please tell me what should I do? How can I remove the red trust? actmyname does not accept my messages. To whom may I contact? Please give advice.

He's the only user who can remove your trust rating.

But he doesn't listen to me. Blocked your personal message. I he can't write! Can you help me?

If you had PM'd me that many times, I would have blocked you as well.

[IvanBerkut]

Please tell me what should I do? How can I remove the red trust? actmyname does not accept my messages. To whom may I contact? Please give advice.

He's the only user who can remove your trust rating.

But he doesn't listen to me. Blocked your personal message. I he can't write! Can you help me?

If you had PM'd me that many times, I would have blocked you as well.

And what could I do? Sitting in place, as if nothing had happened? Anyone in my place did the same.

[Lauda]

And what could I do?

Not harass someone via PM. That's what you could have done.

Anyone in my place did the same.

Anyone who does that is going to get, deservedly, blocked.

[IvanBerkut]

And what could I do?

Not harass someone via PM. That's what you could have done.

Anyone in my place did the same.

Anyone who does that is going to get, deservedly, blocked.

Great logic! That is, I do not deserve to be spoiled by the trust, but I am silent and do nothing. Nice! I would look what would you do in my place.

[sitnikov]

I also think there should be an option to appeal against negative trust. Not doubting the member who used this but what if someone really misuses this option ?

[SaltySpitoon]

Whenever a new feature, like merit or the feedback system is added, it takes the community a few weeks or months to figure out what is or isn't acceptable. I'm personally of the opinion that merit issues aren't related to feedback, and you shouldn't get negative feedback even for "abuse" of the merit system, whatever that ends up meaning.

Its kind of a rough position to be in, but you shouldn't worry about it too much.

Ironically the merit system was introduced to try prevent people from leaving negative feedback on poor posters. It's a tricky situation to police but people shouldn't be allowed to trade merit or leave it for their alts as it's deceptive and defeats the purpose of the system in the first place. I can't really see any other way than negative really but users shouldn't be allowed to get away with it otherwise everyone will just do it. At least if there's the threat of negative for users caught engaging in it then most people will think twice about it. If there's nothing to lose by attempting to trade merit then the practice will become rife.

I dont think the merit and trust system are all that closely related. I'm under the impression that the merit system is to replace the old activity system, and nothing more. Saying that ranking up an account is solely for account farmers and spammers isn't accurate. Plenty of people not involved in ad campaigns or account sales will want to rank up their accounts to lift their posting limits, to be able to post images, just for grins, etc. Of course, the new system is designed to prevent spam just for the sake of raising (activity) an account's rank.

More than anything, I really think it comes down to whether or not its typically acceptable to tag owners of multiple accounts with negative trust, just because they own multiple accounts. Second comes whether or not trading/selling merit is generally acceptable, and to what extents.

The general consensus between the remaining active DT members that do attempt to  *improve* the forum (not the DT members that are active and don't really do anything in that regard) is yes. It was explained properly over here:

untrustworthy behavior = negative tag
asking for/buying trust/reputation = untrustworthy behavior
buying accounts = trying to buy reputation
begging for merit = trying to ask for reputation

These correspondences should be accepted by all members... but unfortunately, some do not view it this way (typically account traders).

Non malicious false positives are going to occur in pretty much every system. As long as the rate is very low, it is fine.

As for actmyname's quote above, I follow until the last statement. I agree with the bolded, but disagree with the underlined statement. As I just said a moment ago, I don't think there is a very strong link between reputation and merit. And I don't think the non malicious false positives are going to be low, let alone very low. Mixing the two systems is a pretty slippery slope. Begging for merit is obviously annoying, but there are a lot of unknowns with what is acceptable.  

The value of 1 merit point is widely different to each person. If someone posted something and say I gave them 1/10/25/50 merit points, everyone might think that is extreme, but maybe its been a point I've been trying to get across for years, and seeing someone else say what I've been thinking gave me an overwhelming feeling of joy, hence the reward. Now, that guy is my friend/alt whatever allegedly, or I sold them merit. So I've now got a red mark for what is essentially my opinion.

The merit system should slow down spammers and account farmers, will it stop them completely? No, but if it helps cut down on them, the moderation staff should be able to handle the ones that slip through the cracks.