overwhelming consensus excludes Lauda, remains in DT2, went in2 buz w sold act

[TheUltraElite]

The trust system in bitcointalk has become a joke now. It was a joke few years back when I first came here when I was not aware of many things and used to lurk around trying to gain knowledge from everyone and getting to know the forum and how things work here.

It never improved in any manner or so during this period and now we have a number of people - who even though people try to defame them, they are actually fighting the scammers, account sellers, ICO shills bumpers and whatnot - they are the ones who get excluded from Trust lists of "so-called" trusted people.

Considering this forum to be the biggest discussion site for the crypto community we need to have a strong ground on what is right and what is wrong and act accordingly. People will come to this forum because they want to know about crypto and while we are trying to get everybody know about scammers and how they could get scammed here and/or get involved unknowingly in criminal activity - it is our forum members who are in a "power-war" among themselves. Although this is seen in every forum/community there need to be mutual understanding between people which is definitely lacking here.

But thats just my opinion.
BTW why did QS make this thread? Just curious Theymos could have made it. Or some other "reputable" member of the forum too or even a NeutralTrust Member. I can see where this bandwagon is going ultimately.

[1714917916]

1714917916

[1714917916]

1714917916

[1714917916]

1714917916

[edgycorner]

BTW why did QS make this thread? Just curious Theymos could have made it. Or some other "reputable" member of the forum too or even a NeutralTrust Member. I can see where this bandwagon is going ultimately.

[TMAN]

Generated how?

Currently it's the same as I described here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=914641.0 . That's from 2015, so maybe it could be improved. Also, instead of hard-forcing people to set trust as I described there, I think I'd instead have the trust link be red on every person, saying something like "Warning: you need to set your trust!".

great idea - much better than what we have now.. so when are you rolling it out?

[Maum]

I don't have an opinion on this particular issue (Lauda has many good ratings, but also several that seem too trigger-happy), but I have been getting very annoyed about how centralized the trust system is. The reason that I made it a complicated trust network instead of a centralized list/database is so that it'd be decentralized and subjective.

I've been seriously thinking about reopening the idea of enforcing user-defined trust lists via suggestions, etc., deprecating DefaultTrust.

Please don't. The current DT-System is doing well.

[jointherevolution]

I only read the first post but this is a long list of accusations. Also, pill addiction? I do not want to mock anyone's vulnerabilities, I hope this person manages the get over the addiction.

[hilariousetc]

I don't have an opinion on this particular issue (Lauda has many good ratings, but also several that seem too trigger-happy), but I have been getting very annoyed about how centralized the trust system is. The reason that I made it a complicated trust network instead of a centralized list/database is so that it'd be decentralized and subjective.

I've been seriously thinking about reopening the idea of enforcing user-defined trust lists via suggestions, etc., deprecating DefaultTrust.

Whatever you do people will just complain about it. I don't think I've ever seen a feedback system that really works fairly and is always just abused by scammers.

It never improved in any manner or so during this period and now we have a number of people - who even though people try to defame them, they are actually fighting the scammers, account sellers, ICO shills bumpers and whatnot - they are the ones who get excluded from Trust lists of "so-called" trusted people.

Scammers and unscrupulous people make the most amount of noise once they're busted because you've taken away their source of income. QS has probably been badgering the people who have just excluded Lauda for quite some time until they acquiesced to his demands.

[TheUltraElite]

I don't have an opinion on this particular issue (Lauda has many good ratings, but also several that seem too trigger-happy), but I have been getting very annoyed about how centralized the trust system is. The reason that I made it a complicated trust network instead of a centralized list/database is so that it'd be decentralized and subjective.

I've been seriously thinking about reopening the idea of enforcing user-defined trust lists via suggestions, etc., deprecating DefaultTrust.

Whatever you do people will just complain about it. I don't think I've ever seen a feedback system that really works fairly and is always just abused by scammers.

So what do you suggest? Remove the Trust system completely? There needs to be some sort of mutual consensus system so that newbies who come here know whom to listen to - being new and unexperienced. Over time they will gain experience but every new person here needs guidance. True scammers will always lurk here and everyone should be careful themselves - because the Trust is subjective

Scammers and unscrupulous people make the most amount of noise once they're busted because you've taken away their source of income. QS has probably been badgering the people who have just excluded Lauda for quite some time until they acquiesced to his demands.

It still bugs me that those people even listen to someone like QS. It only makes them more towards the untrustworthy scale. Someone needs to judge the way they decide (the DT). Simply because QS has/had successful trades with them does not make QS their "Close trusty pal" - and other references against QS suggest something totally different.

[hilariousetc]

I don't have an opinion on this particular issue (Lauda has many good ratings, but also several that seem too trigger-happy), but I have been getting very annoyed about how centralized the trust system is. The reason that I made it a complicated trust network instead of a centralized list/database is so that it'd be decentralized and subjective.

I've been seriously thinking about reopening the idea of enforcing user-defined trust lists via suggestions, etc., deprecating DefaultTrust.

Whatever you do people will just complain about it. I don't think I've ever seen a feedback system that really works fairly and is always just abused by scammers.

So what do you suggest? Remove the Trust system completely? There needs to be some sort of mutual consensus system so that newbies who come here know whom to listen to - being new and unexperienced. Over time they will gain experience but every new person here needs guidance. True scammers will always lurk here and everyone should be careful themselves - because the Trust is subjective

Keep the system we currently have. 99% of people who get tagged with negative feedback deserve it, but of course when it happens to them they kick up a fuss about. I'm all for people disputing any feedback received but anybody who was abusing it would likely be removed from DT pretty fast but this rarely happens.

Scammers and unscrupulous people make the most amount of noise once they're busted because you've taken away their source of income. QS has probably been badgering the people who have just excluded Lauda for quite some time until they acquiesced to his demands.

It still bugs me that those people even listen to someone like QS. It only makes them more towards the untrustworthy scale. Someone needs to judge the way they decide (the DT). Simply because QS has/had successful trades with them does not make QS their "Close trusty pal" - and other references against QS suggest something totally different.

Anyone can do a few trades or make themselves out to be trustworthy and that's what QS was doing. It wouldn't surprise me if he was just here for the long con from the start but I certainly don't trust him because of his behaviour and due to how he's conducted himself since his fall from grace (which was entirely his own fault due to his fragile ego and pathetic grudges). His level of butthurt borders on mental illness and it's clear he won't stop until he feels like he gets his revenge and comeuppance and this thread is further proof of it.

QS and his ego every morning:

[muddafudda]

Happy Valentines Lauda...      Lov u Sweety..

[Lauda]

great idea - much better than what we have now.. so when are you rolling it out?

Until such time, there is this simple workaround[1]:

~HostFat
gmaxwell
~OgNasty
qwk
Vod
~Tomatocage
DiamondCardz
KWH
ibminer
~defcon23
Mitchell
~cyclops
Blazed
hilariousandco
~shorena
~jonald_fyookball
~CryptoImperator
~chronicsky
~Quickseller
Zepher
actmyname
The Pharmacist
Lutpin
Gunthar

This puts OP at a well deserved rating of -4078.

Keep the system we currently have. 99% of people who get tagged with negative feedback deserve it, but of course when it happens to them they kick up a fuss about. I'm all for people disputing any feedback received but anybody who was abusing it would likely be removed from DT pretty fast but this rarely happens.

At least a few DT seats would have to be changed for this to work. As for that type of case, I don't remember a single one in quite some time.

Anyone can do a few trades or make themselves out to be trustworthy and that's what QS was doing. It wouldn't surprise me if he was just here for the long con from the start but I certainly don't trust him because of his behaviour and due to how he's conducted himself since his fall from grace (which was entirely his own fault due to his fragile ego and pathetic grudges). His level of butthurt borders on mental illness and it's clear he won't stop until he feels like he gets his revenge and comeuppance and this thread is further proof of it.

Unless he is permanently banned, he will not stop. Although, it's quite petty that he believes this changes anything at all for me. This affects everyone else. But hey, if you like scams then I guess that's a win.
[1] My recommendation. Most people who should look better, look better. Most people who shouldn't, don't.

[InvoKing]

I've been seriously thinking about reopening the idea of enforcing user-defined trust lists via suggestions, etc., deprecating DefaultTrust.

ELI5/ I don't understand how could this be helpful for the community. Everyone will start seeing the trust of userX like this, no?
Me : userX Neutral for example
Member1 : userX -1024 (never contacted him nor can browse his 100 pages history before dealing with him)
Member2 : userX +1024 (same comment)
It will all depends on the people you trust who can change side at any moment (plenty of examples of escrow & previously trusted person).
I suggest to have 2 trusting system if, the new one...but let us keep the actual one enabled (checking an option in the parameters)
YT    0: -0 / +0
DT   -26: -x / +y

Back to topic : same drama every week or so (maybe everyday?)... Sometimes i am asking why we are here in the first place to see this happening over and over...

[Lauda]

Everyone will start seeing the trust of userX like this, no?
Me : userX Neutral for example
Member1 : userX -1024 (never contacted him nor can browse his 100 pages history before dealing with him)
Member2 : userX +1024 (same comment)

Yes. The whole idea is to set up your own list, to avoid the collusion(s) from OP and his alts (&& similar) and to decentralize the system. However, you have a point there. This whole move, including the change to user-defined list is going to have a very dividing and negative impact on newbies. The best that you could do in that case is advise people to create a common (good) list upon which others would build up (i.e. tweak it/add their own people and such).

Sometimes i am asking why we are here in the first place to see this happening over and over...

This is why: OP has the following rating "Trust: -4078". Most of his sockpuppets got busted in the meantime, and he developed a very unhealthy obsession with me and a few others.

[actisstupidname]

Forget about DefaultTrust! Adopt the Merit System now!

I don't have an opinion on this particular issue (Lauda has many good ratings, but also several that seem too trigger-happy), but I have been getting very annoyed about how centralized the trust system is. The reason that I made it a complicated trust network instead of a centralized list/database is so that it'd be decentralized and subjective.

I've been seriously thinking about reopening the idea of enforcing user-defined trust lists via suggestions, etc., deprecating DefaultTrust.

Thank you Theymos for listening. I agree decentralizing the trust system in this forum is the best in the spirit of Bitcoin. You can't trust human overlords to make decisions for you. The next best thing would be the judgement of the whole community. And then maybe making harder to make new accounts by verifying identities by phone (like Telegram) or by BTC holds (proving you hold enough BTC) would ensure less alt accounts.

The following quote is a first impression of this forum from a newbie:

I've seen many weird trust ratings while bored waiting for the post timer to conclude when I want to post something right after having posted something a second ago.

Some people have negative trust, but the amount of BTC involved is literally 0. And the negative trust message is somewhat odd, something like: "POTENTIAL SCAMMER! ASKS FOR NO COLLATERAL LOAN"

This is odd to me. If he never scammed anyone yet, then why does he get negative trust that reflects oh so poorly on his main profile when posting? That's unfair to the maximum.

I've seen another weird one, where someone is selling subscription services to crypto investment groups. The negative trust given is merely a speculation on why the price is so low: "Warning scammer trying to sell subscription services for half the price of regular." <-- again, no BTC involved. It's just people ranting.

It's almost like leaving a restaurant review without actually eating at the restaurant.

But then again, the environment of crypto where no transactions can be reversed... I'd say these negative trust messages are natural. Have to prevent a scam before it happens, right?

But giving someone negative trust for their political/religious opinions is just fucked. That has nothing to do with business. Trust is about business. Being a radical Christian has nothing to do with scamming someone.

Frankly, this cleaning up of the DT members or deprecating DefaultTrust would help the merit system since it's the next best thing for a community vote.

[minifrij]

Forget about DefaultTrust! Adopt the Merit System now!

These systems serve different purposes; one cannot properly be substituted for the other.

[Zepher]

Haha, so I'm officially been booted from DT as a result of bashing Quickseller in this post?

Funny how that happens within 24hrs of me having a bash at you, QuickScammer.

If this doesn't prove that you are in control of the Tomatocage account after everything else that has happened recently with that trust list, with "events" taking place between you (QS) and someone else (*) - against other trusted users of this forum - then I don't really know. Timelords thread that was buried has a lot of merit, huh?

*I wouldn't be surprised if OgNasty is also a part of this (purely conjecture, of course) effort to boot certain users over a period of time from DT. Again, purely conjecture at this time, but it certainly wouldn't surprise me.

Edited for grammar.

[TMAN]

So are the guys on DT-1 now going to step up and start the tagging? one step forward with merit now two steps back with this.

pretty pathetic that OG and his "mate" orchestrate something like this as it only benefits the scammers.

[johhnyUA]

Long live the scammers paradise now, I guess.

Bro, all as Nietzsche said   You're in "slave" community, here fight against "master's" (JP Morjan, Trump and others, oligarchs) morality. You're not welcome here, be ubermensch somewhere else!  
(By Nietzsche only slaves fighting for freedom. Masters already have it (I think Trump or Putin are free enough))


Everything above is a half-joke. It's very bad that man who fought scammers is out of DT now. Scammers and spammers are in work again  
 

[Kvanko]

Now we see that trust system is really far from being perfect. When punishment instrument is concentrated in the hands of tight circle of individuals we can get situations like this. Lauda was excluded from DT and now hundreds of scammers are back in town. Very sad.

[FFrankie]

lol There is no way tomatocage is in control by quickseller

I swear you guys just make stuff up

[Zepher]

Now we see that trust system is really far from being perfect. When instrument for punishment is concentrated in the hands of tight circle of individuals we can get a situations like this.Lauda was excluded form DT and now hundreds of scammers are back in town. Very sad.

Your english may not be perfect, but you make a very valid point in regards to the trust system, especially in the bolded part.

Most people in DT1 and DT2 use their "power" wisely. They don't abuse it for personal gain, they don't use it to purposely destroy others - and touching on that second point, they don't bring emotion into their decisions.

Some users choose to ignore those invisible lines and use their power as a way of getting at another individual.

You are quite right, it's sad.

lol There is no way tomatocage is in control by quickseller

I swear you guys just make stuff up

Killyou72, just leave. Please. You tend to make an idiot of yourself.