There’s going to be fireworks in here.....

I'm probably unusual in that I completely ignore trust. I don't do any trading, apart from a few domain names, and those tend to be run through an escrow service. I thought trust was about trading, and money exchanges, but it seems to be a lot more here. I'm not sure that I understand it's purpose. It seems to be used as a weapon, more than a trading rating.

I really do not understand these DT1, DT2 etc things. Can anyone enlighten me please. I saw people send trust for others if they are not trust worthy. I really interested to know actually what is the purpose of trust things and how to find these DT1, DT2 etc things. A link of the details should be fine for me.

Thanks

Seriously? You abuse and diddle the system with your buddy Quickscammer all the time. Quit playing dumb and btw, are you ever going to answer my scam accusation about whether or not you sent that PM to Michael Silver? You also negged minifrij yesterday for nothing, then bragged about it to all your minions. That's not abuse? LOL, you are such a fool, and everyone will finally see it eventually.

This is the most trustworthy user here? FFS, really?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3160695.msg32677479#msg32677479

The only real concern I see here is the number of additional ratings that philipma1957 has as a result of his own trust list.

After CITM was removed, more people were added to the DT network, and I am fairly confident that those trusted directly by DefaultTrust are more conscientious of not adding too many people who have given them positive ratings, although this is sometimes unavoidable.

What is more concerning is the one or two "DT1" members who have a trust list made up of people who have given eachother positive ratings. 

The goal is to add users who leave correct trust without abuse, helping others to recognize trusted users from scammers
If you think the users you've added meet that requirement and should stay as DT2 then ask them to remove the feedback they left to you or make it neutral, otherwise you're abusing the system to increase your trust

I considered the percentage but even more the total amount of added trust points. You are red because you added 94 points (soon to be 100) to yourself. Specifically you've added 12 users not added by any other DT1 member (i.e. they are DT2 only because of you) and 10 of them left positive trust to you (83%). It's more than obvious the fact they added positive trust to you is a very important factor for you to decide to make them DT2

I wasn't sure if Tomatocage had to be orange or red, I had to put the limit somewhere. Imagine he is red too if that makes you feel better. Anyhow besides philipma1957 and you it's clear Tomatocage, Cyrus and maybe HostFat and Blazed should do something to prevent this conflict of interest

Typical OG move - Deflect and attack.. with a little bit of persecution mixed in..


So OG is using the trust system for personal gain? I count that as trust abuse.. maybe theymos can chime in here with his views? it would be great if he could clarify if this personal gaming of the system is how he intended the trust system to be used? if not Blazed as the truly most trusted member of this forum could act out and pull an OG move by adding the magic ~ before a few peoples names?

Annon001's opinion is worth more than yours QS, all you seem to do is come running when anyone points out absolutely anything controversial about your master OG..

it is obvious to anyone with an IQ of over 60 that OG is gaming the system here, but yet again you come in and attack and try to deflect the pertinent issue

I hear that SaltySpitoon fella is pretty solid as well  but joking aside, the quality of a person's feedback and the users it is from are more important than some numerical score. Having a +10 from Theymos is probably more telling than +100 from 10 random people. At a certain point, I really don't think the number matters all that much.

It is an interesting metric, but there are a lot of reasons why you can't necessarily draw conclusions from this alone. For example, each person's marketplace presence. Phillipma has a pretty large presence in the computer hardware section (if I'm not mistaken, I'm not looking up post history now, just recalling this from memory), Ognasty and Blazed in the Collectibles sections, myself in the Goods/Collectibles sections, and the others not as much. The 15-20% that you are calling normal seems to be about the standard for those not as heavily involved in the marketplace sections, so what does that mean about people who are getting tons of feedback for trades they are doing?

As you said in your OP, there is also some consideration to the nature of how a relationship starts. I have a couple of people on my trust list that I would never have known had I not traded with them, so to a certain extent its inevitable. The real metric for who you should trust to add to your trust list, are people that you believe will leave accurate feedback for others and act fairly.

And finally, usergroups kind of just establish themselves in boards where people frequent. The Alt coin sections have pump/dump groups, the ICO hunter groups, etc. Another example is the weird cult of people that have established themselves in the collectibles section. If you find yourself in one of those groups, by interacting with them, you'll probably find people you trust to add to your trust list. More so than just following the posts of a user you agree with in the speculation section. If that group was formed in a section that facilitates trades, your % I'd imagine would get higher.

Phillipma is indeed a large outlier, but this thread serves as the smoke to warrant further investigation, not necessarily something to draw conclusions from. I'm really tired so ignore the spelling and grammar mistakes, I write walls of text and proofreading is more than I'm up to right now.

It was left after. I added you on July 11 2017.