Bitcointalk.org = Bitcoin version of Alibaba

[Morpheus21]

I guess its how i was raised. If there is a problem, find a solution.

Yeah... alibaba and is 40  scammer and more

a solution can be found, BTC weight 10 000 000 000 $  and the same weight in fu+++++  Scam.

I never thinking about a solution but  i'm agree Modérator of bitcointalk could do something 
People are stupid but it's not a reason; Everyone want a piece of big BTC cake and when the scam is clean a lot of serious man, broke her head   

[mprep]

This is a libertarian type forum. The main idea of it's management is the least possible interaction in other's people affairs. So get used to it.

But that doesn't have to mean complete lawlessness.

Here where the decentralization aspect comes in - the community should cope with and police it by themselves.

I wonder if one of the escrow guys would ever concider starting a full fledged bitcoin escrow website? You would enter the specific details of each transaction into a webpage. it then gives you a quote and you can then submit it so an email gets sent out to the buyer/seller to which they can commit to the transaction after signing up. Everytime the transaction is updated with shipping or tracking info it is automatically emailed to all 3 members of the transaction. Is there such a thing? 

Yeah, there are automated escrows provided by reputable members. Can't really name them now but I've seen a few around here.

[hilariousandco]

This is a libertarian type forum. The main idea of it's management is the least possible interaction in other's people affairs. So get used to it.

But that doesn't have to mean complete lawlessness.

Here where the decentralization aspect comes in - the community should cope with and police it by themselves.

True and I agree, but as with 'policing' disputes etc, this also sometimes doesn't work out or isn't enough.

[mprep]

This is a libertarian type forum. The main idea of it's management is the least possible interaction in other's people affairs. So get used to it.

But that doesn't have to mean complete lawlessness.

Here where the decentralization aspect comes in - the community should cope with and police it by themselves.

True and I agree, but as with 'policing' disputes etc, this also sometimes doesn't work out or isn't enough.

Why? Angry mobs usually make sure of punishment.

[saif92]

This is a libertarian type forum. The main idea of it's management is the least possible interaction in other's people affairs. So get used to it.

But that doesn't have to mean complete lawlessness.

yes we need some laws and stick moderation to stop many scams happening in last few days

[hilariousandco]

This is a libertarian type forum. The main idea of it's management is the least possible interaction in other's people affairs. So get used to it.

But that doesn't have to mean complete lawlessness.

Here where the decentralization aspect comes in - the community should cope with and police it by themselves.

True and I agree, but as with 'policing' disputes etc, this also sometimes doesn't work out or isn't enough.

Why? Angry mobs usually make sure of punishment.

Vigilante mobs also often end up attacking the wrong person.

[mprep]

This is a libertarian type forum. The main idea of it's management is the least possible interaction in other's people affairs. So get used to it.

But that doesn't have to mean complete lawlessness.

Here where the decentralization aspect comes in - the community should cope with and police it by themselves.

True and I agree, but as with 'policing' disputes etc, this also sometimes doesn't work out or isn't enough.

Why? Angry mobs usually make sure of punishment.

Vigilante mobs also often end up attacking the wrong person.

Governments often make mistakes as well and they can "make mistakes" for people who don't like them.

[hilariousandco]

This is a libertarian type forum. The main idea of it's management is the least possible interaction in other's people affairs. So get used to it.

But that doesn't have to mean complete lawlessness.

Here where the decentralization aspect comes in - the community should cope with and police it by themselves.

True and I agree, but as with 'policing' disputes etc, this also sometimes doesn't work out or isn't enough.

Why? Angry mobs usually make sure of punishment.

Vigilante mobs also often end up attacking the wrong person.

Governments often make mistakes as well and they can "make mistakes" for people who don't like them.

True, but again I refer you my post above, but no system is perfect.

[mprep]

This is a libertarian type forum. The main idea of it's management is the least possible interaction in other's people affairs. So get used to it.

But that doesn't have to mean complete lawlessness.

Here where the decentralization aspect comes in - the community should cope with and police it by themselves.

True and I agree, but as with 'policing' disputes etc, this also sometimes doesn't work out or isn't enough.

Why? Angry mobs usually make sure of punishment.

Vigilante mobs also often end up attacking the wrong person.

Governments often make mistakes as well and they can "make mistakes" for people who don't like them.

True, but again I refer you my post above, but no system is perfect.

Well, if no system is perfect then why not leave it without any system like now?

[saif92]

This is a libertarian type forum. The main idea of it's management is the least possible interaction in other's people affairs. So get used to it.

But that doesn't have to mean complete lawlessness.

Here where the decentralization aspect comes in - the community should cope with and police it by themselves.

True and I agree, but as with 'policing' disputes etc, this also sometimes doesn't work out or isn't enough.

Why? Angry mobs usually make sure of punishment.

Vigilante mobs also often end up attacking the wrong person.

Governments often make mistakes as well and they can "make mistakes" for people who don't like them.

True, but again I refer you my post above, but no system is perfect.

Well, if no system is perfect then why not leave it without any system like now?

its one of best suggestions here we have to leave this without any policy and enjoy this

[hilariousandco]

This is a libertarian type forum. The main idea of it's management is the least possible interaction in other's people affairs. So get used to it.

But that doesn't have to mean complete lawlessness.

Here where the decentralization aspect comes in - the community should cope with and police it by themselves.

True and I agree, but as with 'policing' disputes etc, this also sometimes doesn't work out or isn't enough.

Why? Angry mobs usually make sure of punishment.

Vigilante mobs also often end up attacking the wrong person.

Governments often make mistakes as well and they can "make mistakes" for people who don't like them.

True, but again I refer you my post above, but no system is perfect.

Well, if no system is perfect then why not leave it without any system like now?

its one of best suggestions here we have to leave this without any policy and enjoy this

Really? Complete lawlessness?  Just people scamming and spamming left right and centre? I'm a Libertarian Socialist (some may say that's Anarchism), but I don't believe in this sort of anarchy.

[BadBear]

yes we need some laws and stick moderation to stop many scams happening in last few days

No we don't need laws and more moderation to stop scams, people need to stop being greedy and start taking responsibility for their actions. Banning doesn't help, ips are easy to change, so are emails, and accounts are free to create. People are too used to others saving them from their own stupidity.

[mprep]

This is a libertarian type forum. The main idea of it's management is the least possible interaction in other's people affairs. So get used to it.

But that doesn't have to mean complete lawlessness.

Here where the decentralization aspect comes in - the community should cope with and police it by themselves.

True and I agree, but as with 'policing' disputes etc, this also sometimes doesn't work out or isn't enough.

Why? Angry mobs usually make sure of punishment.

Vigilante mobs also often end up attacking the wrong person.

Governments often make mistakes as well and they can "make mistakes" for people who don't like them.

True, but again I refer you my post above, but no system is perfect.

Well, if no system is perfect then why not leave it without any system like now?

its one of best suggestions here we have to leave this without any policy and enjoy this

Really? Complete lawlessness?  Just people scamming and spamming left right and centre? I'm a Libertarian Socialist (some may say that's Anarchism), but I don't believe in this sort of anarchy.

Not complete lawlesness, the community members deal with scammers. That's why the trust rating exists.

[hilariousandco]

This is a libertarian type forum. The main idea of it's management is the least possible interaction in other's people affairs. So get used to it.

But that doesn't have to mean complete lawlessness.

Here where the decentralization aspect comes in - the community should cope with and police it by themselves.

True and I agree, but as with 'policing' disputes etc, this also sometimes doesn't work out or isn't enough.

Why? Angry mobs usually make sure of punishment.

Vigilante mobs also often end up attacking the wrong person.

Governments often make mistakes as well and they can "make mistakes" for people who don't like them.

True, but again I refer you my post above, but no system is perfect.

Well, if no system is perfect then why not leave it without any system like now?

its one of best suggestions here we have to leave this without any policy and enjoy this

Really? Complete lawlessness?  Just people scamming and spamming left right and centre? I'm a Libertarian Socialist (some may say that's Anarchism), but I don't believe in this sort of anarchy.

Not complete lawlesness, the community members deal with scammers. That's why the trust rating exists.

But the trust system is easily abused. Those who are on the Default Trust have all the power. We could leave each other negative feedback now and it wouldn’t show up as red, yet another 'Trusted' member could leave us bad feedback and then we both look like scammers. We and ten others could leave a blatant scammer feedback and that wouldn't show up unless people actually clicked on his trust, so it's a flawed system.

[mprep]

This is a libertarian type forum. The main idea of it's management is the least possible interaction in other's people affairs. So get used to it.

But that doesn't have to mean complete lawlessness.

Here where the decentralization aspect comes in - the community should cope with and police it by themselves.

True and I agree, but as with 'policing' disputes etc, this also sometimes doesn't work out or isn't enough.

Why? Angry mobs usually make sure of punishment.

Vigilante mobs also often end up attacking the wrong person.

Governments often make mistakes as well and they can "make mistakes" for people who don't like them.

True, but again I refer you my post above, but no system is perfect.

Well, if no system is perfect then why not leave it without any system like now?

its one of best suggestions here we have to leave this without any policy and enjoy this

Really? Complete lawlessness?  Just people scamming and spamming left right and centre? I'm a Libertarian Socialist (some may say that's Anarchism), but I don't believe in this sort of anarchy.

Not complete lawlesness, the community members deal with scammers. That's why the trust rating exists.

But the trust system is easily abused. Those who are on the Default Trust have all the power. We could leave each other negative feedback now and it wouldn’t show up as red, yet another 'Trusted' member could leave us bad feedback and then we both look like scammers. We and ten others could leave a blatant scammer feedback and that wouldn't show up unless people actually clicked on his trust, so it's a flawed system.

Maybe, but if the mods banned users wouldn't they be those who "have all the power"?
In the moderator policing the forums case, theymos controls who he wants to asign and you can't do crap, in the trust rating situation, theymos asigns who he wants in the DefaultTrust however you can change it to what you want. Besides what kind of idiot doesn't check out all the trust ratings before doing a trade with that person?

[hilariousandco]

Maybe, but if the mods banned users wouldn't they be those who "have all the power"?
In the moderator policing the forums case, theymos controls who he wants to asign and you can't do crap, in the trust rating situation, theymos asigns who he wants in the DefaultTrust however you can change it to what you want. Besides what kind of idiot doesn't check out all the trust ratings before doing a trade with that person?

The kind of idiots that get scammed on here daily  . And the opposite is also abused. A scammer can make a few accounts, give himself feedback from 5 of them so he looks legit, then scams anybody who trusts him. No system is perfect, but putting trust in this trust system is where people fall down as it gives them a false sense of security.

[mprep]

Maybe, but if the mods banned users wouldn't they be those who "have all the power"?
In the moderator policing the forums case, theymos controls who he wants to asign and you can't do crap, in the trust rating situation, theymos asigns who he wants in the DefaultTrust however you can change it to what you want. Besides what kind of idiot doesn't check out all the trust ratings before doing a trade with that person?

The kind of idiots that get scammed on here daily  . And the opposite is also abused. A scammer can make a few accounts, give himself feedback from 5 of them so he looks legit, then scams anybody who trusts him. No system is perfect, but putting trust in this trust system is where people fall down as it gives them a false sense of security.

Welcome to the jungle. Smart people win, dumb people lose. The system is definitely better than the high probability of turning the centralized system into a tyranny.

[hilariousandco]

Maybe, but if the mods banned users wouldn't they be those who "have all the power"?
In the moderator policing the forums case, theymos controls who he wants to asign and you can't do crap, in the trust rating situation, theymos asigns who he wants in the DefaultTrust however you can change it to what you want. Besides what kind of idiot doesn't check out all the trust ratings before doing a trade with that person?

The kind of idiots that get scammed on here daily  . And the opposite is also abused. A scammer can make a few accounts, give himself feedback from 5 of them so he looks legit, then scams anybody who trusts him. No system is perfect, but putting trust in this trust system is where people fall down as it gives them a false sense of security.

Welcome to the jungle. Smart people win, dumb people lose. The system is definitely better than the high probability of turning the centralized system into a tyranny.

It doesn't have to be one or the other and especially Tyranny vs Complete Lawless Anarchy where anything goes and every man for himself. A middle ground needs to be achieved (or at least attempted).

[mprep]

Maybe, but if the mods banned users wouldn't they be those who "have all the power"?
In the moderator policing the forums case, theymos controls who he wants to asign and you can't do crap, in the trust rating situation, theymos asigns who he wants in the DefaultTrust however you can change it to what you want. Besides what kind of idiot doesn't check out all the trust ratings before doing a trade with that person?

The kind of idiots that get scammed on here daily  . And the opposite is also abused. A scammer can make a few accounts, give himself feedback from 5 of them so he looks legit, then scams anybody who trusts him. No system is perfect, but putting trust in this trust system is where people fall down as it gives them a false sense of security.

Welcome to the jungle. Smart people win, dumb people lose. The system is definitely better than the high probability of turning the centralized system into a tyranny.

It doesn't have to be one or the other and especially Tyranny vs Complete Lawless Anarchy where anything goes and every man for himself. A middle ground needs to be achieved (or at least attempted).

And that it is. Trust rating system, theymos' DefaultTrust, Scam accusation forums and of course your brain.

[hilariousandco]

Maybe, but if the mods banned users wouldn't they be those who "have all the power"?
In the moderator policing the forums case, theymos controls who he wants to asign and you can't do crap, in the trust rating situation, theymos asigns who he wants in the DefaultTrust however you can change it to what you want. Besides what kind of idiot doesn't check out all the trust ratings before doing a trade with that person?

The kind of idiots that get scammed on here daily  . And the opposite is also abused. A scammer can make a few accounts, give himself feedback from 5 of them so he looks legit, then scams anybody who trusts him. No system is perfect, but putting trust in this trust system is where people fall down as it gives them a false sense of security.

Welcome to the jungle. Smart people win, dumb people lose. The system is definitely better than the high probability of turning the centralized system into a tyranny.

It doesn't have to be one or the other and especially Tyranny vs Complete Lawless Anarchy where anything goes and every man for himself. A middle ground needs to be achieved (or at least attempted).

And that it is. Trust rating system, theymos' DefaultTrust, Scam accusation forums and of course your brain.

But a trust system that doesn't really work that well or is open to abuse isn't such a great middle ground and gives a false sense of security to those who are not in the know. Scam Accusations don't really matter because those are after the scams have been perpetrated and the scammers are long gone. And obviously most people who do get scammed don't use their brain.