Bitcoin Forum
September 24, 2018, 12:49:19 PM *
News: ♦♦ New info! Bitcoin Core users absolutely must upgrade to previously-announced 0.16.3 [Torrent]. All Bitcoin users should temporarily trust confirmations slightly less. More info.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: RED Trust...is it enough for fraudulent work ???  (Read 1021 times)
TalkStar
Copper Member
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 80
Merit: 18


View Profile
August 11, 2018, 10:20:03 AM
 #1

Dear respectable members,
As an forum member i wanna put an question to Everyone.
My question is:

When any Person of this forum get connected with any fraudulent work or supporting any kinda work which is really harmful for rest of us and investor.Is it the only punishment to give him red trust. we have seen from past record many well reputed members of this forum support fraud ICO, scam Shit Exchange, Fraud projects which are nothing but scam. But as a result we also observe that our DT members are taking action by giving RED TRUST to them. after spending some time they get back to their work again. yeah i know someone can rise a question that if anyone see red trust and although he or she make payment or deal with him whats the responsibility of us then, but as a bitcointalk forum member its our duty to ensure a safe environment here for our upcoming generation. Just only giving RED TRUST is not enough. we need to take much harder action. if we look 1 years back in this forum members profile you can see many trusted members already got RED TRUST . If someone experienced and well reputed members like them engaged in this kinda scam or fraudulent activities what we will learn from them.

My request to all respective DT members to think again on this rising issue and update the rules by which bitcointalk forum will regain its fame

Lets work together to make bitcointalk scam free
1537793360
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1537793360

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1537793360
Reply with quote  #2

1537793360
Report to moderator
1537793360
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1537793360

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1537793360
Reply with quote  #2

1537793360
Report to moderator
Make a difference with your Ether.
Donate Ether for the greater good.
SPRING.WETRUST.IO
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1537793360
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1537793360

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1537793360
Reply with quote  #2

1537793360
Report to moderator
1537793360
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1537793360

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1537793360
Reply with quote  #2

1537793360
Report to moderator
mdayonliner
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 294
Merit: 280


Over 13BTC http://bit.ly/BTCLoan


View Profile
August 11, 2018, 10:31:47 AM
 #2

As long as you have trust on the DTs judgement, I think red trust should work. Question is/are...

Do we really blindly trust the DTs red trusts?
Have they positioned themselves much higher that no one will questions their red trust? Not from the fear but from the basic moral.
Do they take enough time before leaving a red trust? A wrong red trust left by them can harm the user in many ways.
Do they give the other person enough time to explain? People have reasons for the acts they do. They have the rights to explain.
If they make mistake on leaving a red trust do they consider a review standing from a neutral point and compromise their ego?


There could be so many parameters to judge the DTs red trust and if you are satisfied and confident with the red trusts they leave then only a red trust should work.


       █
      ██
     ██
   ██ ██
 █ ██ ██
██ ██ ██
██ ██ ██
██ ██ ██
██ ██ ██
██ ██ ██
   
       █
      ██
     ██
   ██ ██
 █ ██ ██
██ ██ ██
██ ██ ██
██ ██ ██
██ ██ ██
██ ██ ██
  B

          ▄▄▄▄▄▄
     ▄▄████████████▄▄
   ▄█████▀▀    ▀▀█████▄
  ████▀            ▀████
 ████                ████
▐███                  ███▌
███▌                  ▐███
▐███           ▄▄     ███▌
 ████         ▀███▄  ▐███
  ████▄         ▀███▄███
   ▀█████▄▄     ▄█████▀
     ▀▀████████████▀▀
          ▀▀▀▀▀▀
T 
Better. Quick.

Transparent.






             ▄████▄▄   ▄
█▄          ██████████▀▄
███        ███████████▀
▐████▄     ██████████▌
▄▄██████▄▄▄▄█████████▌
▀████████████████████
  ▀█████████████████
  ▄▄███████████████
   ▀█████████████▀
    ▄▄█████████▀
▀▀██████████▀
    ▀▀▀▀▀






▄█████████████████████████▄
███████████████████████████
███████████████▀       ████
██████████████      ▄▄▄████
██████████████    ▐████████
██████████████    ▐████████
██████████            ▐████
██████████            █████
██████████████    ▐████████
██████████████    ▐████████
██████████████    ▐████████
▀█████████████    ▐███████▀






                   ▄▄████
              ▄▄████████▌
         ▄▄█████████▀███
    ▄▄██████████▀▀ ▄███▌
▄████████████▀▀  ▄█████
▀▀▀███████▀   ▄███████▌
      ██    ▄█████████
       █  ▄██████████▌
       █  ███████████
       █ ██▀ ▀██████▌
       ██▀     ▀████
                 ▀█▌
TalkStar
Copper Member
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 80
Merit: 18


View Profile
August 11, 2018, 10:41:43 AM
 #3

As long as you have trust on the DTs judgement, I think red trust should work. Question is/are...

Do we really blindly trust the DTs red trusts?
Have they positioned themselves much higher that no one will questions their red trust? Not from the fear but from the basic moral.
Do they take enough time before leaving a red trust? A wrong red trust left by them can harm the user in many ways.
Do they give the other person enough time to explain? People have reasons for the acts they do. They have the right to explain.
If they make mistake on leaving a red trust do they consider a review standing on a neutral point?


There could be so many parameters to judge the DTs red trust and if you are satisfied and confident with the red trusts they leave then only a red trust should work.
Before giving RED TRUST to anyone i think DT members obviously investigate properly.but my question is isn't it alarming when we see someone have 1000 merits but got red trust. This kind of profile spoils our forum fame.

Lets work together to make bitcointalk scam free
mdayonliner
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 294
Merit: 280


Over 13BTC http://bit.ly/BTCLoan


View Profile
August 11, 2018, 10:49:36 AM
 #4

isn't it alarming when we see someone have 1000 merits but got red trust. This kind of profile spoils our forum fame.
If you break forum rules then you should get warned (red tag) it does not matter if you have 1000 merits or you are a legendary member or even admin. Rules are rules. However, a defaulter should have enough rights to explain his reasons. If the reasons are not satisfactory then don't remove the red.

If someone do an on forum bad act (breaking rules) which is confirmed, then tag them but it's too much when you tag someone because you think this could lead to that. The experience you have had and the experience others have are not same besides just because you are a DT does not mean that you are a mind reader.

A confirmed rule breaker should defiantly get red tag, does not matter if he has 1000 merits and even a Legend. And in it I do not see any spoiling on the forum fame.


       █
      ██
     ██
   ██ ██
 █ ██ ██
██ ██ ██
██ ██ ██
██ ██ ██
██ ██ ██
██ ██ ██
   
       █
      ██
     ██
   ██ ██
 █ ██ ██
██ ██ ██
██ ██ ██
██ ██ ██
██ ██ ██
██ ██ ██
  B

          ▄▄▄▄▄▄
     ▄▄████████████▄▄
   ▄█████▀▀    ▀▀█████▄
  ████▀            ▀████
 ████                ████
▐███                  ███▌
███▌                  ▐███
▐███           ▄▄     ███▌
 ████         ▀███▄  ▐███
  ████▄         ▀███▄███
   ▀█████▄▄     ▄█████▀
     ▀▀████████████▀▀
          ▀▀▀▀▀▀
T 
Better. Quick.

Transparent.






             ▄████▄▄   ▄
█▄          ██████████▀▄
███        ███████████▀
▐████▄     ██████████▌
▄▄██████▄▄▄▄█████████▌
▀████████████████████
  ▀█████████████████
  ▄▄███████████████
   ▀█████████████▀
    ▄▄█████████▀
▀▀██████████▀
    ▀▀▀▀▀






▄█████████████████████████▄
███████████████████████████
███████████████▀       ████
██████████████      ▄▄▄████
██████████████    ▐████████
██████████████    ▐████████
██████████            ▐████
██████████            █████
██████████████    ▐████████
██████████████    ▐████████
██████████████    ▐████████
▀█████████████    ▐███████▀






                   ▄▄████
              ▄▄████████▌
         ▄▄█████████▀███
    ▄▄██████████▀▀ ▄███▌
▄████████████▀▀  ▄█████
▀▀▀███████▀   ▄███████▌
      ██    ▄█████████
       █  ▄██████████▌
       █  ███████████
       █ ██▀ ▀██████▌
       ██▀     ▀████
                 ▀█▌
vlad230
Full Member
***
Online Online

Activity: 280
Merit: 229


Vod's BTT Public Information Project - bpip.org


View Profile
August 11, 2018, 11:01:54 AM
 #5

The thing is trust is not moderated. Maybe if it will be in the future, we can talk about some "standards/guidelines" for it.

I have seen a lot of people getting red trust just as a precaution or for intent and not for the actual "bad deed". This is somewhat unfair and should be reconsidered.

Not to mention that there is a lot of red trust sent out regarding merit transactions that is irelevant for the purpose the trust system was created. Theymos himself said that you are welcome to top up anyone whom you think should rank up and I'm not sure why people care about merit that much to send red trust for it.

As OP said, I agree red trust isn't good enough to stop people from doing bad things and we may need to have better punishments for repeat offenders.

TalkStar
Copper Member
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 80
Merit: 18


View Profile
August 11, 2018, 11:06:25 AM
 #6

isn't it alarming when we see someone have 1000 merits but got red trust. This kind of profile spoils our forum fame.
If you break forum rules then you should get warned (red tag) it does not matter if you have 1000 merits or you are a legendary member or even admin. Rules are rules. However, a defaulter should have enough rights to explain his reasons. If the reasons are not satisfactory then don't remove the red.

If someone do an on forum bad act (breaking rules) which is confirmed, then tag them but it's too much when you tag someone because you think this could lead to that. The experience you have had and the experience others have are not same besides just because you are a DT does not mean that you are a mind reader.

A confirmed rule breaker should defiantly get red tag, does not matter if he has 1000 merits and even a Legend. And in it I do not see any spoiling on the forum fame.
yeah i am agree with your opinion. if something happens like that tag anyone because DT think he is going to lead to fraudulent . without enough proof or investigation its not fair to give anyone RED TRUST

Lets work together to make bitcointalk scam free
Thanasis
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1351
Merit: 505



View Profile
August 11, 2018, 02:35:33 PM
 #7

If someone dealing with the people who got negative trust for scam then they are responsible for what they were doing,the forum or DT member can't do anything for such a nonsense activity. Roll Eyes

        ▄▄███████████▄▄
     ▄██▀▀           ▀▀██▄
   ▄█▀   ▄▄█████████▄▄   ▀█▄
  █▀  ▄███████▌ █▌ █████▄  ▀█
 █▀  ██  ██         ▀█████  ▀█
▐█  ██▀▀█████   ▄▄▄   █████  █▌
█▌ ▐██▄▄████▌  ████   █████▌ ▐█
█  ███  ████        ▄███████  █
█▌ ▐█▀▀████▌   ▄▄▄  ▀██████▌ ▐█
▐█  █▄▄████   ████   ▐█████  █▌
 █▄  ████           ▄█████  ▄█
  █▄  ▀████  ███  ██████▀  ▄█
   ▀█▄   ▀▀█████████▀▀   ▄█▀
     ▀██▄▄           ▄▄██▀
        ▀▀███████████▀▀
bitcore.
...The Future Is Now...
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄    ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄     ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄

        ██
██████
        ██
        ██████
        ██
██████
        ██
        ██████
        ██
██████
                 ▄▄██
 ▄██████████████████████▄
█▀         ▄▄██▀▀   ██  ▀█
█▄     ▄▄██▀▀        ██  █
█▀█████████████████████████▄
█                          ▀█
█                           █
█              ▄████▄       █
█             ██▀  ▀██      █
█            ▐█▌    ▐████████
█             ██▄  ▄██      █
█              ▀████▀       █
█                           █
█▄                         ▄█
 ▀█████████████████████████▀
.
iOs
Android

        ██
        ██████
        ██
██████
        ██
        ██████
        ██
██████
        ██
        ██████


     ▄▄█████████▄▄
   ▄███▀▀     ▀▀███▄
  ███             ███
 ███               ███
▐██   ▐█▄   ▄███▄   ██▌
██▌    ███▄██████▀  ▐██
██▌    ▐████████    ▐██
▐██     ▐██████     ██▌
 ███   ▀█████▀     ███
  ███             ███
   ▀███▄▄     ▄▄███▀
     ▀▀█████████▀▀


     ▄▄█████████▄▄
   ▄███▀▀     ▀▀███▄
  ███             ███
 ███       ▄███    ███
▐██       █████     ██▌
██▌       ███       ▐██
██▌     ███████     ▐██
▐██       ███       ██▌
 ███      ███      ███
  ███             ███
   ▀███▄▄     ▄▄███▀
     ▀▀█████████▀▀


     ▄▄█████████▄▄
   ▄███▀▀     ▀▀███▄
  ███             ███
 ███         ▄▄█▌  ███
▐██      ▄▄█████    ██▌
██▌   ▄████████     ▐██
██▌  ▐████████      ▐██
▐██    ▀▀████       ██▌
 ███     ▀██       ███
  ███             ███
   ▀███▄▄     ▄▄███▀
     ▀▀█████████▀▀
Website
ANN
Block Explorer
TalkStar
Copper Member
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 80
Merit: 18


View Profile
August 11, 2018, 06:48:55 PM
 #8

If someone dealing with the people who got negative trust for scam then they are responsible for what they were doing,the forum or DT member can't do anything for such a nonsense activity. Roll Eyes
Obviously DT members are here to stop prohibited activity and what they do is only for the improvement of forum fame.

Lets work together to make bitcointalk scam free
Steamtyme
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Activity: 406
Merit: 348

Blokforge Affiliate- see profile


View Profile WWW
August 11, 2018, 07:07:13 PM
Merited by suchmoon (7)
 #9

OP, Avoid multiple posts in a row.


In this environment "Red Trust" is enough. Scams are not moderated here so this is an indication that individuals need to look into things a little more before proceeding in any deals.

*snip* if we look 1 years back in this forum members profile you can see many trusted members already got RED TRUST . If someone experienced and well reputed members like them engaged in this kinda scam or fraudulent activities what we will learn from them.

I'm pretty lost in what your point is here. Are you are referring to trusted members having red trust??  That can happen as retaliatory feedback; DT members can also receive negative from other DT members. Anyone can leave feedback and you can see it by looking beyond just the trusted feedback.

Obviously DT members are here to stop prohibited activity and what they do is only for the improvement of forum fame.

No they are here as a tool to provide some insight into the activities good or bad, based on their perception.


xtraelv
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 462
Merit: 739



View Profile
August 12, 2018, 05:03:58 AM
Merited by iasenko (1), DdmrDdmr (1)
 #10

Before giving RED TRUST to anyone i think DT members obviously investigate properly.but my question is isn't it alarming when we see someone have 1000 merits but got red trust. This kind of profile spoils our forum fame.

Not really. For a start a lot of legendary accounts already have 1000 merit automatically from the merit that was provided to them automatically when the merit system was introduced.  Merit is for post quality and not for trust.

I have merited some users with negative trust because their post was good - sometimes their post was brilliant and very useful.

Trust is based on opinion - so the person placing it feels there is a reason to warn others.

I use a modified trust list to include people I know and trust and exclude people I don't trust.

Negative trust does not necessarily mean that the person is a "written off" in all aspects. This is why it is really important to place a reference link and clear explanation why the rating has been given. (Same applies for positive trust)

Anyone can provide trust or negative trust and people on the DT list is not directly controlled by the forum. They are "independent agents".

Some scams are clearly defined while others are more subjective. For instance - if a business fails due to no illegal activity of the member. Is it a scam because people lost funds - or is it not a scam because no illegal activity was involved ?

Things that can get people negative trust from a DT are:
Attempted or successful fraud or theft.
Business activity that resulted in the loss of funds by others.
Account sales
Merit sales / swapping
Harassing a DT
Offering escrow without a track record
Asking for a no collateral loan
Shilling / advertising MLM or ponzi
Escrowing for themselves
Late loan repayments / loan defaults.
Any other untrustworthy or illegal behavior.

Saying "I don't trust you" is subjective. It doesn't mean there has been a judicial process that has found the person to be guilty of a crime.

Sometimes minor dishonesty is a sign of more less obvious stuff. Like Al Capone who was convicted on tax evasion.

Also just because a person has done something in the past (history is something that we rely on to identify patterns of behavior) it doesn't mean that they will repeat their mistake or haven't reformed.  

Some historical scams and failures have also been very good learning processes for the Crypto community.
Some of it resulted in Terms like:
"To get Goxed" Definition: To suffer from mt. gox’s technical glitches; to get screwed over by mt. gox; to lose all your money in a speculative investment .
"To take a Big Vern holiday" Definition: To disappear like Paul Vernon - the owner and CEO of the now defunct Cryptsy who "vanished" like the exchange funds. (Also referred to as an "exit scam".
"To receive a (Butterfly Labs) BFL upgrade" Definition: To receive something substandard much later than promised.
"To buy a Yesminer" Definition: To pay for something and never receive it.

There was a thread about why scams are not moderated and it has good reasons:

What is a scam and who decides it is a scam ?

Some scams are obvious but others are not. Once you start moderating scams it can quickly become extremely complex.

Some people call bitcoin a scam. Some people call bcash a scam - some people call it bitcoin cash.

Some people call Ripple a scam. Where do you draw the line ?

Cloud-mining contracts ? Short term mining contracts ? HYIP ? Pump and dump groups ? Crypto exchanges ? Tax collectors ?

The trust system - while not perfect - works fine in identifying and warning people of potential issues and scams.

The reality is that people need to educate themselves on how to spot scams, keep their crypto safe, use escrow and do their own research.


If Theymos wanted to, he could come up with a list of things that are and aren't acceptable.  It might not be easy, and it might not please everyone, but he could do it instead of doing nothing.  I mean, that's what laws are--they're written rules describing behavior that isn't acceptable.  Lawmakers don't throw up their hands at the complexity of the legal system and decide to not prohibit certain things as a result.

Once you start censorship it opens up a whole new can of worms.

If you censor some scams but not others it can provide a false sense of security.

Banning copy-pasting is not censoring because they have nothing unique to say.

It is also a matter of "proof" and "liability". Copy-pasting when caught is fairly clear cut.

Once you start censoring scams you are accepting some sort of responsibility for the safety of the users.

The whole bitcoin thing came from the Cypherpunk movement - which tends to have a free speech and libertarian viewpoint on life.

Once you start censoring it very quickly turns into over-reach.

The reality is that most users that get banned probably re-incarnate as another account anyway.

A known & tagged scammer is better than an unknown & untagged scammer.

Lawmakers often over-reach. The powers they give their "henchmen" often affect ordinary citizens. (I'm not only talking of developed democratic countries)

To make something illegal - lawmakers only have to declare it to be illegal. Lawmakers only pursue "crime" if it is in their self interest.


The average CEO salary is more than 531 times that of the average hourly worker.
Politicians get a regular pay rise  -but for other Government workers it is "not affordable".
Some wealthy executives pay less tax than a laborer.
Some drugs with minimal risk are illegal - while other drugs with high risks can be prescribed by your doctor.
Euthanasia, and suicide are illegal in most countries - but the death penalty or "shooting by police" is not illegal in some of those countries.
Some large corporations pay no taxes without breaking the law.
Some legal action can leave an innocent person broke.


We are surrounded by legends on this forum. Phenomenal successes and catastrophic failures. Then there are the scams. This forum is a digital museum.  
* The most iconic historic bitcointalk threads.* Satoshi * Cypherpunks*MtGox*Bitcointalk hacks*pHiShInG* Silk Road*Pirateat40*Knightmb*Miner shams*Forum scandals*BBCode*
TalkStar
Copper Member
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 80
Merit: 18


View Profile
August 12, 2018, 05:12:55 AM
 #11

Before giving RED TRUST to anyone i think DT members obviously investigate properly.but my question is isn't it alarming when we see someone have 1000 merits but got red trust. This kind of profile spoils our forum fame.

Not really. For a start a lot of legendary accounts already have 1000 merit automatically from the merit that was provided to them automatically when the merit system was introduced.  Merit is for post quality and not for trust.

I have merited some users with negative trust because their post was good - sometimes their post was brilliant and very useful.

Trust is based on opinion - so the person placing it feels there is a reason to warn others.

I use a modified trust list to include people I know and trust and exclude people I don't trust.

Negative trust does not necessarily mean that the person is a "written off" in all aspects. This is why it is really important to place a reference link and clear explanation why the rating has been given. (Same applies for positive trust)

Anyone can provide trust or negative trust and people on the DT list is not directly controlled by the forum. They are "independent agents".

Some scams are clearly defined while others are more subjective. For instance - if a business fails due to no illegal activity of the member. Is it a scam because people lost funds - or is it not a scam because no illegal activity was involved ?

Things that can get people negative trust from a DT are:
Attempted or successful fraud or theft.
Business activity that resulted in the loss of funds by others.
Account sales
Merit sales / swapping
Harassing a DT
Offering escrow without a track record
Asking for a no collateral loan
Shilling / advertising MLM or ponzi
Escrowing for themselves
Late loan repayments / loan defaults.
Any other untrustworthy or illegal behavior.

Saying "I don't trust you" is subjective. It doesn't mean there has been a judicial process that has found the person to be guilty of a crime.

Also just because a person has done something in the past (history is something that we rely on to identify patterns of behavior) it doesn't mean that they will repeat their mistake or haven't reformed.  

Some historical scams and failures have also been very good learning processes for the Crypto community.
Some of it resulted in Terms like:
"To get Goxed" Definition: To suffer from mt. gox’s technical glitches; to get screwed over by mt. gox; to lose all your money in a speculative investment .
"To take a Big Vern holiday" Definition: To disappear like Paul Vernon - the owner and CEO of the now defunct Cryptsy who "vanished" like the exchange funds. (Also referred to as an "exit scam".
"To receive a (Butterfly Labs) BFL upgrade" Definition: To receive something substandard much later than promised.
"To buy a Yesminer" Definition: To pay for something and never receive it.

There was a thread about why scams are not moderated and it has good reasons:

What is a scam and who decides it is a scam ?

Some scams are obvious but others are not. Once you start moderating scams it can quickly become extremely complex.

Some people call bitcoin a scam. Some people call bcash a scam - some people call it bitcoin cash.

Some people call Ripple a scam. Where do you draw the line ?

Cloud-mining contracts ? Short term mining contracts ? HYIP ? Pump and dump groups ? Crypto exchanges ? Tax collectors ?

The trust system - while not perfect - works fine in identifying and warning people of potential issues and scams.

The reality is that people need to educate themselves on how to spot scams, keep their crypto safe, use escrow and do their own research.


If Theymos wanted to, he could come up with a list of things that are and aren't acceptable.  It might not be easy, and it might not please everyone, but he could do it instead of doing nothing.  I mean, that's what laws are--they're written rules describing behavior that isn't acceptable.  Lawmakers don't throw up their hands at the complexity of the legal system and decide to not prohibit certain things as a result.

Once you start censorship it opens up a whole new can of worms.

If you censor some scams but not others it can provide a false sense of security.

Banning copy-pasting is not censoring because they have nothing unique to say.

It is also a matter of "proof" and "liability". Copy-pasting when caught is fairly clear cut.

Once you start censoring scams you are accepting some sort of responsibility for the safety of the users.

The whole bitcoin thing came from the Cypherpunk movement - which tends to have a free speech and libertarian viewpoint on life.

Once you start censoring it very quickly turns into over-reach.

The reality is that most users that get banned probably re-incarnate as another account anyway.

A known & tagged scammer is better than an unknown & untagged scammer.

Lawmakers often over-reach. The powers they give their "henchmen" often affect ordinary citizens. (I'm not only talking of developed democratic countries)

To make something illegal - lawmakers only have to declare it to be illegal. Lawmakers only pursue "crime" if it is in their self interest.


The average CEO salary is more than 531 times that of the average hourly worker.
Politicians get a regular pay rise  -but for other Government workers it is "not affordable".
Some wealthy executives pay less tax than a laborer.
Some drugs with minimal risk are illegal - while other drugs with high risks can be prescribed by your doctor.
Euthanasia, and suicide are illegal in most countries - but the death penalty or "shooting by police" is not illegal in some of those countries.
Some large corporations pay no taxes without breaking the law.
Some legal action can leave an innocent person broke.

Thanks a lot for sharing important knowledges. Its really important to put our attention to scam but in a positive way. A forum is a place of sharing and gathering knowledges.

Lets work together to make bitcointalk scam free
The Pharmacist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1274
Merit: 1698



View Profile
August 12, 2018, 05:16:29 AM
Merited by Steamtyme (1)
 #12

Obviously DT members are here to stop prohibited activity and what they do is only for the improvement of forum fame.
Not necessarily.  There are a lot of members on DT who do nothing to actively stop scams.  Take a good look at who's on DT1 & DT2, and you'll see a lot of them aren't even here all that much.  There really aren't that many members tagging scammers, and it's not our job to do that.  I do it because I think it's a good use of the weight of trust that a DT member can leave, and if DT members weren't tagging them we'd have total anarchy on bitcointalk.

Having said that, I got put on DT2 because I was tagging shitposters (I don't do this anymore) and account-selling scammy folks (I still do this).  But I think a lot of DT members are made simply because someone higher in the hierarchy trusts them--and that's completely valid IMO.

we have seen from past record many well reputed members of this forum support fraud ICO, scam Shit Exchange, Fraud projects which are nothing but scam.
I'd be interested to know who you're talking about here.  I don't dispute that this has happened, because in my time on the forum I've seen members kicked off DT for all sorts of shenanigans.  Quickseller, Master-P, and TECSHARE are two that immediately come to mind, but there are more.  aTriz wasn't on DT, but he was probably close to getting on it and he was a good campaign manager who ruined his reputation by not calling out a scam soon enough.  I'm curious as to who you are referring to, however.

I have merited some users with negative trust because their post was good - sometimes their post was brilliant and very useful.
I have too.  Mdayonliner is one member who comes to mind, although his negative trust was recently acquired because he offered to escrow a huge sum of money.  It isn't obvious that he was trying to scam, but I certainly see how it could be suspicious.  Can't bring myself to merit people like QS, though.  Even though his posts are very well written and can be helpful, it drives me bonkers to read them because I know they're rooted in total hypocrisy.  Also I have a custom trust list and I'm sure I've merited some folks whose trust would be negative on a lot of other member's trust display.

I got aTriz showing as having been on DT2
Huh.  Well, that just shows you how unfortunate that situation was.  He obviously could be trusted with money, since he held the funds for his sig campaigns, and he always paid on time.  It's too bad, but I hope he continues paying people back--not sure where he stands on that right now, but it did look like he was trying to recently.

And yeah...escrow.ms.  I was trying to think of that name and couldn't recall it.  That just goes to show you how fragile DT membership is.  You screw up and you're gone.  TECSHARE didn't even scam anyone.  He was booted off DT for misusing the trust system if I recall correctly.  I think he's a total asshole, but I'd still do business with him because by all accounts he's a trustworthy businessman.  Not going to happen, because he has the same opinion of me, but I'm just sayin'.

xtraelv
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 462
Merit: 739



View Profile
August 12, 2018, 06:02:50 AM
Merited by The Pharmacist (1), iasenko (1)
 #13

I'd be interested to know who you're talking about here.  I don't dispute that this has happened, because in my time on the forum I've seen members kicked off DT for all sorts of shenanigans.  Quickseller, Master-P, and TECSHARE are two that immediately come to mind, but there are more.  aTriz wasn't on DT, but he was probably close to getting on it and he was a good campaign manager who ruined his reputation by not calling out a scam soon enough.  I'm curious as to who you are referring to, however.


I got aTriz showing as being on DT2 (I temporarily disabled my custom list)



I'm not sure of who the OP was referring to but I can think of a few.

Escrow.ms
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=76380 escrow.ms
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1359865.0 (arrested for fraud)

Tradefortress of CoinLenders and Inputs.io,
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=67058

Siameze (sold account used for dodgy ICO)
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=121562

Blackarrow
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=105804
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1125552.0

The problem is that even though these people ended up having issues and scam accusations against them their prior contributions should not be ignored. That is what got them to that stage in the first place.

Businesses do fail - crypto was high risk and still is high risk.

Some of it I covered here:
Bitcointalk trolls, dysfunction and all out flame wars. Guide to the scandals.

Senior members are still people. Fortunately a lot of scammers are discovered before they reach to that level.

We are surrounded by legends on this forum. Phenomenal successes and catastrophic failures. Then there are the scams. This forum is a digital museum.  
* The most iconic historic bitcointalk threads.* Satoshi * Cypherpunks*MtGox*Bitcointalk hacks*pHiShInG* Silk Road*Pirateat40*Knightmb*Miner shams*Forum scandals*BBCode*
TalkStar
Copper Member
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 80
Merit: 18


View Profile
August 12, 2018, 01:03:16 PM
 #14

Obviously DT members are here to stop prohibited activity and what they do is only for the improvement of forum fame.
Not necessarily.  There are a lot of members on DT who do nothing to actively stop scams.  Take a good look at who's on DT1 & DT2, and you'll see a lot of them aren't even here all that much.  There really aren't that many members tagging scammers, and it's not our job to do that.  I do it because I think it's a good use of the weight of trust that a DT member can leave, and if DT members weren't tagging them we'd have total anarchy on bitcointalk.

Having said that, I got put on DT2 because I was tagging shitposters (I don't do this anymore) and account-selling scammy folks (I still do this).  But I think a lot of DT members are made simply because someone higher in the hierarchy trusts them--and that's completely valid IMO.
Thanks for sharing expand knowledge. its really helpful for forum members like us.I know as a DT member you have got strict rules and honestly I feel good to see that. We want to create our position here by our hard work & creativity. We just need proper guidense from someone one like you.Thanks again

Lets work together to make bitcointalk scam free
Steamtyme
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Activity: 406
Merit: 348

Blokforge Affiliate- see profile


View Profile WWW
August 12, 2018, 09:33:25 PM
 #15

Well OP you inspired me to update my topic regarding posting Tips, reading this may assist you in the future.

Go to this post of yours and remove the entire quote as it's massively long and unnecessary to your reply.



TECSHARE didn't even scam anyone.  He was booted off DT for misusing the trust system if I recall correctly.

This was one of the first rabbit holes I traveled down when I was bored and began looking into peoples feedback, both trusted and untrusted. I'm fuzzy on it but it had something to do with outing a scammer, but the way they went about it was deemed untrustworthy by DT. Most accounts I think still would have trusted them with money but not the position on DT.

This forum definitely has an interesting nuance, and some hard lines have been drawn roughly down the middle of the DT networks.

Thanks for sharing expand knowledge. its really helpful for forum members like us.I know as a DT member you have got strict rules and honestly I feel good to see that.

Each DT has their own perception of things and it can be confusing at times. In general just don't try "biting off more than you can chew" or do anything shady and you will be fine.

Vod
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2506
Merit: 1696


Licking my boob since 1970


View Profile WWW
August 14, 2018, 07:23:48 AM
 #16

Things that can get people negative trust from a DT are:
Attempted or successful fraud or theft.
Business activity that resulted in the loss of funds by others.
Account sales
Merit sales / swapping
Harassing a DT
Offering escrow without a track record
Asking for a no collateral loan
Shilling / advertising MLM or ponzi
Escrowing for themselves
Late loan repayments / loan defaults.
Any other untrustworthy or illegal behavior.

I have also tagged for extreme shitposting, and trying to scam other companies.  (Selling fake MS software, fake facebook likes, fake youtube views etc).

I'm into creating universes, smiting people, writing holy books and listening to Prayer Messages (PMs).
BitcoinTalk Public Information Project (BPIP)
"Masturbation makes you feel good but doesn't do anything for the person you're thinking of.  Just like prayer."
TheQuin
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Activity: 672
Merit: 672


Freebitco.in Forum Dude https://bit.ly/2I9BVS2


View Profile WWW
August 14, 2018, 08:41:58 AM
 #17

I'd be interested to know who you're talking about here.  I don't dispute that this has happened, because in my time on the forum I've seen members kicked off DT for all sorts of shenanigans.  Quickseller, Master-P, and TECSHARE are two that immediately come to mind, but there are more.  aTriz wasn't on DT, but he was probably close to getting on it and he was a good campaign manager who ruined his reputation by not calling out a scam soon enough.  I'm curious as to who you are referring to, however.


I got aTriz showing as being on DT2 (I temporarily disabled my custom list)



When you see the minus figure on the DT list it doesn't mean that they were previously positive. The (-2) just means that 2 members of DT1 have put an exclusion in place. That could just be a pre-emptive action to stop someone else adding them. AFAIK there is no historical record of who was on DT.

iasenko
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 322
Merit: 500


Vod's BTT Public Information Project - bpip.org


View Profile WWW
August 14, 2018, 09:02:30 AM
 #18


Things that can get people negative trust from a DT are:
Attempted or successful fraud or theft.
Business activity that resulted in the loss of funds by others.
Account sales
Merit sales / swapping
Harassing a DT
Offering escrow without a track record
Asking for a no collateral loan
Shilling / advertising MLM or ponzi
Escrowing for themselves
Late loan repayments / loan defaults.
Any other untrustworthy or illegal behavior.

Sorry for the off-topic here but this is really valuable information, so I want to ask xtralev if I can use this quoted piece in my [Guide]How to detect rule-breakers.Techniques and tips. of cource I'll mention my source Smiley


marlboroza
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 952
Merit: 930

Don't need it.


View Profile
August 14, 2018, 02:14:20 PM
 #19

When any Person of this forum get connected with any fraudulent work or supporting any kinda work which is really harmful for rest of us and investor.Is it the only punishment to give him red trust.
I believe negative rating with reference link pointing to why someone was tagged is more than enough.
Before giving RED TRUST to anyone i think DT members obviously investigate properly.but my question is isn't it alarming when we see someone have 1000 merits but got red trust. This kind of profile spoils our forum fame.
You are confusing merit, rank and trust.


If you break forum rules then you should get warned (red tag) it does not matter if you have 1000 merits or you are a legendary member or even admin. Rules are rules. However, a defaulter should have enough rights to explain his reasons. If the reasons are not satisfactory then don't remove the red.

If someone do an on forum bad act (breaking rules) which is confirmed, then tag them but it's too much when you tag someone because you think this could lead to that. The experience you have had and the experience others have are not same besides just because you are a DT does not mean that you are a mind reader.

A confirmed rule breaker should defiantly get red tag, does not matter if he has 1000 merits and even a Legend. And in it I do not see any spoiling on the forum fame.
So you agree that this account should have been negative tagged long time ago https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4487800.msg40471597#msg40471597 , from its early days http://archive.is/Hkkow#selection-2781.0-2781.235 ?

Self admitted rule breaker...
Quote
I was banned three times: 1 day, 7 days and then 14 days one I guess.

Merit beggar:



Reference link is pointing to post which was edited the same day:


Do you think this account should be tagged with -ve for begging merit, the same way this account was tagged with -ve:




Tell me, based on 1-5 and your observation of forum rules, trust system and scammers...

1) breaking forum rules
2) begging for merit
3) exchanging merit between family members
4) advertising refshare schemes
5) offering to escrow more than $100,000

...should people trust this account or tag this account with negative trust, to make sure - as OP said "...its our duty to ensure a safe environment here for our upcoming generation", we keep forum clean and safe?

TalkStar
Copper Member
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 80
Merit: 18


View Profile
August 14, 2018, 02:58:47 PM
 #20

As a bitcointalk forum member I will always try to make the forum scam free and clean. I think its my responsibility too. That's why I opened this topic... in here sone guys got red trust in past and I think they trying to send their old account merit to new account but in a clever way. But something really hurting me that is a SR rank member mdayonliner taking the side of those merit abusers. Taking here something which is not related to this topic. its nothing but to save thoae abusers. already some DT members put their eyes on it and it is to notify that mydayonliner have also got red trust in his or her account.  If its bad to mention something suspicious above our DT meblmers eyes to helpp them on their moto o making forum scam free clean than I am sorry from my side. In previous messages everyone can understand how mydayonliner trying to defense me andnd trying to tell me its wrong to help oir DT s by opening this kinda topic.😞


..should people trust this account or tag this account with negative trust, to make sure - as OP said "...its our duty to ensure a safe environment here for our upcoming generation", we keep forum clean and safe?
I can't believe why you are not tag him yet where you already provide all proof by yourself.

Lets work together to make bitcointalk scam free
Pages: [1] 2 3 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!