"Trust" system is shit !!! "Trust me !!!"

[CoolWave]

Few months back I had traded with a positive trust guy and he turned out to be a scammer . Now the question is Does this forum's "trust" system really offers what it seems to ? To be honest I would say that owners of this forum are not doing good job .

Accrding to me , Trust should only be handles by moderator of any particular section . Trust should be strictly limited to trading and the negative rating should only show up when a scam has been done . A warning will be enough rather than shitty negative look which spoils your profile . Infact trust system should be like LBTC, which asks for your ID .

For those guys requesting about a sample : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=89329

[The Sceptical Chymist]

There are definitely flaws in the trust system, but if we had to do deals in order to leave trust, DT members wouldn't be able to tag shady members and those who are trying to scam.

By the way, who scammed you?  I'd be interested in seeing his profile.  I also got scammed by a green-trusted member, but I was asking for it since it was a loan I didn't ask for collateral for, and I kind of blindly assumed his green trust had more weight than it did.  With all the account sales going on, you never know who you're really dealing with or if their trust page means anything.

I disagree that mods should be the ones leaving all the trust--not that it's even an option.  It's been discussed and discarded before.

[AdolfinWolf]

Few months back I had traded with a positive trust guy and he turned out to be a scammer . Now the question is Does this forum's "trust" system really offers what it seems to ? To be honest I would say that owners of this forum are not doing good job .

I'd agree that the trust system could potentially be abused rather easily. I know instances where people indeed were able to simply buy DT1/DT2 trust for a couple bucks.
(See the email service of TBZ as a prime example of that.)

But, i don't see any other system that could work, and i think that this system is pretty self-evolving, (In the last couple of months, i have yet to see any (imo) unjustified positive feedback.)

Accrding to me , Trust should only be handles by moderator of any particular section .

Totally disagree. Moderators already have a hefty workload, and they shouldn't be the ones to judge, for obvious reasons.

Trust should be strictly limited to trading and the negative rating should only show up when a scam has been done . A warning will be enough rather than shitty negative look which spoils your profile .

Disagree. You want to give ponzi promoters a pass? Or the people that are promoting autobuy links?

The system in most cases becomes rather useless if we have to wait until the ""crime/scam" has already happend.

[OgNasty]

By the way, who scammed you?  I'd be interested in seeing his profile.  I also got scammed by a green-trusted member, but I was asking for it since it was a loan I didn't ask for collateral for, and I kind of blindly assumed his green trust had more weight than it did.  With all the account sales going on, you never know who you're really dealing with or if their trust page means anything.

I'd be interested in seeing the profile too.  Maybe it is a situation that can be addressed before another user is effected.

[CoolWave]

There are definitely flaws in the trust system, but if we had to do deals in order to leave trust, DT members wouldn't be able to tag shady members and those who are trying to scam.

By the way, who scammed you?  I'd be interested in seeing his profile.  I also got scammed by a green-trusted member, but I was asking for it since it was a loan I didn't ask for collateral for, and I kind of blindly assumed his green trust had more weight than it did.  With all the account sales going on, you never know who you're really dealing with or if their trust page means anything.

I disagree that mods should be the ones leaving all the trust--not that it's even an option.  It's been discussed and discarded before.

To be honest I have forgotten his profile as he scammed for even a small amount and I was quite surprised of how he could spoil his trust for such small amount . Do not worry, as far as I remember he was negative tagged later . If mods can verify your ID, or you want to upload your ID like LBTC then you could be tagged with "verified" mark . Your account might get hacked anytime who knows and your positive trust could be misused . The "hack" may even be not real . However, a verified can be contacted in case of "false hack" situation .

[athanz88]

Well it is not something happen in a daily basis, where the "trusted members" do some scamming. The best thing to know before you look into a trust is you should understand that trust is not moderated by the forum, so any green trusts still mean it can do some scam to you while the red trust (especially if the reason for the red is the account did the scam before) members have a big chance to scam you.

Although i am sorry to hear that you got scammed, it is hard to believe that the scam from your case ever happen unless you have some proof to prove it, even it is only a small amount.

[AdolfinWolf]

There are definitely flaws in the trust system, but if we had to do deals in order to leave trust, DT members wouldn't be able to tag shady members and those who are trying to scam.

By the way, who scammed you?  I'd be interested in seeing his profile.  I also got scammed by a green-trusted member, but I was asking for it since it was a loan I didn't ask for collateral for, and I kind of blindly assumed his green trust had more weight than it did.  With all the account sales going on, you never know who you're really dealing with or if their trust page means anything.

I disagree that mods should be the ones leaving all the trust--not that it's even an option.  It's been discussed and discarded before.

To be honest I have forgotten his profile as he scammed for even a small amount and I was quite surprised of how he could spoil his trust for such small amount . Do not worry, as far as I remember he was negative tagged later . If mods can verify your ID, or you want to upload your ID like LBTC then you could be tagged with "verified" mark . Your account might get hacked anytime who knows and your positive trust could be misused . The "hack" may even be not real . However, a verified can be contacted in case of "false hack" situation .

Adding KYC to this forum would really destroy purpose/ideology this forum was once build on.

Furthermore, the forum as of right now can barely recover hacked accounts that have signed messages that prove ownership.

I really wouldn't be so sure that this would drastically improve with KYC. I honestly only see downsides. People hacking my/other accounts and misusing their name/doxxing them, extorting them, the forum's database could could get hacked, the list goes on and on.

[The Cryptovator]

Few months back I had traded with a positive trust guy and he turned out to be a scammer

Green trust doesn't mean he will never scam. You should checked reason of green trust. I can trust anybody for specific reason. Same also for DT. Nobody forcing you to deal with green trust. It's depend on you how trustworthy for you.

To be honest I would say that owners of this forum are not doing good job .

Leave the forum if you don't like admin activity. No one forcing you to stay here.

Accrding to me , Trust should only be handles by moderator of any particular section . Trust should be strictly limited to trading and the negative rating should only show up when a scam has been done . A warning will be enough rather than shitty negative look which spoils your profile . Infact trust system should be like LBTC, which asks for your ID .

You got red trust it doesn't mean you are ban from forum. Let us know which DT send negetive feedback without proper reason. There is a option for reference why DT leave red trust / green trust. If you spoils the forum there is no problem but if DT tagged you there is problem ? For example bumping service isn't spoils on forum ? You got tagged for bumping service too, so how you consider as spoils?

Do you know DT also monitored by admin ? So it's no necessary monitor trust by moderator. There is chance to loss DT power if some one use it wrong way & if there is strong evidence. Just visit your trust setting you will find many DT removed from list.

Edit;

The trust system is meaningless when green trusted accounts can be sold, and the trust is transferred to the new owner.

This is allowed by forum. That rule was before implement of merit system. Now should be  ban account sale officially. Although it can be trade outside of forum, it doesn't mean forum should allow it. If forum ban trade account that means if some one catch his account will ban permanently.

[Silent26]

A Positive Trust is given when someone made an honest act or someone made a good transaction and etc. to a particular member which shows that the person who gave +Trust trusts the one who received it, but doesn't mean that the person who received Positive Trust won't do something stupid. That's why it is still much better to just "don't trust anyone" except if that member is a very reputable and trusted by a lot of members.

Trust system were really working fine as it is right now but the problem is there are bunch of people who were abusing it just the same with the Merit System.

So you were scammed a few months ago? Why did you just posted it today? You should have reported it here or in Scam Accusation right after you were scammed. I'm just wondering why it's already months too late before you came up to this topic. Additional bad news is you forgot the guy's username as it's a long time ago.

To be honest I would say that owners of this forum are not doing good job .

Oh boy, you're mistaken.
Edit.

The trust system is meaningless when green trusted accounts can be sold, and the trust is transferred to the new owner.

Well, that's right. I'm just about to add but you really are hundreds of steps before me 

[Jet Cash]

The trust system is meaningless when green trusted accounts can be sold, and the trust is transferred to the new owner.

[CoolWave]

Leave the forum if you don't like admin activity. No one forcing you to stay here.

That's not a solution kid .I don't know if LBTC was ever hacked . A strong protection can be added . The "Worst" part about red trust is that , it becomes dead hard to get your dignity back . While a mod can at least be communicated to .

I definitely do not want to "pass" ponzies, I have already indicated that a warning message could be allotted to such users instead of those irritating negative tags .

If you spoils the forum there is no problem but if DT tagged you there is problem ?

This ofcourse should be verified if a guy is supportive to the forum or not . Definitely I've got that and that too because of stupid reasons or business rivalry . Those who were helped know what I mean to them .

[MagicSmoker]

To be honest I have forgotten [the scammer's] profile as he scammed for even a small amount and I was quite surprised of how he could spoil his trust for such small amount .
...

Lol, bullshit. You are outraged enough at getting scammed by a green trust member to post about it here, but can't remember who that member was? 

It seems much more likely that what you are really butthurt over is getting negged for offering a paid ICO bumping service. See: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2395548.msg24494659#msg24494659

[CoolWave]

To be honest I have forgotten [the scammer's] profile as he scammed for even a small amount and I was quite surprised of how he could spoil his trust for such small amount .
...

Lol, bullshit. You are outraged enough at getting scammed by a green trust member to post about it here, but can't remember who that member was? 

It seems much more likely that what you are really butthurt over is getting negged for offering a paid ICO bumping service. See: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2395548.msg24494659#msg24494659

Now this is what I call a waste of post . Whatever you have posted is pure shit . Read before you say something . Those guys are just ass lickers of corrupt people .

[LeGaulois]

A member with a green trust doesn't mean you can trust him blindly. The system isn't designed to work like this. It's just a parameter that you can use to make your own opinion. There are not a lot of people here that you can trust without any worry (green, purple, or rainbow trust doesn't matter). Maybe a dozen... Personally, I see 6 or 7 members who I know I can send money and come back in a month, I know they won't disappear. However, I know there are members with no shame to scam you for 5 bucks lol.

If only the moderators handled the trust system members would start yelling about centralization or whatever excuse looks good to give the opportunity to complain

[Alone055]

Few months back I had traded with a positive trust guy and he turned out to be a scammer .

Anyone, reading this thread, would ask only one thing after reading this sentence of yours, and that is "Who was he??" and if you answer that question with

To be honest I have forgotten his profile as he scammed for even a small amount...

then it doesn't really make any sense for you to say that if you can't let others know about him. And why would it bother you now, after all this time, if he scammed you for just a small amount and you have already forgotten his profile?

Now the question is Does this forum's "trust" system really offers what it seems to ?

Of course it does. Maybe not all the time, as Jet Cash said already, that if a green trusted account can be sold, then obviously the trust system is going to be abused, but that doesn't happen very often. And the trust system is the only reason for thousands of users leaving the forum because they were negative tagged for spamming or something and felt they cannot continue this anymore with the red sign on their profile.

To be honest I would say that owners of this forum are not doing good job .

I don't agree with that. Introduction of Merit System is itself a very big example of what you are saying is wrong.

Accrding to me , Trust should only be handles by moderator of any particular section.

No. Moderators are already too burdened with the reports and all. They should not be burdened with managing the trust issues as well.

Trust should be strictly limited to trading and the negative rating should only show up when a scam has been done.

Anyone doing anything suspicious or is involved in anything that can harm the forum or its users deserve a negative trust, and there should be no limitations to that.

A warning will be enough rather than shitty negative look which spoils your profile.

That shitty negative look on your profile is a warning for others, and that is what the trust system does - it warns people to be careful if a profile is red tagged. Besides, if you don't want your profile to look shitty, you should simply stay away from anything that can cause that to happen. Just have a clean record and no one would ever touch your profile or spoil it. Simple as that.

Infact trust system should be like LBTC, which asks for your ID.

I don't really understand how that would work for trust system.

[Steamtyme]

Sorry but if you can't use the trust system properly, it's hard to give your complaint any weight. You should have left the user with negative feedback, then opened a scam accusation with proof. Doing this would have likely resulted in the account having an up to date negative.

The trust system isn't perfect but is a good tool if used properly. It in no way removes your need to perform due diligence.
You need to look for a consistent pattern not just 1 trade, even recently. Some people try to trade with DT members just for a green feedback. Same as a few trades several years old.  I also suggest people look into untrusted feedback.

Then there is also escrow. So really to trade in this forum we have the tools necessary to trade safely.

[CoolWave]

Sorry but if you can't use the trust system properly, it's hard to give your complaint any weight.

It's not me who uses it. It is other idiots who abuse it .

Of course it does.

Not justified .

Who was he?

Well there are lots of examples all over the forum if you look for it .

Anyone doing anything suspicious or is involved in anything that can harm the forum or its users deserve a negative trust, and there should be no limitations to that.

Disagree . No limitation would mean negative tagging on the basis of doubt or stupid researches

[vphasitha01]

I would like to shared my thoughts about this case. While reading this whole thread, I feeled like it's someone having red trust got scammed by green trusted hypothetical member ( since OP didn't provide any evidence for what and by whom he got scammed). Then suddenly he is getting angried with the trust system and even started a thread by questioning the trust system, but not starting a thread under scam accusation. I think OP is now feeling the bitterness of getting scammed. Imagine what would be the feeling of other members when they realized that they got scammed by you. (I don't know you scammed or not, but I expressed based on what your trust exhibit to other members)

"The man who sows wrong thoughts and deeds and prays that God will bless him is in the position of a farmer who, having sown tares, asks God to bring forth for him a harvest of wheat". - James Allen

To be honest, I'm also believed that current system to be tweaked, but until then this "trust" is a good indication for others to get a idea about who you're going to deal with. It's not giving you the licence or seal of verified to deal with others. Do your business with your own risk and there is no system that can be implemented having zero scammed policy. Because it depends on person to person. A person is always labelled as trusted until he/she scammed another person, and how the hell are we  knowing any perticular member is a scammer or not by looking only at his/her posting behavior in the forum.

[Parodium]

Do you really think that moderators have the time to be leaving everybody trust? How would they know which deals people were involved in, and hence deserving of trust, or will people need to post a trust application thread for every successful deal or transaction? Moderators have to deal with the hordes of bots, shitposters and trolls here on this forum, I really don't think such a minor feature of the forum should be handled by the moderators. If anything, there should just be more DT members, allowing trust to be spread more efficiently, rather than having the select few who interact with DT members be seen as trustworthy.

[Theb]

To be honest I have forgotten his profile as he scammed for even a small amount and I was quite surprised of how he could spoil his trust for such small amount . Do not worry, as far as I remember he was negative tagged later . If mods can verify your ID, or you want to upload your ID like LBTC then you could be tagged with "verified" mark . Your account might get hacked anytime who knows and your positive trust could be misused . The "hack" may even be not real . However, a verified can be contacted in case of "false hack" situation .

You might just have contradicted what you are saying in your OP, him being tagged with what he did you means that the trust system still works as he paid for the consequences even if the transaction was a "small amount". Remember trading/transacting with a trusted member does not mean you can always be comfortable or carefree with him, you can always add your own precautionary measures (e.g. escrow) when you want to trade with him. Trust system might have its flaws but I am glad that it is here because it is useful in identifying the scammers and preventing the shitposters in joining most of the signature campaigns.