Bitcoin Forum
October 26, 2020, 11:23:37 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.20.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 [64] 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 ... 124 »
  Print  
Author Topic: DefaultTrust changes  (Read 71510 times)
LoyceV
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2016
Merit: 7081


Thick-Skinned Gang Leader


View Profile WWW
February 07, 2019, 03:46:16 PM
 #1261

I mean i can show a lot of high ranked account who are activ on that forum and posting many updates about crypto but don't receive merit.

Why do they don't own a vote ?
I can think of a reason: the account farmers from before the Merit system shouldn't be able to use those accounts for voting power.

2 more videos of that low quality and he will be a DT1
Receiving Merit alone doesn't put him on DT1, it gives some voting power at best.
Last Saturday, nobody had included Crypto-DesignService, and he didn't create a custom Trust list either.

1603711417
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1603711417

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1603711417
Reply with quote  #2

1603711417
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1603711417
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1603711417

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1603711417
Reply with quote  #2

1603711417
Report to moderator
TECSHARE
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3318
Merit: 1939


First Exclusion Ever


View Profile WWW
February 07, 2019, 04:59:06 PM
 #1262

I certainly wouldn't say it's entirely hands off, because of the subjective contingencies lying within the rules as you have pointed out. To me, it certainly seems more decentralized than the old system, but I agree there is progress to be made.

TEC, do you believe the system would be better without the option for these judgement calls from staff (Or DT)? Genuinely curious to hear your thoughts, and anyone else on this. It's difficult to delegate responsibility in a decentralized manner without ruining whatever that responsibility is there to maintain.

At the end of the day the forum is Theymos's personal property, even if he and the community largely see it as something he is entrusted with on behalf of the community. The question is not if they will be able to interfere, ofc they will be able. I don't think they will need or want to for the vast majority of instances.

We already uphold certain standards for what is not acceptable to rate people for without staff intervention. Any disputes or judgement calls would be handled by community analysis and judgement in public as it always has been. This can be done with ratings, trust lists, and general ostracism.

The problem is no one except Theymos will ever be able to get such a standard of evidence of theft, violation of contractual agreement, or violation of applicable laws in to effect, because it goes against the interest of those already in control of the system. He doesn't need to personally nit pick every case, or really any, but by setting a comparatively very objective standard for leaving a negative rating the VAST majority of conflict is simply avoided.

There will be no hindrance of stopping scammers, but in fact it will be easier to spot them as they don't blend in in a sea of red. Also people will feel more comfortable contributing to a community where they don't have to worry about everything being taken away over some petty squabble at any instant.

xtraelv
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1148
Merit: 1775


฿ear ride on the rainbow slide


View Profile
February 07, 2019, 09:29:34 PM
 #1263

Somebody might explain to me why old members who have clearly participated a lot in the forum in the past are not allowed to have any voting rights if they didn't earn 10 merits ?

I mean i can show a lot of high ranked account who are activ on that forum and posting many updates about crypto but don't receive merit.


You should have made the list before merit had a political function. Merit sources were asking for merit worthy posts in meta for months.

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*
Troll spotting*Thank you to madnessteat for my custom avatar hat.
The Pharmacist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2044
Merit: 3713



View Profile
February 07, 2019, 09:40:38 PM
 #1264

I mean i can show a lot of high ranked account who are activ on that forum and posting many updates about crypto but don't receive merit.
How highly-ranked?  Who are you talking about?  Feel free to post the list in LoyceV's thread on undermerited posts and I'll be happy to take a look at it.

But you are meriting a guy with a new account who is whoring for merit and received 80 merits for a short video made in 10 minutes which is  in your political few right?
That video was funny, IMO and deserved every merit it got.  Get a sense of humor.  

otrkid1970
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 253
Merit: 16


View Profile
February 08, 2019, 02:44:09 AM
 #1265

-snip-
Why is the DT list made up of almost NO ONE who has traded a single $ on BCT?
The DT was implemented for trade reasons right?
What is this nonsense? Most of the new DT1 members (at least from the collectibles section) have traded goods worth very large amounts of BTC. You may be talking about DT members from local sections; but that was the goal if I understood my master correctly.

What have you traded,sold,bought??    Nothing... Kindly STFU
Hhampuz
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1568
Merit: 2849


Meh.


View Profile
February 08, 2019, 02:48:53 AM
 #1266

-snip-
Why is the DT list made up of almost NO ONE who has traded a single $ on BCT?
The DT was implemented for trade reasons right?
What is this nonsense? Most of the new DT1 members (at least from the collectibles section) have traded goods worth very large amounts of BTC. You may be talking about DT members from local sections; but that was the goal if I understood my master correctly.

What have you traded,sold,bought??    Nothing... Kindly STFU

Hmm.. I've sold/bought things from Lauda over the last two years. Physical goods for BTC. Never used any escrow from either side so you are wrong.

EDIT; Are you just trolling or are you actually unable to check who is on DT? Most people there have made trades for tens of thousands of $ in BTC.

████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
████████▀▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▀▀████████
██████▀▄██▀▀▄▄ ████▄▀██████
█████ ███ ████ ▀▀████ █████
████ █████ ███▀▀▀▄████ ████
████ ███▀▀▀▄▄▄████████ ████
████ ██▄▄▀▀███████▀▄▄█ ████
█████ █████ █▀██▀▄███ █████
██████▄▀███▀▄█▀▄███▀▄██████
████████▄▄▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▄▄████████
██████████▀▄███████████████
██████████████████████████
.
.FORTUNEJACK..
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
.
.+250 FS....................
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
owlcatz
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2352
Merit: 1398


http://www.coldkey.eu


View Profile WWW
February 08, 2019, 02:50:45 AM
 #1267

-snip-
Why is the DT list made up of almost NO ONE who has traded a single $ on BCT?
The DT was implemented for trade reasons right?
What is this nonsense? Most of the new DT1 members (at least from the collectibles section) have traded goods worth very large amounts of BTC. You may be talking about DT members from local sections; but that was the goal if I understood my master correctly.

What have you traded,sold,bought??    Nothing... Kindly STFU

Hmm.. I've sold/bought things from Lauda over the last two years. Physical goods for BTC. Never used any escrow from either side so you are wrong.

EDIT; Are you just trolling or are you actually unable to check who is on DT? Most people there have made trades for tens of thousands of $ in BTC.

Lol. I was just trying to point that out myself. This guy is trolling lol... Tongue

.

        ▄███████████▄
      ██████▀█▀██████
    ███████▀▄▀███████
  ██▀█▀████░████▀█▀███████████▌█████████▀▀▐███████▄
  ██▀▄▀████░████▀▄▀█████▌▀▀▀██▌▀▀▀█████▀▐███▌▀▀█████
██████░░▀▌░▐▀░░███████████▌▀█████▄▐███▐██████▌▀▀████▄
██████░▄▀░░░▀▄░████████████▌▀▀████▐███░░▀██████▌████▀
███████░░███░░███████████████▌████▀▀█▀░░░░▀████▌███▀
██████░▀▄░░░▄▀░█████████▀▀██▀░░▀█░░░░░░░░░░▀▀▀███▀
██████░░▄▌░▐▄░░███████▀░░░░▀░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░▀░
  ██▄▀▄████░████▄▀▄█████
  ██▄█▄████░████▄█▄██
    ███████▄▀▄███████
      ██████▄█▄██████
        ▀███████████▀
COLDKEY
.
. C O L D   S T O R A G E    W A L L E T  F O R    E V E R Y O N E..
.

             ▄████▄▄   ▄
█▄          ██████████▀▄
███        ███████████▀
▐████▄     ██████████▌
▄▄██████▄▄▄▄█████████▌
▀████████████████████
  ▀█████████████████
  ▄▄███████████████
   ▀█████████████▀
    ▄▄█████████▀
▀▀██████████▀
    ▀▀▀▀▀
otrkid1970
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 253
Merit: 16


View Profile
February 08, 2019, 02:57:42 AM
 #1268

-snip-
Why is the DT list made up of almost NO ONE who has traded a single $ on BCT?
The DT was implemented for trade reasons right?
What is this nonsense? Most of the new DT1 members (at least from the collectibles section) have traded goods worth very large amounts of BTC. You may be talking about DT members from local sections; but that was the goal if I understood my master correctly.

What have you traded,sold,bought??    Nothing... Kindly STFU

Hmm.. I've sold/bought things from Lauda over the last two years. Physical goods for BTC. Never used any escrow from either side so you are wrong.

EDIT; Are you just trolling or are you actually unable to check who is on DT? Most people there have made trades for tens of thousands of $ in BTC.

You are a douchebag. I Acknowledge your trade history as  trustworhty trader but still are a douchebag. Lauda is not trustworthy. I would trust you with $$ I would not trust LAUDA

Lol. I was just trying to point that out myself. This guy is trolling lol... Tongue
otrkid1970
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 253
Merit: 16


View Profile
February 08, 2019, 02:59:08 AM
 #1269

Fucked that response up but you feel me.
Hhampuz
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1568
Merit: 2849


Meh.


View Profile
February 08, 2019, 03:00:38 AM
 #1270

Fucked that response up but you feel me.

Then say that what you meant instead of spewing out shit posts that adds nothing to the discussion.

EDIT; Most people on current DT have substantial trade history of physical goods over long periods of time. Others are on DT for being trustworthy in a sense where their judgement is always on point and their contributions to this forum goes above and beyond.


Fucked that response up but you feel me.

Then say that what you meant instead of spewing out shit posts that adds nothing to the discussion.

A mistake is a Mistake...Fuck you. you impatient little fuck.

I wasn't even implying that your failed quotation was the shitty post. Your post that I initially replied to was the shit post that adds nothing to the discussion (where you spew out lies with nothing to back it up with).

████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
████████▀▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▀▀████████
██████▀▄██▀▀▄▄ ████▄▀██████
█████ ███ ████ ▀▀████ █████
████ █████ ███▀▀▀▄████ ████
████ ███▀▀▀▄▄▄████████ ████
████ ██▄▄▀▀███████▀▄▄█ ████
█████ █████ █▀██▀▄███ █████
██████▄▀███▀▄█▀▄███▀▄██████
████████▄▄▀▀▀ ▀▀▀▄▄████████
██████████▀▄███████████████
██████████████████████████
.
.FORTUNEJACK..
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
.
.+250 FS....................
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
otrkid1970
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 253
Merit: 16


View Profile
February 08, 2019, 03:03:32 AM
 #1271

Fucked that response up but you feel me.

Then say that what you meant instead of spewing out shit posts that adds nothing to the discussion.

A mistake is a Mistake...Fuck you. you impatient little fuck.
asche
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1036
Merit: 1309


I forgot more than you will ever know.


View Profile
February 08, 2019, 07:23:05 AM
 #1272

A mistake is a Mistake...Fuck you. you impatient little fuck.

No need in calling names.

Also Hhampuz has a point here.

If you are not refering to Lauda, mixed up quoting or not, who are you refering to? And how is it relevant?

Kindly GTFO Smiley

Gunthar
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 610


Liable for what i say, not for what you understand


View Profile WWW
February 08, 2019, 09:12:21 AM
Merited by JayJuanGee (1), LoyceV (1)
 #1273

He doesn't need to personally nit pick every case, or really any, but by setting a comparatively very objective standard for leaving a negative rating the VAST majority of conflict is simply avoided.

There will be no hindrance of stopping scammers, but in fact it will be easier to spot them as they don't blend in in a sea of red. Also people will feel more comfortable contributing to a community where they don't have to worry about everything being taken away over some petty squabble at any instant.

I agree with this, the more people adopt this system the more it will balance itself. Initially it might appear a Cats vs Dogs drama, the more people adding their trusts/distrusts the more our personal "reputation" would form based on objective observations from the community. I might be able to plot with a bunch of people against Cats for 1 month, maybe 2/3/6 months, but the real value of cats and dogs will come out overtime. Personally I woudnt even give power to any DT level indeed: the sum of someone Trust would then come out based on the entire community feedback. Scary? Behave then...

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

████  ████  ████
████  ████  ████

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

████  ████  ████
████  ████  ████

████  ████  ████
████  ████  ████
         ▄█████▄ ▀██▄
       ▄███▀ ▐███▄ ▀██▄
     ▄███▀    █████▄ ▀██▄
   ▄███▀    ▄██▀  ▀██▄ ▀██▄
 ▄███▀    ▄██▀      ▀██▄ ▀██
███▀    ▄██▀    █▄    ███ ██
███    ███    ▄███    ███ ██
███▄    ▀███▄███▀    ▄███ ██
 ▀███▄    ▀███▀    ▄███▀ ▄██
   ▀███▄         ▄███▀ ▄██▀
     ▀███▄     ▄███▀ ▄██▀
       ▀███▄ ▄███▀ ▄██▀
         ▀█████▀ ▄██▀
TheNewAnon135246
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2198
Merit: 1933


฿uy ฿itcoin


View Profile
February 08, 2019, 09:18:31 AM
 #1274

He doesn't need to personally nit pick every case, or really any, but by setting a comparatively very objective standard for leaving a negative rating the VAST majority of conflict is simply avoided.

There will be no hindrance of stopping scammers, but in fact it will be easier to spot them as they don't blend in in a sea of red. Also people will feel more comfortable contributing to a community where they don't have to worry about everything being taken away over some petty squabble at any instant.

I agree with this, the more people adopt this system the more it will balance itself. Initially it might appear a Cats vs Dogs drama, the more people adding their trusts/distrusts the more our personal "reputation" would form based on objective observations from the community. I might be able to plot with a bunch of people against Cats for 1 month, maybe 2/3/6 months, but the real value of cats and dogs will come out overtime. Personally I woudnt even give power to any DT level indeed: the sum of someone Trust would then come out based on the entire community feedback. Scary? Behave then...

I don't think that would work. Let's say I piss off a scammer by sending negative feedback, what would stop him from creating/using a bunch of alt-accounts to wreck my trust level? I like the idea of a non-DT system since the latest DT changes have caused a lot of childish behaviour.
asche
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1036
Merit: 1309


I forgot more than you will ever know.


View Profile
February 08, 2019, 09:20:04 AM
 #1275

He doesn't need to personally nit pick every case, or really any, but by setting a comparatively very objective standard for leaving a negative rating the VAST majority of conflict is simply avoided.

There will be no hindrance of stopping scammers, but in fact it will be easier to spot them as they don't blend in in a sea of red. Also people will feel more comfortable contributing to a community where they don't have to worry about everything being taken away over some petty squabble at any instant.

I agree with this, the more people adopt this system the more it will balance itself. Initially it might appear a Cats vs Dogs drama, the more people adding their trusts/distrusts the more our personal "reputation" would form based on objective observations from the community. I might be able to plot with a bunch of people against Cats for 1 month, maybe 2/3/6 months, but the real value of cats and dogs will come out overtime. Personally I woudnt even give power to any DT level indeed: the sum of someone Trust would then come out based on the entire community feedback. Scary? Behave then...

Then again this is biased.

Like in every situation people are more likely to speak up if they had an issue, or for the matter a trust breach, than a good experience, or say a trust proof.

The score average would be deeply negatively biased.

KingZee
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 672
Merit: 429


Check your coin privilege


View Profile
February 08, 2019, 09:26:59 AM
Merited by LoyceV (1)
 #1276

He doesn't need to personally nit pick every case, or really any, but by setting a comparatively very objective standard for leaving a negative rating the VAST majority of conflict is simply avoided.

There will be no hindrance of stopping scammers, but in fact it will be easier to spot them as they don't blend in in a sea of red. Also people will feel more comfortable contributing to a community where they don't have to worry about everything being taken away over some petty squabble at any instant.

I agree with this, the more people adopt this system the more it will balance itself. Initially it might appear a Cats vs Dogs drama, the more people adding their trusts/distrusts the more our personal "reputation" would form based on objective observations from the community. I might be able to plot with a bunch of people against Cats for 1 month, maybe 2/3/6 months, but the real value of cats and dogs will come out overtime. Personally I woudnt even give power to any DT level indeed: the sum of someone Trust would then come out based on the entire community feedback. Scary? Behave then...

I don't think that would work. Let's say I piss off a scammer by sending negative feedback, what would stop him from creating/using a bunch of alt-accounts to wreck my trust level? I like the idea of a non-DT system since the latest DT changes have caused a lot of childish behaviour.

I don't understand how someone can wreck your trust level using alts. Feedback left by nobodies is disregarded in counting your points (you can look at my own trust page for examples).

If someone manages to create enough sockpuppets, gives them voting rights, and unlegitimately include people in DT1 just so he can tag you in red, without getting blacklisted in the process, not only we could consider the trust system flawed, but also ask what in the hell did you do to piss off this person.

Beep boop beep boop
TheNewAnon135246
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2198
Merit: 1933


฿uy ฿itcoin


View Profile
February 08, 2019, 09:30:48 AM
 #1277

He doesn't need to personally nit pick every case, or really any, but by setting a comparatively very objective standard for leaving a negative rating the VAST majority of conflict is simply avoided.

There will be no hindrance of stopping scammers, but in fact it will be easier to spot them as they don't blend in in a sea of red. Also people will feel more comfortable contributing to a community where they don't have to worry about everything being taken away over some petty squabble at any instant.

I agree with this, the more people adopt this system the more it will balance itself. Initially it might appear a Cats vs Dogs drama, the more people adding their trusts/distrusts the more our personal "reputation" would form based on objective observations from the community. I might be able to plot with a bunch of people against Cats for 1 month, maybe 2/3/6 months, but the real value of cats and dogs will come out overtime. Personally I woudnt even give power to any DT level indeed: the sum of someone Trust would then come out based on the entire community feedback. Scary? Behave then...

I don't think that would work. Let's say I piss off a scammer by sending negative feedback, what would stop him from creating/using a bunch of alt-accounts to wreck my trust level? I like the idea of a non-DT system since the latest DT changes have caused a lot of childish behaviour.

I don't understand how someone can wreck your trust level using alts. Feedback left by nobodies is disregarded in counting your points (you can look at my own trust page for examples).

If someone manages to create enough sockpuppets, gives them voting rights, and unlegitimately include people in DT1 just so he can tag you in red, without getting blacklisted in the process, not only we could consider the trust system flawed, but also ask what in the hell did you do to piss off this person.

That is because of the current trust system. I believe Gunthar was trying to address a system without any form of DT, just community feedback (similar to eBay).
Gunthar
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 610


Liable for what i say, not for what you understand


View Profile WWW
February 08, 2019, 09:43:05 AM
 #1278

~snip
Yes ofc thinking loud about an ideal system with a community that reached its maturity: there are many filters to apply while this process grows, some of them are already in here, i.e. a minimum membership rank/merit/trust point in order to be able to tag someone (green or red doesnt matter)

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

████  ████  ████
████  ████  ████

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

████  ████  ████
████  ████  ████

████  ████  ████
████  ████  ████
         ▄█████▄ ▀██▄
       ▄███▀ ▐███▄ ▀██▄
     ▄███▀    █████▄ ▀██▄
   ▄███▀    ▄██▀  ▀██▄ ▀██▄
 ▄███▀    ▄██▀      ▀██▄ ▀██
███▀    ▄██▀    █▄    ███ ██
███    ███    ▄███    ███ ██
███▄    ▀███▄███▀    ▄███ ██
 ▀███▄    ▀███▀    ▄███▀ ▄██
   ▀███▄         ▄███▀ ▄██▀
     ▀███▄     ▄███▀ ▄██▀
       ▀███▄ ▄███▀ ▄██▀
         ▀█████▀ ▄██▀
KingZee
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 672
Merit: 429


Check your coin privilege


View Profile
February 08, 2019, 09:49:58 AM
 #1279


That is because of the current trust system. I believe Gunthar was trying to address a system without any form of DT, just community feedback (similar to eBay).

I've suggested a completely decentralized system multiple times. The more people keep arguing on trivialities here, the more I'm starting to think it's better than the current system.

The "problems" everyone keeps bringing up with my system :

1. You can't verify that transactions happened. Some people can leave fake feedback for money that was never risked. You gave an example with Ebay, well Ebay transactions are all true. Imo that's a valid concern, but then again, no one is stopping current DT1/2 members from straight up lying as well and leaving fake positive feedback. Who's going to verify those txes?

2. Leaving feedback for non-money transactions. You know, you have to tag ponzi scammers and funny lending section sobbers. (For my system) It's possible to create a default "empty shell" feedback for similar tags. If a high trusted member leaves an empty shell, it means something, unlike if a newbie does it, and so on.

But good luck convincing people that the current system is heading towards a centralized DT controlled by less people than it actually looks like. But maybe I'm wrong, it's only been a few weeks, and so far there's still a diverse amount of people in control that I hope it won't be the case.

Beep boop beep boop
LFC_Bitcoin
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 2240
Merit: 3828


One of the world's leading Bitcoin-powered casinos


View Profile
February 08, 2019, 02:45:12 PM
 #1280

I put a certain established poster here in my personalised trust list last night. I’ve signed into btctalk.org today & checked who trusts me etc & it seems the following users have distrusted me presumably as a result of putting said established poster in my trust list -

LFC_Bitcoin is Distrusted by:
Thule (20 Merit earned) (Trust feedback) (Trust list) (BPIP)
endlasuresh (3 Merit earned) (Trust feedback) (Trust list) (BPIP)
DutchFinity (2 Merit earned) (Trust feedback) (Trust list) (BPIP)
Danica22 (0 Merit earned) (Trust feedback) (Trust list) (BPIP)
ac2eugenio (1 Merit earned) (Trust feedback) (Trust list) (BPIP)
Bazinga442 (21 Merit earned) (Trust feedback) (Trust list) (BPIP)
Deena (37 Merit earned) (Trust feedback) (Trust list) (BPIP)
mr.creampie (10 Merit earned) (Trust feedback) (Trust list) (BPIP)
chickinini (11 Merit earned) (Trust feedback) (Trust list) (BPIP)
cryptorgasm (4 Merit earned) (Trust feedback) (Trust list) (BPIP)
TinaMoran (10 Merit earned) (Trust feedback) (Trust list) (BPIP)
Pablojob (10 Merit earned) (Trust feedback) (Trust list) (BPIP)
PiningGarcia (10 Merit earned) (Trust feedback) (Trust list) (BPIP)
PingGermoco (10 Merit earned) (Trust feedback) (Trust list) (BPIP)
NilaMutac (10 Merit earned) (Trust feedback) (Trust list) (BPIP)
cryptopov (4 Merit earned) (Trust feedback) (Trust list) (BPIP)
poypototoy (10 Merit earned) (Trust feedback) (Trust list) (BPIP)
Zin-Zang (10 Merit earned) (Trust feedback) (Trust list) (BPIP)
H8bussesNbicycles (5 Merit earned) (Trust feedback) (Trust list) (BPIP)
gwsukabokepjepang (0 Merit earned) (Trust feedback) (Trust list) (BPIP)

I’d like to make it clear that I don’t believe I’ve interacted with any of these cunts.
I now have more people distrusting me than people who trust me.

Anybody else been a victim of a ‘mass distrust’ in a short period of time despite being a perfectly honest member of the community?

Pages: « 1 ... 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 [64] 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 ... 124 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!