DefaultTrust changes

[Bazinga442]

I think the trust system does way more harm to the community than good, it should be removed IMO. The amount of people I get direct messaging me on Twitter complaining how they stopped using this forum because of issues around trust is noticeable, or ranting about Lauda. I don't think these people are necessarily scammers either.

Better to just remove it. I'm sure the overall happiness of the community would go way up. Let people figure out for themselves if someone or a business is trustworthy, as they do on the rest of the internet. It's a noble idea but it just builds resentment among members which might actually lead to more shady and dubious behavior. Mobs going around bullying members with trust scores is shady activity. Feels like more people complain about getting their trust fucked with and characters like Lauda than they do about scams here.

Trust scores are mostly meaningless, it's closer to a popularity contest than a true measure of someone's trustworthiness. Just by using this site, all of you are implicitly trusting me, but that isn't reflected at all in my trust score, in fact I probably seem less trustworthy on first observation than some actual shady people on here. There's so much angst with the whole system, maybe there's a way to make it work better, and tweaking it could eventually lead to that, but for now it just looks like something that's dividing the community.

Be careful now. You don’t want your account tagged as bought or ‘changed hands’. Opinions that go against the cults are generally viewed with suspicion, and it wouldn’t be long before you’re labeled a troll. I can imagine them already trawling through your post history looking for dirt.

I don’t think DT is a bad thing, however, it comes with some responsibility. I am certain that when Lauda was booted off DT for a few weeks, things were quieter on here and scams were still busted. Lauda and some members of her cult are the problem here not DT. And the sooner they’re out the better.

Update: Bazinga442 has excluded me anyway, so he just copy/pasts a list he doesn't even agree with.

Yes, I copied and pasted the list. I’ve never had a trust list before now and I visit my trust page only when I want to leave retaliatory feedback. I don’t need a trust list to tell me who I should trust or not.

[1714465777]

1714465777

[1714465777]

1714465777

[1714465777]

1714465777

[1714465777]

1714465777

[1714465777]

1714465777

[qwk]

I think the trust system does way more harm to the community than good
[...]
It's a noble idea but
[...]
more people complain about getting their trust fucked with
[...]
than they do about scams here

I have to agree.
The trust system does not do much in preventing scams, but it does lead to a lot of infighting.

Trust scores are mostly meaningless, it's closer to a popularity contest than a true measure of someone's trustworthiness.

That's where I'm at least a little uncertain.
It's true that most trust ratings are meaningless, but established traders who've done a number of trades in a trustworthy manner seem to be easily identified by substantial trust scores.
If that really justifies all the hassle with the trust system, is another question.


But the trust system is very good at one thing:
warning about accounts that might superficially seem trustworthy because of their long existence and e.g. "Legendary" status which either fall into the hands of account buyers or ruin their reputation by doing something fishy.

So, its really a glass half full half empty situation.
One real function of the trust system and a lot of bile, bickering and bitching.

[KingZee]

I think the trust system does way more harm to the community than good, it should be removed IMO. The amount of people I get direct messaging me on Twitter complaining how they stopped using this forum because of issues around trust is noticeable, or ranting about Lauda. I don't think these people are necessarily scammers either.

Better to just remove it. I'm sure the overall happiness of the community would go way up. Let people figure out for themselves if someone or a business is trustworthy, as they do on the rest of the internet. It's a noble idea but it just builds resentment among members which might actually lead to more shady and dubious behavior. Mobs going around bullying members with trust scores is shady activity. Feels like more people complain about getting their trust fucked with and characters like Lauda than they do about scams here.

Trust scores are mostly meaningless, it's closer to a popularity contest than a true measure of someone's trustworthiness. Just by using this site, all of you are implicitly trusting me, but that isn't reflected at all in my trust score, in fact I probably seem less trustworthy on first observation than some actual shady people on here. There's so much angst with the whole system, maybe there's a way to make it work better, and tweaking it could eventually lead to that, but for now it just looks like something that's dividing the community.

Someone had to say it : I can't help think that if these exact same words came from someone else on the forums, there'd be a radically inverse response. And I'm not even exaggerating. It really shows how much people here are severely affected by status and prejudice.

I would agree that both the old and current trust system create more drama and issues rather than solve problems. But I don't know about removing the system as a whole. In the end (for me at least.), Trust remains just as a simple indicator of a person's past behaviour, and I almost always check the feedback be it positive or negative before I trade with someone.

I dealt with people who have negative trust before, and also refused to deal with people who had green one. I've already learned my lesson several times that there is no such thing as absolute trust, because being "trusted" is not generally something that can stay forever. People change. So if anything, people just need to start understanding that the trust system is just an indicator, and you need to use your own judgement when dealing with people.

[TECSHARE]

I think the trust system does way more harm to the community than good
[...]
It's a noble idea but
[...]
more people complain about getting their trust fucked with
[...]
than they do about scams here

I have to agree.
The trust system does not do much in preventing scams, but it does lead to a lot of infighting.

Trust scores are mostly meaningless, it's closer to a popularity contest than a true measure of someone's trustworthiness.

That's where I'm at least a little uncertain.
It's true that most trust ratings are meaningless, but established traders who've done a number of trades in a trustworthy manner seem to be easily identified by substantial trust scores.
If that really justifies all the hassle with the trust system, is another question.


But the trust system is very good at one thing:
warning about accounts that might superficially seem trustworthy because of their long existence and e.g. "Legendary" status which either fall into the hands of account buyers or ruin their reputation by doing something fishy.

So, its really a glass half full half empty situation.
One real function of the trust system and a lot of bile, bickering and bitching.

Instead of teaching new users to blindly trust ratings that could be on a hacked account, or that scam busters will always protect them, perhaps we should be teaching them to use the numbers as a quick reference and to do due diligence before trading. The bitching and bickering tends to happen when you take years of work some one did to build a reputation in an extremely hostile environment full of con artists and scams, and turn it in to a toy for children with modest amounts of authority to lord over you with fake internet points. It is like taking a mans prosthetic leg off of him and beating him with it. It is an insult by its mere existence as the status quo.

[Anduck]

Someone had to say it : I can't help think that if these exact same words came from someone else on the forums, there'd be a radically inverse response. And I'm not even exaggerating. It really shows how much people here are severely affected by status and prejudice.

The same applies for outside the forums, so not very forum/community-specific issue.

People change. So if anything, people just need to start understanding that the trust system is just an indicator, and you need to use your own judgement when dealing with people.

I guess that people generally understand "trust system" to be quite a strong indicator, when coming out of nowhere to deal with total randomers. See a red score, and you'll just move elsewhere. I think trying to improve or change the way people understand what is the intention of having trust system is a too big battle... People naturally weigh a lot on such things. Pretty complicated stuff.

I think the trust system does way more harm to the community than good, it should be removed IMO. The amount of people I get direct messaging me on Twitter complaining how they stopped using this forum because of issues around trust is noticeable, or ranting about Lauda. I don't think these people are necessarily scammers either.

Better to just remove it. I'm sure the overall happiness of the community would go way up. Let people figure out for themselves if someone or a business is trustworthy, as they do on the rest of the internet. It's a noble idea but it just builds resentment among members which might actually lead to more shady and dubious behavior. Mobs going around bullying members with trust scores is shady activity. Feels like more people complain about getting their trust fucked with and characters like Lauda than they do about scams here.

Trust scores are mostly meaningless, it's closer to a popularity contest than a true measure of someone's trustworthiness. Just by using this site, all of you are implicitly trusting me, but that isn't reflected at all in my trust score, in fact I probably seem less trustworthy on first observation than some actual shady people on here. There's so much angst with the whole system, maybe there's a way to make it work better, and tweaking it could eventually lead to that, but for now it just looks like something that's dividing the community.

Someone would need to make a proper analysis of the effects/consequences of having had the trust system here. For sure, it has increased drama and wasted loads of time, in addition to increasing bad blood around the active community of BCT. I think it largely boils down to having communication problems, misunderstandings and so on. People have different views (but still probably same goals) and (almost always) too little information to form a proper model of what someone else is meaning/arguing/thinking for real when they say something. Especially over the internet emotions play a large role, too. And there are no real consequences, so no real incentives to do everything as well as possible. People naturally form exaggerated views of others (for good and for bad), as all they see of someone else is text. These are somewhat studied subjects.
And of course accounts change hands, people change, trust system gets gamed, DT gets gamed, general misuse of trust system happens, people have different intentions when they rate someone from how the reader of the rating reads/understands it, etc.

So do the good stuff of this system outweigh downsides? It would be interesting to see an analysis about this, with some semi-objective measurements and argumentation and so on.

Btw, I think it's also worth noting that most of the users of these forums do not know or care at all about the trust system.

[marlboroza]

EDIT: Where are all the scam busters when an ACTUAL THREAT appears?

Here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=83.0.

[bones261]

EDIT: Where are all the scam busters when an ACTUAL THREAT appears?

Here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=83.0.

Actually, shouldn't possible malware links be reported to mods for deletion?

[OgNasty]

EDIT: Where are all the scam busters when an ACTUAL THREAT appears?

Here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=83.0.

Actually, shouldn't possible malware links be reported to mods for deletion?

Hence why I tagged them and reported the post for deletion. Good thing I didn’t wait until they successfully scammed and a post was made in the scam accusation section.  

[mikeywith]

I think the trust system does way more harm to the community than good, it should be removed IMO.

The trust system does more good than harm in terms of detecting scammers, look at the market place specially the digital goods, there are tons of confirmed scammers, members have a lead on them by seeing their trust score, there is a good part of harm indeed, but it's NOT bad enough to take over the good part.

 

The amount of people I get direct messaging me on Twitter complaining how they stopped using this forum because of issues around trust is noticeable, or ranting about Lauda. I don't think these people are necessarily scammers either.

most of those people are very likely the scammers who don't like to be tagged for obvious reasons.

Better to just remove it. I'm sure the overall happiness of the community would go way up. Let people figure out for themselves if someone or a business is trustworthy, as they do on the rest of the internet.

almost everywhere on the internet where there is any type of trading, there is a trust system , they call it review and feedback, some different terms and some technical differences do exist here , but overall it's all the same concept, the only advantage / disadvantage the forum has over most other places - is that they give much more weight to DT feedback than everybody else, it's a great feature to prevent trust farming , but when used in the wrong manner, it creates the mess we have now.

Feels like more people complain about getting their trust fucked with and characters like Lauda than they do about scams here.

this is simply because the trust system is being misused sometimes, some members base their feedback on personal b.s or self-interest. this can be solved by enforcing some rules on DT members to maintain the trust system and keep it on track ,whereby only scammers should be tagged.

it makes sense that the majority of complains come from non scammers, because scammers don't really complain, they just move on and create a new account, this again all comes down to how do some DT members use the trust system terribly.

Trust scores are mostly meaningless, it's closer to a popularity contest than a true measure of someone's trustworthiness. Just by using this site, all of you are implicitly trusting me, but that isn't reflected at all in my trust score

Pierre Omidyar Founder of ebay probably has 0 positive feedback or no account at all on ebay, this does not mean people don't trust him, he chooses not to sell/buy stuff on ebay, the same choice you made by not really participating in the forum. if  someone neg tag you then your theory is valid, other wise it really doesn't make sense.

maybe there's a way to make it work better, and tweaking it could eventually lead to that, but for now it just looks like something that's dividing the community.

exactly, tweaking is important, in fact simple tweaks will do the trick, a single rule that states "any DT member who tag anyone for non-scam related subject and without a proper evidence will be unlisted from DT" -This will stop 90% of complains, the scoring will be more accurate.

i understand your concern about wanting to make everybody happy on the forum, but i rather be sad than scammed, i really think theymos should postpone the "hands-off" approach and involve a bit more in the DT, i am pretty sure there are many things he doesn't like about the trust system, and for a while he is being saying this but leaving it all up to DT members who never follow what theymos want the trust system to be and look like, therefore i think it's about time he get's a bit bossy and stand up for the wrong doings and put a clear guideline on how should DT members use the trust system.

there are many other things that can be done, but totally removing / disabling the trust system is the worst thing ever, i am pretty sure scammers are getting a lot of relief reading such a suggestion from someone like you.

[bones261]

EDIT: Where are all the scam busters when an ACTUAL THREAT appears?

Here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=83.0.

Actually, shouldn't possible malware links be reported to mods for deletion?

Hence why I tagged them and reported the post for deletion. Good thing I didn’t wait until they successfully scammed and a post was made in the scam accusation section.  

Well, kudos to you. 

[marlboroza]

EDIT: Where are all the scam busters when an ACTUAL THREAT appears?

Here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=83.0.

Actually, shouldn't possible malware links be reported to mods for deletion?

I responded to OG's "question".

It should be reported to moderator if user is spreading malware, but moderators won't ban account every time and sometimes thread will remain there. So, it is best to tag account, report them to moderator and post warning for guests who can't see -ve

Hence why I tagged them and reported the post for deletion. Good thing I didn’t wait until they successfully scammed and a post was made in the scam accusation section.  

If I am looking correctly, this is first account OG has tagged for spreading malware since 2011  

Go ahead, brag around, first time is something to remember  

Edit: https://www.virustotal.com/#/file/541b91f5074afb04d6749f10bb860d5a9035d73a22534cb73fe4f50b140b9c72/detection here you go OG, for better reference and if you want to report them to moderator. This is your big case fella.

[OgNasty]

Hence why I tagged them and reported the post for deletion. Good thing I didn’t wait until they successfully scammed and a post was made in the scam accusation section.  

If I am looking correctly, this is first account OG has tagged for spreading malware since 2011  

Go ahead, brag around, first time is something to remember  

I don’t spend my time looking for people to tag... However, it seemed a good opportunity to display how useless the current tagging efforts are, that they literally don’t even tag actual scam threats because they’re too busy trying to keep newbies off the forum. Don’t let that stop you from trying to find a way to turn my positive action into a negative though...

[DarkStar_]

Hence why I tagged them and reported the post for deletion. Good thing I didn’t wait until they successfully scammed and a post was made in the scam accusation section.  

If I am looking correctly, this is first account OG has tagged for spreading malware since 2011  

Go ahead, brag around, first time is something to remember  

I don’t spend my time looking for people to tag... However, it seemed a good opportunity to display how useless the current tagging efforts are, that they literally don’t even tag actual scam threats because they’re too busy trying to keep newbies off the forum

Or maybe it's because there aren't any active DT members who browse Mining forums, and no one bothered reporting it somewhere it will be seen?

[OgNasty]

Hence why I tagged them and reported the post for deletion. Good thing I didn’t wait until they successfully scammed and a post was made in the scam accusation section.  

If I am looking correctly, this is first account OG has tagged for spreading malware since 2011  

Go ahead, brag around, first time is something to remember  

I don’t spend my time looking for people to tag... However, it seemed a good opportunity to display how useless the current tagging efforts are, that they literally don’t even tag actual scam threats because they’re too busy trying to keep newbies off the forum

Or maybe it's because there aren't any active DT members who browse Mining forums, and no one bothered reporting it somewhere it will be seen?

Sure there are. They’re just excluded by trust manipulators currently. The post was reported to the people tasked to handle such things (i.e. not you).

[marlboroza]

However, it seemed a good opportunity to display how useless the current tagging efforts are, that they literally don’t even tag actual scam threats because they’re too busy trying to keep newbies off the forum.

 

Don’t let that stop you from trying to find a way to turn my positive action into a negative though...

Why would you say such crazy thing?

I am happy that you have found scammer and warned community about them. The way you have presented this, well, it is whole different story.

[minifrij]

Sure there are. They’re just excluded by trust manipulators currently.

Then they're not DT members.

The post was reported to the people tasked to handle such things (i.e. not you).

But I will berate you for not doing anything about it anyway.

[OgNasty]

I am happy that you have found scammer and warned community about them. The way you have presented this, well, it is whole different story.

It doesn’t matter what I find or how it’s presented. Those with ulterior motives only know one way to respond (see below post). However, unless I’m vastly mistaken, I believe my thoughts and actions are in line with how the administration of this forum would like to see things being done. If I’m wrong, please theymos or Cobra reach out to me via PM and help me see the error of my ways.

Sure there are. They’re just excluded by trust manipulators currently.

Then they're not DT members.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;dtview

[minifrij]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;dtview

Excluded from the DT list (and therefore unseen by default) = not a DT member.

[peloso]

Lauda and some members of her cult are the problem here not DT. And the sooner they’re out the better.

but to neutralize Lauda need off trust system otherwise ton of scammers will get power as Lauda ( allready got )
i absolutely agree with Cøbra
disabling this system will better  for community

[cryptohunter]

The trust system does more good than harm in terms of detecting scammers, look at the market place specially the digital goods, there are tons of confirmed scammers, members have a lead on them by seeing their trust score, there is a good part of harm indeed, but it's NOT bad enough to take over the good part.

That could  be true but it does not mean over all it is net positive. You have to take into account the innocent accounts destroyed in this and the fall out from that ie the forum is getting a hostile environment and it will only get worse while persons are using red tags for anything other than scams or direct scammers. The possible implications for free speech.

most of those people are very likely the scammers who don't like to be tagged for obvious reasons.

That is speculation and possibly not true at all

almost everywhere on the internet where there is any type of trading, there is a trust system , they call it review and feedback, some different terms and some technical differences do exist here , but overall it's all the same concept, the only advantage / disadvantage the forum has over most other places - is that they give much more weight to DT feedback than everybody else, it's a great feature to prevent trust farming , but when used in the wrong manner, it creates the mess we have now.

getting rid of DT is not the same as scrapping the trust system.

although a broken trust system that can be used to suffocate free speech is worse than no trust system altogether.

this is simply because the trust system is being misused sometimes, some members base their feedback on personal b.s or self-interest. this can be solved by enforcing some rules on DT members to maintain the trust system and keep it on track ,whereby only scammers should be tagged.

it makes sense that the majority of complains come from non scammers, because scammers don't really complain, they just move on and create a new account, this again all comes down to how do some DT members use the trust system terribly.

Was not expecting this........... Fully agree with this 100%

exactly, tweaking is important, in fact simple tweaks will do the trick, a single rule that states "any DT member who tag anyone for non-scam related subject and without a proper evidence will be unlisted from DT" -This will stop 90% of complains, the scoring will be more accurate.

 

Yes I agree with this part too.


Either tighten DT up so that abuse is prevented or punished and then reversed. Or scrap DT and push people to make their own custom lists. Or just call the entire thing feedback and people have to read it all and investigate the persons full history here.

I would rather see a few risk takers who do not do their homework possibly get scammed than see the freedom of speech here crushed and the entire place become a hostile environment.

DDE should eventually fix all of this to a degree.