DefaultTrust changes

[mOgliE]

Hellooooooooo

I got a small question. I finally made a personnal trustlist. It's a start:

Code:

theymos
~TECSHARE
Vod
~cryptohunter
TMAN
hilariousandco
suchmoon
LoyceV
krogothmanhattan

There are other people not on the list that I trust or distrust but I've left them a feedback (positive or negative). Do I have to add them manually or are they automatically counted as trusted or excluded if I made a feedback?

Thanks in advance!

[1714062793]

1714062793

[1714062793]

1714062793

[1714062793]

1714062793

[1714062793]

1714062793

[1714062793]

1714062793

[DooMAD]

There are other people not on the list that I trust or distrust but I've left them a feedback (positive or negative). Do I have to add them manually or are they automatically counted as trusted or excluded if I made a feedback?

Feedback doesn't always correlate to overall trust.  If you made a successful trade with someone and left them positive feedback, it doesn't necessarily mean you agree with the feedback they've left other people.  You should include or exclude users based on the feedback they leave, who they have added to their own trust list and, in general, the judgement and reasoning they demonstrate in their encounters with other users.

But yes, to answer the question, you need to add them manually.

[mOgliE]

But yes, to answer the question, you need to add them manually.

Thank you.

[JayJuanGee]

Get this confirmed by someone that knows what they're talking about before you go and paint the town red  

You are correct. You can also double check by going to any profile you have left trust to, switching to default trust view by adding ";dt" at the end of the URL, and seeing if your name appears under the "Trusted feedback" section. Example: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=911719;dt

I thought that when you go to hierarchical (which is the same as putting ";full" on the end of the url) view on your trust settings and then you perform a find of your name on that page (ctrl f or command f), then you will see all mentions of your name which would show both inclusions and exclusions by other members.  Currently, I noticed with myself that I can only go to depth level 2 when using hierarchical view.  If I try to view either depth level 3 or 4 on hierarchical view, then I get a loading error (the page will not load).  Maybe too much data if viewed on depth level 3 or 4?

[tmfp]

Currently, I noticed with myself that I can only go to depth level 2 when using hierarchical view.  If I try to view either depth level 3 or 4 on hierarchical view, then I get a loading error (the page will not load).  Maybe too much data if viewed on depth level 3 or 4?

Yes, I found that too.

[actmyname]

Currently, I noticed with myself that I can only go to depth level 2 when using hierarchical view.  If I try to view either depth level 3 or 4 on hierarchical view, then I get a loading error (the page will not load).  Maybe too much data if viewed on depth level 3 or 4?

Yes, I found that too.

Yeah, I did a bunch of testing with trust before the DT changes. I assume that with the massively increased number of DefaultTrust members, depth 3 has already exceeded the threshold.

[Lauda]

Currently, I noticed with myself that I can only go to depth level 2 when using hierarchical view.  If I try to view either depth level 3 or 4 on hierarchical view, then I get a loading error (the page will not load).  Maybe too much data if viewed on depth level 3 or 4?

Yes, I found that too.

Yeah, I did a bunch of testing with trust before the DT changes. I assume that with the massively increased number of DefaultTrust members, depth 3 has already exceeded the threshold.

It's a sign that we already have too many people in there. I can't imagine how it's going to be later if it keeps increasing a lot. You'd probably be able to do all sorts of nasty stuff for quite some time before someone picks up on it (assuming you stay hidden in the trash sections).

[xtraelv]

A major goal of this is to allow retaliatory distrusts and ratings to actually have some chance of mattering so that contentious ratings have an actual cost. If someone is obviously scamming, then any retaliatory rating should not last long due to the DT1 "voting", but if you negative-rate someone for generally disliking them, then their retaliation against you may stick. In borderline cases, it should result in something of a political battle.

This is inspired partly by something that David Friedman said once (though I can't find the quote), that one of the requirements for a peaceful society is the credible threat of retaliation in case you are harmed. As DT was organized previously, one or both sides of a dispute was usually unable to effectively retaliate to a rating, at least via the trust system itself. Now your ability to effectively retaliate will tend to increase as you become more established in the community, which should discourage abuse generally. (Or that's the idea, at least.)

All that being said, I still discourage retaliatory ratings, and with these changes I encourage people to try to "bury the hatchet" and de-escalate rather than trying to use any increased retaliatory power you now have. Also, it's best to make your own custom list, and you must do this if you want to be on DT1.

I am never completely tied to anything, but let's try this for at least a few months and see how it works.

I feel that we are all part of Theymos "ant-farm " experiment.

The unfortunate part of the trust system is that it holds political and potential scam power.

For this reason I think it would be good to create a list of values that the majority on the DT list would like to maintain.

It is interesting that while the list was created as a trust list it appears that distrust is more important.

One of the things that I would like to alert people to is the danger of removing some of the old DTs from the list.

For instance when Lauda was removed from the old list there were numerous scammers that suddenly were untagged. This worried me.

Having a charter of what is acceptable and what is unacceptable will bring both discussion and some agreement.

I feel the idea of the new DT system is to have more eyes and ears out there fighting scams.

[Gunthar]

One of the things that I would like to alert people to is the danger of removing some of the old DTs from the list.
For instance when Lauda was removed from the old list there were numerous scammers that suddenly were untagged. This worried me.

I agree, this is important, and I think to make it work with this new dynamic DT list, all actual and future DT members should keep tagging even if other DT members already tagged that user, in that way if the DT list changes, that scammer would still be red painted eventually.

[The Cryptovator]

User Ente on DT2 added by SebastianJu,
Ente inactive from September 03, 2018 and he have left lot of positive feedback previously. I don't see any point to add him on DT2 since he is not active. His positive feedback will show green now to all profile.

You're on DT1, so you can exclude him yourself. As of right now, actmyname and I both left exclusions so he is off DT2.

Done

[DarkStar_]

User Ente on DT2 added by SebastianJu,
Ente inactive from September 03, 2018 and he have left lot of positive feedback previously. I don't see any point to add him on DT2 since he is not active. His positive feedback will show green now to all profile.

You're on DT1, so you can exclude him yourself. As of right now, actmyname and I both left exclusions so he is off DT2.

[Timelord2067]

[quote author=DarkStar_ link=topic=5095156.msg49321683#msg49321683 date=1547943895]
[quote author=Coolcryptovator link=topic=5095156.msg49318308#msg49318308 date=1547923874]
User Ente on DT2 added by SebastianJu,
Ente inactive from September 03, 2018 and he have left lot of positive feedback previously. I don't see any point to add him on DT2 since he is not active. His positive feedback will show green now to all profile.
[/quote]

You're on DT1, so you can exclude him yourself. As of right now, actmyname and I both left exclusions so he is off DT2.
[/quote]

SebastianJu received positive trust from Ente in 2015, perhaps it was a return thank-you?



Other than Bruno showing up,



none of the other names ring any bells for me:

Code:

Source file https://bitcointalk.org/trust.txt.xz timestamp: 19-01-2019 02:52:01 UTC

>> Ente
     custom_list: true
     included by (5): 
         22naru
         2weiX
         adamas
         SebastianJu
         TonerCoin
     excluded by none 
     customized trust list: 
         2weiX
         Akka
         Andreas Schildbach
         BkkCoins
         casascius
         davout
         etotheipi
         Gavin Andresen
         joecooin
         kangasbros
         Matthew N. Wright
         molecular
         organofcorti
         Phinnaeus Gage
         Rassah
         satoshi
         SebastianJu
         sodoku
         theymos
         yossarian
         zefir

Perhaps trust of Bruno is the real reason you want him off of DT2?

[Lauda]

User Ente on DT2 added by SebastianJu,
Ente inactive from September 03, 2018 and he have left lot of positive feedback previously. I don't see any point to add him on DT2 since he is not active. His positive feedback will show green now to all profile.

You're on DT1, so you can exclude him yourself. As of right now, actmyname and I both left exclusions so he is off DT2.

SebastianJu received positive trust from Ente in 2015, perhaps it was a return thank-you?


-snip-

This does not surprise me from the so called mr. "scaling-backwards expert" one bit. If there is no other visible reason for the inclusion of Ente, then you can be certain that it was a CITM move.

[Timelord2067]

User Ente on DT2 added by SebastianJu,
Ente inactive from September 03, 2018 and he have left lot of positive feedback previously. I don't see any point to add him on DT2 since he is not active. His positive feedback will show green now to all profile.

You're on DT1, so you can exclude him yourself. As of right now, actmyname and I both left exclusions so he is off DT2.

If DarkStar_ was genuine in removing UID's simply because they were inactive, he'd remove UID's such as

Code:

mexxer-2

http://archive.fo/tBvag#selection-503.5-503.35 - last posted a month ago.

Code:

shorena

http://archive.fo/0oYQQ#selection-347.0-347.30 - last online more than a month ago
http://archive.fo/8KgWo#selection-635.5-635.31 - posted just once in last seven months

[Lauda]

User Ente on DT2 added by SebastianJu,
Ente inactive from September 03, 2018 and he have left lot of positive feedback previously. I don't see any point to add him on DT2 since he is not active. His positive feedback will show green now to all profile.

You're on DT1, so you can exclude him yourself. As of right now, actmyname and I both left exclusions so he is off DT2.

If DarkStar_ was genuine in removing UID's simply because they were inactive, he'd remove UID's such as

Code:

mexxer-2

http://archive.fo/tBvag#selection-503.5-503.35 - last posted a month ago.

He's not in DT2, is he?

Code:

shorena

All his tags after 2016 are covered. I'll do mexxer too soon.

[DarkStar_]

User Ente on DT2 added by SebastianJu,
Ente inactive from September 03, 2018 and he have left lot of positive feedback previously. I don't see any point to add him on DT2 since he is not active. His positive feedback will show green now to all profile.

You're on DT1, so you can exclude him yourself. As of right now, actmyname and I both left exclusions so he is off DT2.

If DarkStar_ was genuine in removing UID's simply because they were inactive, he'd remove UID's such as

Code:

mexxer-2

http://archive.fo/tBvag#selection-503.5-503.35 - last posted a month ago.

Code:

shorena

http://archive.fo/0oYQQ#selection-347.0-347.30 - last online more than a month ago
http://archive.fo/8KgWo#selection-635.5-635.31 - posted just once in last seven months

Done.

[MadZ]

Since it seems we're addressing inactive/former DT2 members, I think its worth noting xetsr was finally (and rightfully) excluded. That being said, he did have a number of valid ratings before he went AWOL. If someone has the time to go through them (similar to mexxer and Shorena), it might be worth it.

[Lauda]

Since it seems we're addressing inactive/former DT2 members, I think its worth noting xetsr was finally (and rightfully) excluded. That being said, he did have a number of valid ratings before he went AWOL. If someone has the time to go through them (similar to mexxer and Shorena), it might be worth it.

Give me two days and I'll start redoing every rating he sent.

[Timelord2067]

Since it seems we're addressing inactive/former DT2 members, I think its worth noting xetsr was finally (and rightfully) excluded. That being said, he did have a number of valid ratings before he went AWOL. If someone has the time to go through them (similar to mexxer and Shorena), it might be worth it.

Give me two days and I'll start redoing every rating he sent.

Same with TomatoCage:

Code:

Last Active: 	04 May 2018, 09:46:06

monbux

Code:

Last Active: 	28 August 2018, 04:08:22

Zepher

Code:

Last Active: 	15 November 2018, 23:00:55

james.lent

Code:

Last Active: 	19 November 2018, 21:04:01

Muhammed Zakir

Code:

Last Active: 	16 December 2018, 11:27:34

[TMAN]

Same with TomatoCage:

Code:

Last Active: 	04 May 2018, 09:46:06

monbux

Code:

Last Active: 	28 August 2018, 04:08:22

Zepher

Code:

Last Active: 	15 November 2018, 23:00:55

james.lent

Code:

Last Active: 	19 November 2018, 21:04:01

Muhammed Zakir

Code:

Last Active: 	16 December 2018, 11:27:34

confirmed alts, all had a last sign in date of 2018!

/s

love your efforts really dude