A short introduction to the Trust System

[qwk]

To begin with, your Trust Network is preset with a list of other users whose Feedback ratings you trust automatically.
Those users were chosen in a special procedure that's detailed down below.

When those users leave negative Feedback for a user, his Trust Score turns red.
If they leave positive Feedback, his Trust Score turns green.

This Trust Score is not displayed all over the forum, but only in boards where goods or services are offered.

These presets are probably useful for you as a newbie at bitcointalk, as long as you don't know the people around here.
Unfortunately, it happens that even users with green scores turn out to be scammers.

Green Trust doesn't mean you should be careless!
Red Trust, on the other hand, usually means you should take care.


Once you start making your own experiences with other users by trading, or when you feel that you are finally able to judge people's trustworthiness, you should start leaving your own Feedback.
This Feedback will alter the Trust Score of users only in your own eyes at first.
Others won't see the Feedback you leave at first*, and the Trust Score they see won't be affected by your Feedback.
For now, the Feedback you leave will only be meaningful for yourself.

* they may chose to view this "private" Feedback if they so wish, though.


Advanced use of the Trust System

The day might come when you no longer want to rely on the judgment of a preset group of users, but rather chose yourself whose Feedback to trust.

To do so, it's necessary to work on your own Trust List.
The Trust List settings can be found here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust

You may wonder why there's no list of users there, as I've explained above, but rather a single entry called "DefaultTrust".
DefaultTrust is a special user who maintains his own Trust List.
The Trust List of DefaultTrust includes the names of those preset users I've talked about.
Beneath the list, there's a value called "Depth". This value represents the number of "steps down" which the forum's software will look into Trust Lists of people in your own Trust List, to construct your final, complete list.


Let's view a simple example. Depth is 1.

DefaultTrust's Trust List
* Alice
* Bob

Alice's Trust List
* Carol
* Dan
* Eve

Bob's Trust List
* Frank
* Grace
* ~Eve

As you can see, "Eve" is in two lists, in one of them with a prefix "~".

The final Trust List that the forum's software will generate will now look like this:
* DefaultTrust
* Alice
* Bob
* Carol
* Dan
* Frank
* Grace

Those are the people whose judgment you trust for the moment.
All Feedback left by those users will be taken into account to calculate the Trust Score you'll see displayed.
Of course, your own Feedback will be taken into account as well.

You might have noticed that Eve doesn't show up in the final list.
The reason is simply that Eve is added "positively" to the Trust List of Alice, but at the same time, by the prefix "~", Bob tells us that he explicitly distrusts the judgment of Eve.
The software will now calculate "+ Eve" and "- Eve", which equals "Zero Eve", so Eve won't show up.
Actually, that's not true, a score of 0 will still keep Eve on the list, only a negative score, i.e. more people distrusting Eve than trusting her will lead to her exclusion.
I'll leave the example with only two lists standing for simplicity's sake, though.


Now, to set up your own Trust List, you might not want to create one from scratch.
To create a list based on other users' judgements, you may just include other users' Feedback by including their names into your own Trust List and set Depth to 1.
If you believe that the people in your Trust List not only leave valuable Feedback, but also maintain good Trust Lists themselves, feel free to set Depth to 2.
I advise against higher values for Depth. That will lead to a final Trust List that includes an enormous number of people.

If you're convinced of a specific user's "bad judgment", you may simply include their name with the prefix "~".
Away with his Feedback and his Trust List, no matter how many people have included him or her.


In the extreme case where you don't want to trust anyone's judgment but your own, you may just want to include the single entry "~DefaultTrust", with a Depth of 0, preferably.
Depth 0 means that you will only take into account the Feedback of the users in your Trust List, but not their Trust Lists.
DefaultTrust doesn't leave Feedback of his own, by the way, so you might as well keep DefaultTrust without the "~" at Depth 0.


Unfortunately, there's no way to set a specific Depth for each user in your Trust List, e.g. when you know someone whose Feedback you consider valuable but whose Trust List is a mess.
Now that'd be an improvement suggestion for the Trust System, right?


I hope this short introduction helps you understand the Trust System a little better.
Once you've come to understand it, you'll notice that it's an elegant system with its two distinct lists, Feedback and Trust List. The combination of which allows for quite some finetuning.

Unfortunately, most users misunderstand how the trust system works.

TL;DR:
Feedback is where your direct experience with other users goes (trading etc.) and / or your "opinion" about the trustworthiness of a certain user.
Trust List is where users go whose Feedback you consider valuable.
A lot of people confuse the two and put people in their Trust List whom they trust.
This is in most cases useless, and in a few cases even harmful.

[1713482888]

1713482888

[qwk]

Caveat: I'm not 100% sure if I understand the new system in its entirety so far.
Also, the system seems to still be undergoing change

So how are users chosen for DefaultTrust?

In the past, our benevolent forum dictator theymos simply appointed the users in DefaultTrust by decree.
That was, to put it mildly, a constant source of criticism and bickering.
On January 10, 2019, Skynet woke up a new system was set up, which is based in part on the merit system.

Simply put, users on DefaultTrust are "voted" for by the users of bitcointalk.
A user needs to have earned 10 merit before being eligible to vote.
"Super-Voters" are users who have earned 250 merit.
(if voting for someone, the number of merit you've received from that specific person is not counted)

To cast a vote you have to include the name of the user into your own Trust List.
There's no limit to the number of users you may include in your list, giving you an unlimited number of votes.
You cannot vote for a single user more than once, though, and the order of your Trust List doesn't matter.


To be elected, you need at least 10 votes of "simple" voters and 2 votes of Super-Voters.
That will make you a "candidate".

You'll also have to meet a few more requirements:
- be at least "Member"
- been online in the last three days
- have posted in the last 30 days
- maintain a Trust List with at least 10 entries (not counting "~"-entries)
- not be banned
- not be on some kind of blacklist (maintained in secret by theymos?)

Once elected in this fashion, you will show up on DefaultTrust.
If other users on DefaultTrust vote you out with a "~", though, that might lead to your exclusion.
In fact, the system to create DefaultTrust is a little more complicated than that.
This being a "short introduction", I'll skip the details, though.


For you as a regular user wanting to have a say in who goes onto DefaultTrust, all this means:
Earn at least 10 merit yourself, or even better, 250 merit!
Maintain your Trust List!
That's the only way your vote counts!


A personal plea by me: please consider taking users of local boards into your Trust Lists, even if you don't understand the gibberish they call their "language".
How to find out who's a good user? Well, ask around!
The local boards need strong trust networks, and in many cases they have no lobby here. Thank you.

[The Cryptovator]

When those users leave positive Feedback for a user, his Trust Score turns red.

I think type mistake. It will be negative (IMO)
Nice explanation with easy method.

Unfortunately, there's no way to set a specific Depth for each user in your Trust List, e.g. when you know someone whose Feedback you consider valuable but whose Trust List is a mess.
Now that'd be an improvement suggestion for the Trust System, right?

Yes, It was around my mind. But I use by default 2 since there is no chance to choose specifically.

Green Trust doesn't mean you should be careless!
Red Trust, on the other hand, usually means you should take care.

I think this is the most useful and important part of OP. Green trust doesn't indicate that he will not scam. People's should read feedback before make any trade that feedback really for what.

At the same time people's should care when they will trade with red tagged. Sometimes I have seen on Accusation board, someone is getting scam by tagged user.

[mikeywith]

Once elected in this fashion, you will show up on DefaultTrust.
If other users on DefaultTrust vote you out with a "~", though, that might lead to your exclusion.

I do not think once you are elected you show up on DT , it only makes eligible to go to stage 2 of the election ( where others who passes stage 1 have to give you trust you more than they distrust you ) and where you can actually "vote" for other DT members.

you need to pass these two stages.

so even if you were trusted by everyone on the forum and you do not meet the stage 1 election rules of having your own trust list, have posted in the last 30 days etc, then you can't be on DT.

also goes the other way around, if you meet all those criteria but non of those other members who meet the criteria trust you , then you are not be on the DT.
 

[qwk]

Once elected in this fashion, you will show up on DefaultTrust.
If other users on DefaultTrust vote you out with a "~", though, that might lead to your exclusion.

I do not think once you are elected you show up on DT , it only makes eligible to go to stage 2 of the election ( where others who passes stage 1 have to give you trust you more than they distrust you ) and where you can actually "vote" for other DT members.

you need to pass these two stages.

That's one way to put it, but I've simplified the process for the introduction to the trust system, since the "inter-DT-voting" process is not really something the regular user needs to take into account.
People who are on DT1 should take a much closer look at the workings of the system, of course.

[CryptopreneurBrainboss]

Hello qwk I decided to make use of the trust system but I'm a little confused, lets say I decided to add the users below to my trust list, from the image below please answer my questions.
    

1: what's the maximum number of users I can add to my trust list?
2: that which the back arrow is pointing at what does it mean?
3: that which the red arrow is pointing at, what does it mean and what's the maximum number to write there?.  

I'll appreciate if I get a direct answer from qwk or someone who truly knows the answer to my questions and not just some random reply.

[qwk]

Hello qwk I decided to make use of the trust system but I'm a little confused, lets say I decided to add the users below to my trust list, from the image below please answer my questions.
    

1: what's the maximum number of users I can add to my trust list?

I honestly don't know if there's actually a maximum number.

2: that which the back arrow is pointing at what does it mean?

That's the title for "Depth" mentioned in the introduction.

3: that which the red arrow is pointing at, what does it mean and what's the maximum number to write there?.  

That's the value of "Depth". You may want to set it to 1 or 2.

[LoyceV]

As you can see, "Eve" is in two lists, in one of them with a prefix "~".

~snip~

You might have noticed that Eve doesn't show up in the final list.
The reason is simply that Eve is added "positively" to the Trust List of Alice, but at the same time, by the prefix "~", Bob tells us that he explicitly distrusts the judgment of Eve.
The software will now calculate "+ Eve" and "- Eve", which equals "Zero Eve", so Eve won't show up.

This is incorrect: Eve would show up.
Example:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;dt shows this:

Code:

EFS (0)

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=952340;dt shows this:

EFS   2018-02-09   0.00000000      Left me fake feedback for unknown reason.

A user needs more exclusions than inclusions to be excluded.

[qwk]

A user needs more exclusions than inclusions to be excluded.

Dammit, you're right. Now I need to have a third example list to make it work.
Shame on you!

[The Cryptovator]

1: what's the maximum number of users I can add to my trust list?

There is no limit, you can add if you want all forum members.

2: that which the back black arrow is pointing at what does it mean?

This is the depth, you can select up to depth 4. I will explain it below

3: that which the red arrow is pointing at, what does it mean and what's the maximum number to write there?.

When you will add custom list it will be 2 by default. If you want to change you can do it. You can select from 1 to 4. What happend if you select 1 or 4? For your information you can't select any specific depth to specific user. Means if you change depth on your custom list then all your listed user will change. Now you have to decide what number you should select. Better depth 2 only.

Let's say you add me on your custom list. But you select depth;1 then you will see only my feedback. Whoever in my trust list their feedback will not visible to you.

Let's say you select me depth;4, now you will see my feedback and up to more 3 level who is my trust list. Like I add qwk, qwk add LoyceV , LoyceV add suchmoon. So you will see upto suchmoon feedback if you select depth 4. If you select depth 3 then you will see feedback upto LoyceV. If you select depth 2 then you will see feedback upto qwk.
Note: The feedback and rating will visible only to you. Not by all forum members. But if you are in DT1 Then all forum member will able see up to depth 2 feedback on current trust system.

[owlcatz]

Just keep  your default on 2. Otherwise, you are dealing with more (or less)! shit than you need to.

Qwk - great post!    

[DabLjat]

A personal plea by me: please consider taking users of local boards into your Trust Lists, even if you don't understand the gibberish they call their "language".
How to find out who's a good user? Well, ask around!
The local boards need strong trust networks, and in many cases they have no lobby here. Thank you.

Right now we are trying to create a local network of trust in the Russian section, but there is no success yet:

[Challenge] Create your Trust list

Too few users have scored more than 250 Merit. While involved only one such user: Alex_Sr

[Lauda]

A personal plea by me: please consider taking users of local boards into your Trust Lists, even if you don't understand the gibberish they call their "language".
How to find out who's a good user? Well, ask around!
The local boards need strong trust networks, and in many cases they have no lobby here. Thank you.

Right now we are trying to create a local network of trust in the Russian section, but there is no success yet. Too few users have scored more than 250 Merit.
[Challenge] Create your Trust list

Based on what? Random users that never traded and/or never sent almost any feedback to others?

[DabLjat]

Based on what? Random users that never traded and/or never sent almost any feedback to others? Great idea.

There is such a thing - reputation. We choose users who have earned the respect of many users of the Russian local Board.

[Lauda]

Based on what? Random users that never traded and/or never sent almost any feedback to others? Great idea.

There is such a thing - reputation. We choose users who have earned the respect of many users of the Russian local Board.

That's indeed a good method for determining who to trust. That is, if you want to be scammed. I'm not surprised by a local board's community's inability to properly use this system though.

[LoyceV]

That's indeed a good method for determining who to trust. That is, if you want to be scammed. I'm not surprised by a local board's community's inability to properly use this system though.

I predicted this would happen:

I can imagine other communities will make their own DT1 "clique": for example a group of Russians, a group of Indonesians and a group of bounty hunters. As long as they stay out of each other's hair, they can co-exist. The moment they touch, it feels like a black hole collision competing for exclusions.

It's the new reality:

Unlike the previous policy, I will not generally be trying to cultivate a good list; that will be left to the DT1 members themselves. However, I reserve the right to remove you and blacklist you from future selection if you engage in egregious and obvious abuse, or if multiple known alt accounts could be selected.

[qwk]

I predicted this would happen:

I can imagine other communities will make their own DT1 "clique": for example a group of Russians, a group of Indonesians and a group of bounty hunters. As long as they stay out of each other's hair, they can co-exist. The moment they touch, it feels like a black hole collision competing for exclusions.

I don't see too many risks involved with that happening.

Let's assume "the Russians" manage to come up with 2 250+ merit users and a decent number of 10+s.
They vote one or two of their respected fellow Russians into DT1, let's call them Yuri and Ivan (am I being racist? ).
Now, Yuri and Ivan maintain their respective Trust Lists in a "good" way, no problem.
If, OTOH, Yuri and Ivan start including scammers or shady members of the Russian mob into their Trust List, I doubt that will go unnoticed by their fellow DT1ers (most likely, complaints would start flooding Meta).
With ~s from DT1ers accumulating, they'd be off DT1 before anything really bad happens.

Also, from what I think I know about people in general, someone being voted into DT1 will try and behave in a manner that will keep him in position. It may not necessarily be a matter of pride, but being kicked out is still something humans usually have a dislike for.

At the same time, I doubt that a small group of Russians or, e.g. Germans could ever overwhelm DT1.
Inter-DT1-Trust-Lists will confirm the "seats" of reliable DT1ers against any attempt by a small enough group to kick them out.

Long story short: I strongly believe that "local" DT1ers won't cause much trouble.

[bones261]

I predicted this would happen:

I can imagine other communities will make their own DT1 "clique": for example a group of Russians, a group of Indonesians and a group of bounty hunters. As long as they stay out of each other's hair, they can co-exist. The moment they touch, it feels like a black hole collision competing for exclusions.

I don't see too many risks involved with that happening.

Let's assume "the Russians" manage to come up with 2 250+ merit users and a decent number of 10+s.
They vote one or two of their respected fellow Russians into DT1, let's call them Yuri and Ivan (am I being racist? ).
Now, Yuri and Ivan maintain their respective Trust Lists in a "good" way, no problem.
If, OTOH, Yuri and Ivan start including scammers or shady members of the Russian mob into their Trust List, I doubt that will go unnoticed by their fellow DT1ers (most likely, complaints would start flooding Meta).
With ~s from DT1ers accumulating, they'd be off DT1 before anything really bad happens.

Also, from what I think I know about people in general, someone being voted into DT1 will try and behave in a manner that will keep him in position. It may not necessarily be a matter of pride, but being kicked out is still something humans usually have a dislike for.

At the same time, I doubt that a small group of Russians or, e.g. Germans could ever overwhelm DT1.
Inter-DT1-Trust-Lists will confirm the "seats" of reliable DT1ers against any attempt by a small enough group to kick them out.

Long story short: I strongly believe that "local" DT1ers won't cause much trouble.

Furthermore, there is an additional stipulation in the 2 250+ merit rule.

 - You must have at least 2 people directly trusting you with an earned merit of at least 250, not including merit you yourself sent.

For example, I currently have 260 merits. I could add suchmoon to my trust list. However, suchmoon is one of my merit fans. So if I deduct suchmoon's merits, I only have 211 merits with respect to my vote for suchmoon, so my inclusion of suchmoon would not count in respect to that user for the 2 members with 250 merit. You'd need a wider network of users in order to get your puppets into DT1.
(As an aside, I'm having difficulty determining what pronoun to use when referring to Lauda and suchmoon. Him, her, they?  )

[qwk]

For example, I currently have 260 merits. I could add suchmoon to my trust list. However, suchmoon is one of my merit fans. So if I deduct suchmoon's merits, I only have 211 merits with respect to my vote for suchmoon, so my inclusion of suchmoon would not count in respect to that user for the 2 members with 250 merit.

BTW, that's probably something that might be troubling local communities as well.
Just for example, I'm a major source of merit for the German board, so many of the 250+ers there received a lot of their merit from me, bringing their merit "weight" when it comes to voting for me below 250.
All my evil plans of world domination foiled!

[suchmoon]

(As an aside, I'm having difficulty determining what pronoun to use when referring to Lauda and suchmoon. Him, her, they?  )

Why limit verself to only 3 pronouns? I respond to any of these:




Re local boards: generally I don't care where you're from but I need to be able to understand you in order to include you in my trust list. I don't think that's a high bar. I could not include people based on hearsay/reputation/etc. But I think it's easier to have bilingual "bridges" between English and local boards with regards to trust than it is e.g. with merit. Merit sources need to bee in local boards constantly whereas DT inclusions require less maintenance.