Theymos I believe there is an issue with your trust algo.

[TMAN]

This user - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=679341 is showing on the below list of DT

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

as you can see here - there are 0 DT-1 members trusting this user.



If this is the correct action of the current system, then all it will take is a single nefarious user with 250 merits to build up a network of enough votes to include someone on DT-1 I see this as a serious hole in the system (correct me if I am wrong)

I am in no way saying that this user is nefarious although his immediate retaliatory exclusions are rather pathetic, but it does show that there should be a further tweak to your system.

interesting to hear other members thoughts as well

EDIT - Local rule here, please cryptohunter do not post in this thread again as of your post in #10 I and many others do not value anything you spout and you are polluting meta,

[1715130701]

1715130701

[Lauda]

This user - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=679341 is showing on the below list of DT

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

as you can see here - there are 0 DT-1 members trusting this user.

-snip-

If this is the correct action of the current system, then all it will take is a single nefarious user with 250 merits to build up a network of enough votes to include someone on DT-1 I see this as a serious hole in the system (correct me if I am wrong)

As per the current implementation of the DT1 system, you don't need any inclusions from actual DT1 members to get on that list.

[mOgliE]

If this is the correct action of the current system, then all it will take is a single nefarious user with 250 merits to build up a network of enough votes to include someone on DT-1 I see this as a serious hole in the system (correct me if I am wrong)

Isn't it the idea of how it must work?

From what I understood the DT-1 is now all about including someone without the need of a DT-1 member approbation.

[The Cryptovator]

If I am not wrong then someone no need vote from DT1 or DT2 to become DT1. Probably your mentioned account passed by current criteria, but he didn't got any vote from DT1, but since 3 DT1 exclude him that's why showing -3. Means that user is not added by any DT1 so rusted rating : 0, and exclude by 3 DT1so distrusted rating : -3.

So my opinions current algorithm working fine.

This link : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;dtview only view of DT1.

[mdayonliner]

I could not follow DefaultTrust changes after leaving my last response to the topic. Today I will read the rest and hopefully will be able to write you about my thinking.

The information I currently have in mind that
More distrust than trust by other DT1 eliminate anyone from the DT1 list (see the info graph) and I see you are not looking for this answer.

[Lauda]

If I am not wrong then someone no need vote from DT1 or DT2 to become DT1.

That is correct.

[TMAN]

I am in no way saying that this user is nefarious although his immediate retaliatory exclusions are rather pathetic

Changing my stance here - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5098584.0

he is a dodgy fuck and has no business voting anyone on or off DT.

You need to change the set up, Either people excluded have no inclusion or exclusion vote or if someone eligible has no backing of other DT members (shouldnt be hard if there is 50 DT-1 members voting) then they should be wiped from the list.

[TheFuzzStone]

Wow, I'm so popular in these last few days...  

I will leave you a few links:

• DefaultTrust changes

• A short introduction to the Trust System

• [Explained] Importance of Custom Trust List

• Customized Trust Network – Interactive tool to see who we trust/distrust

• [Infographic] Leaving Feedback vs Custom Trust List

EDIT. typos

[Findingnemo]

I am in no way saying that this user is nefarious although his immediate retaliatory exclusions are rather pathetic

Changing my stance here - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5098584.0

he is a dodgy fuck and has no business voting anyone on or off DT.

You need to change the set up, Either people excluded have no inclusion or exclusion vote or if someone eligible has no backing of other DT members (shouldnt be hard if there is 50 DT-1 members voting) then they should be wiped from the list.

When someone meet the criteria to become DT1 then their name will always have in the DT1 list but if they are distrusted by more DT1s than the trusted one their name will be striked out this is how the system works.But when someone caught for abusing the authority of Default trust they can be manually blacklisted by theymos.

[cryptohunter]

The obvious problem with it is that it is broken.

Because it relies on merit which is totally broken.

People are simply cycling their merits to each other (proven) does not matter what reason they give

Then voting the same people on to DT because the merit cyclers are the main ones that meet the threshold merit.

Simply observable by pulling up bpip  and studying top fans and receivers (even worse I am sure if you can see top 20)

start with suchmoon , loyceV, the pharmacist, ioeioe  start finishing through them all on bpip they are a linked together through the fans and receivers that's just the top 10.

Then pull up the DT lists of inclusions exclusions and you soon see what a joke the entire thing is.

I think you will find that is the main issue with it.

Merit should be abolished it is only good for stopping new spammers rank up. After snr it should be decoupled from rank and also legends should not be permited to give it to other legends.

NOTHING should be built upon the merit system in its subjective and gameable state.

Merit was and is a low low value metric because it was left with no criteria or strict mandate and no way to stop cycling it to friends and colluders who you all help get on to DT to push their agenda.  So not only does it mean something different to every person, depending on mood, or if they like your views it is also used by people to attract asslickers who they can recruit to their group.

I like this statement from suchmoon which is not especially damning since anyone is allowed to merit in this fashion.

I notice this post I reported all got merited ,Were this bad reports on my side? how come I wasn't rewarded or are  the merit reward for reporting quality post optional? If they aren't them I believe I should be encouraged

[...]

Noted,  I suggest the meriting of report should stop or all valid report should be merited. It isn't just fair meeting some and ignoring others (I'm taking about the reports not the reported posts). Lets play fair. It makes me feel undervalued when I come over here I see reports get merited but mine isn't.

If you're doing it for merits you're doing it wrong. Reading your post makes me cringe, please stop. This might even get you on Loyce's ignore list.

Also please keep in mind that every merit sender makes their own decisions so I can only speak for myself. The amounts of merit I send can vary from 0 to a lot, depending on how good the post is, my mood, the music I'm listening to, what my spouse is wearing, and whether I can get the stupid GRIN miner finally working on the GTX 1060 before Tuesday. That's just how life is.

LOL yeah merit such an objective meaningful metric let's link it to trust too whilst we are at it. Sounds like a good plan.