Negative trust for bad posting.

[Jet Cash]

I've just given this guy negative trust for bad posting.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=2534030

What he did was to make a post which was solely a quote of the opening post, and not adding any comments whatsoever.
Quote abuse like this is so annoying, and it is destructive to the forum in my opinion. Do you think that negative trust is an extreme penalty?

[1715486346]

1715486346

[Lafu]

I would just report the post even he has that one only done !

Maybe a Bot or newbie how dont know all !

[Lauda]

Don't do that. Whenever you see one of these use the report to moderator button.

[tmfp]

I've just given this guy negative trust for bad posting.
... Do you think that negative trust is an extreme penalty?

Yes.
 

[Jet Cash]

Well it is more work for the mods, and unless the guy gets an explanation, then he won't know what he did wrng, and may even start a thread on the Meta board.

Hopefully this action may serve as a warning to other newbies. I can always remove it if he contacts me, or if people think it is not a good thing for me to do.

[tmfp]

Well it is more work for the mods, and unless the guy gets an explanation, then he won't know what he did wrng, and may even start a thread on the Meta board.

Hopefully this action may serve as a warning to other newbies. I can always remove it if he contacts me, or if people think it is not a good thing for me to do.

I don't understand any of that logic.
Being in Default Trust and red tagging newbies because you find them

annoying

is not the way to go. IMO.

[DooMAD]

Insubstantial or low quality posts are not related to trust.  I get that we're still finding our way with the new DT system, but some of this stuff is fairly self-explanatory:

Breaking forum rules = report to mod

Dishonest conduct = trust

If you want to give them some pointers on their posting habits, a private message would be best.  They're more likely to see it that way.

[Lafu]

I see that often when i am on the Report Mission that Newbies or most times Bots quote just the opening post !

I report them to the Mod and they get deleted !

If they feel misunderstanded and they are a real user they will ask way the post was removed.

[Heisenberg_Hunter]

Well, your negative trust has nothing to do with his account considering he is a newbie. But both Negative and Positive Trust is not meant for that. Just quoting the post and shitposting doesn't mean that you don't trust him. So, if you see a quality poster will you trust him?

As the trust quote says,

Warning: Trade with extreme caution!

What did he actually do? Did he scam anyone or has he traded with you and you don't trust him?

We should give time for newbies to use this forum and understand how it works. Even though he may be a legendary guy, you should not distrust him. Trust is not meant for that.

Regarding spams, I report and mod removes those posts. If the user repeats that, I always PM them stating that they are spamming. Some have realized those and started posting meaningful.

[FatBen]

Negative trust is not really necessary. What if the quote was just a mistake by the newbie?
Imagine someone carrying a "trade with caution" tag for the rest of his time in this forum just because of a quoted post. 

Come on, I think reporting to a mod would be more appropriate.

[suchmoon]

Well it is more work for the mods, and unless the guy gets an explanation, then he won't know what he did wrng, and may even start a thread on the Meta board.

Hopefully this action may serve as a warning to other newbies. I can always remove it if he contacts me, or if people think it is not a good thing for me to do.

Report to moderators and/or send a PM to the user explaining what they did wrong. I think it's not a good thing for you to do

[TheBeardedBaby]

Breaking the forum rules does not make you untrustworthy, the feedback-trust is designed for that. Reporting should be enough, Mods are the one to take care of such things.

[Jet Cash]

I've always thought of the trust system as a measure of a persons trading integrity,but recently it has started to be used for other purposes, and I think those are more related to reputation.  Example are merit abuse, account buying and selling, and signature spamming. I'm still trying to get a feel for the place when the line should be drawn in the current forum environment.

Hopefully this thread will highlight a bad posting habit, and if a few members read it and take note, then it will have been a success.

[bill gator]

Once you believe that the user is posting poorly in an abusive manner that would deem their conduct untrustworthy, it would be fair to leave them trust (neutral, or negative depending on circumstance) at that point. Everyone makes honest mistakes and there are legitimately new users finding this forum daily.

Leaving negative trust for one bad post is over the top, in my opinion.

Side-Note: the post has been deleted.

[CryptopreneurBrainboss]

This can be consider as abuse of the trust system. I know your intentions were clear but getting a red tag can discourage user from forum. Instead a pm directing user to rules of forum will be great and reporting post as others have suggested.

[hilariousandco]

Well it is more work for the mods, and unless the guy gets an explanation, then he won't know what he did wrng, and may even start a thread on the Meta board.

Hopefully this action may serve as a warning to other newbies. I can always remove it if he contacts me, or if people think it is not a good thing for me to do.

Just report them, and/or instead of leaving him negative trust just send him a friendly PM warning instead. It takes the same amount of effort.

[Jet Cash]

Thanks for all the replies and comments. I've removed the red trust as a result.

I'll leave this thread open for comments as an indication of my displeasure with the practice. I would also like to thank the mod who deleted the subject post.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Definitely just report posts/threads/whatever like that to the mods.  Funny you did this on the anniversary of the merit system, because tagging shitposters was exactly what was being done right up until January 2018.  DT members aren't doing that anymore, and it's generally been accepted that it's not a good use of the trust system and that nobody should be tagging morons for their low-quality posts.

Happy anniversary to the merit system!

[suchmoon]

I've always thought of the trust system as a measure of a persons trading integrity,but recently it has started to be used for other purposes, and I think those are more related to reputation.  Example are merit abuse, account buying and selling, and signature spamming. I'm still trying to get a feel for the place when the line should be drawn in the current forum environment.

Hopefully this thread will highlight a bad posting habit, and if a few members read it and take note, then it will have been a success.

Generally speaking, if something violates forum rules then it should be reported to moderators and the trust system should not be used. Don't take their jobs away

Having said that, I have neg-trusted some egregious spammers that e.g. distribute malware. This is against the rules and mods will likely nuke them but in the few minutes or hours until that's done it's worth putting the red tag on.

This also creates some gray areas, e.g. extreme trolling. It's against the rules but one is unlikely to get banned for that (makes me wonder what happened to our favorite troll but I digress) and some users consider such behavior untrustworthy so there are some red tags flying around for that now.

Some of those gray areas could be mitigated via merits perhaps. Spammers and trolls won't be getting many of those.

[S_Therapist]

IIRC, theymos has asked people not to leave negative  trust feedback for shitposting. I think people should tag only with valid reason.