An obvious case of trust abuse (DT members welcome)

[deisik]

I rarely look into my trust settings (more specifically, Ratings) as I'm not involved in merit exchange, buying and selling accounts, borrowing and lending anything, or any other potentially shady activity which you could receive a negative rating for. Today I was setting back my avatar and thus finally visited that part. Now I see that this dude accused me of being a signature spammer and gave me a negative rating:



As I consider it an obvious example of trust abuse, I ask DT members to tag this user appropriately. I'm not going to retaliate personally as I don't see a lot of sense in that, but it doesn't mean I will let it go. And while we are at it, anyone who has any issues with my posts on the forum (whether it be their quality, number, arrangement, or whatever is on your mind) speak it out here

[Findingnemo]

Anyone can have the freedom to give feedback about anyone but it only get weigh when they are in DT position,so you need to contact that person personally to solve this case because no one can do anything here.

But I saw that in the column of risked BTC,he/she has give 1000BTC which is inappropriate.

[suchmoon]

I don't see what Lucius is implying there (multiple posts in a row), nor is that a matter appropriate for the trust system. And the 1000 BTC amount risked is obviously fake. Please PM Lucius and/or get them to visit this thread to discuss that rating. Unfortunately we can't force anyone to remove a rating but you don't need to worry too much about it since it doesn't affect your default score.

[Steamtyme]

Hey I understand your frustration. There are a few facts you can take comfort in.

They are not DT so this shows as untrusted feedback.
The feedback shows how poorly they use the system by using false risked amounts.
The reference shows a sig campaign spreadsheet, there's nothing wrong with that.

With feedback like this if they ever wound up on DT people would reach out to them to have it changed, or they would be excluded pretty quick.

In the meantime you can leave your own neutral, about the situation and your opinion of the feedback, reach out to them regarding it, or just let it go.

[deisik]

Anyone can have the freedom to give feedback about anyone but it only get weigh when they are in DT position,so you need to contact that person personally to solve this case because no one can do anything here

This is a case of trust abuse which should be dealt with accordingly

Apart from that, there is nothing really to discuss with that dude as I expect people to be responsible for what they do and thus they should be ready to accept the consequences of their actions. In short, it is not me who should do anything here other than reporting this case

I don't see what Lucius is implying there (multiple posts in a row), nor is that a matter appropriate for the trust system. And the 1000 BTC amount risked is obviously fake. Please PM Lucius and/or get them to visit this thread to discuss that rating. Unfortunately we can't force anyone to remove a rating but you don't need to worry too much about it since it doesn't affect your default score

You don't get it. Such things are destroying the trust system. Not that I'm quite happy with it at all (I made my point pretty clear about it long ago) but it was basically none of my business. Now it is

[qwk]

Now I see that this dude accused me of being a signature spammer and gave me a negative rating:
[...]
As I consider it an obvious example of trust abuse, I ask DT members to tag this user appropriately.

Unfortunately, his reference doesn't really say anything about the validity of his negative feedback.
I consider that (and his fake amount) "bad style", but nothing more.
His rating is irrelevant anyhow, because it's not visible under ";dt".

I'm not going to retaliate personally

Wise decision, just ignore it.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

you don't need to worry too much about it since it doesn't affect your default score.

I would agree with you in so far as Lucius is currently not on DT, but with all the changes being made and all the new additions, you never know if he's going to be on DT at some point in the future.  And I agree that it's not appropriate feedback, even if it's untrusted.  Everyone should be handing out feedbacks with basically the same idea of what does and doesn't warrant a neg.  Theymos pretty much established that leaving negs for shitposting isn't appropriate, and adding a ridiculous bitcoin amount to it only makes it worse--that could easily get a DT member booted if he/she did that.

Hopefully Lucius will drop in and comment, and even better would be if he at least changed it to a neutral and left the risked amount blank.

[suchmoon]

Anyone can have the freedom to give feedback about anyone but it only get weigh when they are in DT position,so you need to contact that person personally to solve this case because no one can do anything here

This is a case of trust abuse which should be dealt with accordingly

Apart from that, there is nothing really to discuss with that dude as I expect people to be responsible for what they do and thus they should be ready to accept the consequences of their actions. In short, it is not me who should do anything here other than reporting this case

I don't see what Lucius is implying there (multiple posts in a row), nor is that a matter appropriate for the trust system. And the 1000 BTC amount risked is obviously fake. Please PM Lucius and/or get them to visit this thread to discuss that rating. Unfortunately we can't force anyone to remove a rating but you don't need to worry too much about it since it doesn't affect your default score

You don't get it. Such things are destroying the trust system. Not that I'm quite happy with it at all (I made my point pretty clear about it long ago) but it was basically none of my business. Now it is

That's exactly how the trust system works, and yes, you should at least inform the user if you want to fix this.

Then Lucius can either revise the rating or let it stay and likely get excluded. That's how it's "dealt with accordingly" since there is no way to force anyone to change their rating.

I would agree with you in so far as Lucius is currently not on DT, but with all the changes being made and all the new additions, you never know if he's going to be on DT at some point in the future.

Unlikely: http://loyce.club/trust/2019-02-25_Mon_21.39h/533583.html

But if the rating doesn't get revised I'll probably add a comment (neutral rating) just in case.

[deisik]

Unfortunately, his reference doesn't really say anything about the validity of his negative feedback

Everyone should be handing out feedbacks with basically the same idea of what does and doesn't warrant a neg.  Theymos pretty much established that leaving negs for shitposting isn't appropriate, and adding a ridiculous bitcoin amount to it only makes it worse--that could easily get a DT member booted if he/she did that

My post history is open for anyone to see with posts being as they were when submitted, apart from minor changes here and there, e.g. due to spelling errors or style corrections (as I do care about such things)

Then Lucius can either revise the rating or let it stay and likely get excluded. That's how it's "dealt with accordingly" since there is no way to force anyone to change their rating

Okay then. It is mostly about making people responsible for their actions (and reactions)

[The Cryptovator]

I don't see any valid point to leave negative feedback. Although feedback is not visible by default but it's really not good practice especially risk amount. Since he isn't on DT so we don't need counter tag and we can't ask directly to remove his feedback. I believe he will remove feedback when you explain him and invite him to read this thread. Shit poster isn't belongs to trust system (IMO) and admin not much encourage to tag shit poster. Leave them for moderators. report to moderator is appropriate for shit poster.

[coinlocket$]

This is a wrong feedback, if he wants to leave feedback for spamming, in my opinion, should be with 0 BTC risked and neutral.

If he one day will be on DT network it will be red for default to all forum, I think is too much red tag for low-quality posting. Just report to mods and they handle it.

[deisik]

I don't see any valid point to leave negative feedback. Although feedback is not visible by default but it's really not good practice especially risk amount. Since he isn't on DT so we don't need counter tag and we can't ask directly to remove his feedback. I believe he will remove feedback when you explain him and invite him to read this thread

You guys don't understand it

I didn't do anything which could even remotely justify the negative feedback. And now you ask me that I should explain something to somebody? So why should I really? The burden of proof lies with the person who is making the accusation, and I'm the one who is being accused here in case you didn't notice. And if this is left as it is, i.e. without being taken care of (whatever that "care" might come down to), it will be a source of future harm

[Findingnemo]

Anyone can have the freedom to give feedback about anyone but it only get weigh when they are in DT position,so you need to contact that person personally to solve this case because no one can do anything here

This is a case of trust abuse which should be dealt with accordingly

Apart from that, there is nothing really to discuss with that dude as I expect people to be responsible for what they do and thus they should be ready to accept the consequences of their actions. In short, it is not me who should do anything here other than reporting this case

I think admin is the only person who can delete the feedback if it was inappropriate so you may need to contact admins via PM as well,so he will drop a comment here about his opinion on these kind of trust feedback.And we also can get a reference what is the possible solution when a user gave feedback like this.

[deisik]

Anyone can have the freedom to give feedback about anyone but it only get weigh when they are in DT position,so you need to contact that person personally to solve this case because no one can do anything here

This is a case of trust abuse which should be dealt with accordingly

Apart from that, there is nothing really to discuss with that dude as I expect people to be responsible for what they do and thus they should be ready to accept the consequences of their actions. In short, it is not me who should do anything here other than reporting this case

I think admin is the only person who can delete the feedback if it was inappropriate so you may need to contact admins via PM as well,so he will drop a comment here about his opinion on these kind of trust feedback.And we also can get a reference what is the possible solution when a user gave feedback like this

Admins can't and shouldn't interfere here

It is a task for DT members as they can actually make people think twice before throwing false accusations. Otherwise this system is useless (if it can't defend the innocent). That's why I'm asking a DT member to tag this user appropriately until he chooses to remove his feedback (or comes to live with being tagged as a trust abuser), and that's why I'm refraining from retaliating personally. There should be a consensus of sorts (and a way to enforce it)

[qwk]

It is a task for DT members as they can actually make people think twice before throwing false accusations.

We cannot make anybody do anything.
We are limited by the workings of the trust system.

That's why I'm asking a DT member to tag this user appropriately

That would be highly inappropriate and would most likely lead to that DT member being kicked off DT.

The only appropriate thing a DT member could do, would be to include Lucius in their trust list with a "~".
Which would basically render his feedback invisible.
There's no real need for this, though, because it is already invisible.

Also, the prudent thing for you to do is considered to be talking with Lucius.
I.e. "why did you leave negative feedback?".

[suchmoon]

It is a task for DT members as they can actually make people think twice before throwing false accusations. Otherwise this system is useless (if it can't defend the innocent). That's why I'm asking a DT member to tag this user appropriately until he chooses to remove his feedback (or comes to live with being tagged as a trust abuser), and that's why I'm refraining from retaliating personally. There should be a consensus of sorts (and a way to enforce it)

I know the feedback sounds insulting to you but people get pissed at each other on the intertubes all the time. I hope this can be sorted out without escalation, as nobody lost money or anything else of value in this dispute. I have PMed Lucius since you don't want to.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

I have PMed Lucius since you don't want to.

Good deal, hopefully he drops by to say hello and explain himself--better yet, remove the feedback.

I forgot to add in my previous post that deisik isn't even a shitposter from what I've seen (although I'm well aware that everyone's standards are different), so this particular feedback is just wrong in all respects.

Bottom line is that no one should be leaving negs based on the quality of a person's posts.  It doesn't matter if you're on DT or not; it's not a good use of the trust system, and we basically stopped doing it when the merit system came along.

[deisik]

Also, the prudent thing for you to do is considered to be talking with Lucius.
I.e. "why did you leave negative feedback?"

It is written in the OP

Look, I proceed from the fact that people are responsible for their actions. If they don't (which is obviously the case here), it simply doesn't make any sense to talk to them. It is like trying to talk sense into a disobedient child (and not your child at that). Your only rational choice in this case is to ignore them and their feedback altogether, but given the potential issues with the trust system, you can't

Anyway, I made this case known to the wider public here and now everyone (including DT members) should decide for themselves how to act and react

I know it sounds insulting to you but people get pissed at each other on the intertubes all the time. I hope this can be sorted out without escalation, as nobody lost money or anything else of value in this dispute. I have PMed Lucius since you don't want to.

What sounds insulting? If you look into my sent feedback, I never gave anyone negative feedback, ever

I forgot to add in my previous post that deisik isn't even a shitposter from what I've seen (although I'm well aware that everyone's standards are different), so this particular feedback is just wrong in all respects

I wasn't very active throughout 2018, and you can see that I have earned enough merits since the beginning of the year. Not that I care a lot but still (read, it is not just your standards)

[HCP]

It seems that how you think the trust system should work... and how it actually works are not the same.

It is quite well known that:

- Trust is NOT moderated
- The only person that can remove/adjust any trust rating, is the person that left it

Is the trust you have received incorrect? Yes, I would say that it was... but after making this public, you should have contacted Lucius directly. Your stubbornness in consistently refusing to do so is somewhat confusing?

In any case, it seems that suchmoon went ahead and contacted Lucius on your behalf.

I'm sure that if Lucius refuses to remove/alter the trust, then DT member will take appropriate action (as the new changes to the DT system were designed... theymos wanted there to be potential consequences for leaving false/inappropriate ratings)

I know it sounds insulting to you but people get pissed at each other on the intertubes all the time. I hope this can be sorted out without escalation, as nobody lost money or anything else of value in this dispute. I have PMed Lucius since you don't want to.

What sounds insulting? If you look into my sent feedback, I never gave anyone negative feedback, ever

He wasn't saying YOU sounded insulting... or accusing you of any wrongdoing... he was saying that it might sound insulting TO you.

I'm wondering if there is something of a language barrier here that is causing some added confusion?

[2double0]

I think that if the posts are on-topic and of very good quality, then a person cannot be considered a spammer even if he/she does it in a row. What is this forum for? Information. And if that is being given to users, then I find nothing wrong in doing that given that the posts are of any added value to the debate and the pure intention was to help and not to increase post count alone. I'm not advocating deisik in this matter, but just putting my own views on how I see this.