Complete ranking list of the most distrusted/excluded users

[bones261]

For some people on the list, it appears there is an effort to coerce people into distrusting them.

     I can see where there might possible be an effort to coerce someone to either remove or not include someone on the trust list. However, I think when someone takes the extra step to actually exclude someone from the trust lists, that person is pretty committed to the idea.

LoyceV, would you be able to calculate the sum of all trust scores of one's "excluders"? Or sum of merit scores? Perhaps do the same for "includers" and then calculate the difference. Or some sort of other metric in addition to the number of exclusions, which is heavily skewed by sockpuppets and bus-and-bicycle schemes.

I agree. At the moment many of us are distrusted by the same people who also seem to hate busses and bicycles.  I honestly didn't mean to be as annoying as a captcha.

[1714064509]

1714064509

[1714064509]

1714064509

[1714064509]

1714064509

[1714064509]

1714064509

[1714064509]

1714064509

[1714064509]

1714064509

[Quickseller]

LoyceV, would you be able to calculate the sum of all trust scores of one's "excluders"? Or sum of merit scores? Perhaps do the same for "includers" and then calculate the difference. Or some sort of other metric in addition to the number of exclusions, which is heavily skewed by sockpuppets and bus-and-bicycle schemes.

None of that means anything when 15 people have sent 20.7% of all merit ever sent.

All any of that would be would be a reflection of the opinions of those 15 people....

For some people on the list, it appears there is an effort to coerce people into distrusting them.

     I can see where there might possible be an effort to coerce someone to either remove or not include someone on the trust list. However, I think when someone takes the extra step to actually exclude someone from the trust lists, that person is pretty committed to the idea.

Not necessarily when the person is being threatened with negative trust for frivolous reasons or being excluded for no reason. People tend to care about their reputations and generally will not be opposed to excluding someone if it means protecting their own reputation.

[suchmoon]

LoyceV, would you be able to calculate the sum of all trust scores of one's "excluders"? Or sum of merit scores? Perhaps do the same for "includers" and then calculate the difference. Or some sort of other metric in addition to the number of exclusions, which is heavily skewed by sockpuppets and bus-and-bicycle schemes.

None of that means anything when 15 people have sent 20.7% of all merit ever sent.

All any of that would be would be a reflection of the opinions of those 15 people....

Well, if receiving merits from top 15 means reflecting their opinion then stop arguing with me and toe the line.

Or maybe you're wrong and should reconsider turning every thread into your DT/merit whinefest.

[Quickseller]

LoyceV, would you be able to calculate the sum of all trust scores of one's "excluders"? Or sum of merit scores? Perhaps do the same for "includers" and then calculate the difference. Or some sort of other metric in addition to the number of exclusions, which is heavily skewed by sockpuppets and bus-and-bicycle schemes.

None of that means anything when 15 people have sent 20.7% of all merit ever sent.

All any of that would be would be a reflection of the opinions of those 15 people....

Well, if receiving merits from top 15 means reflecting their opinion then stop arguing with me and toe the line.

Or maybe you're wrong and should reconsider turning every thread into your DT/merit whinefest.

I am just pointing out that considering that who is on DT is ultimately based on merit, and that 15 people have given out over 20% of all merit, any trust or merit stat is going to be skewed heavily towards what those 15 people want.

Some of these people are trustworthy, others, not so much, but none of them have come close to demonstrating it is appropriate to having anywhere near the amount of influence they have. 

[suchmoon]

I am just pointing out that considering that who is on DT is ultimately based on merit, and that 15 people have given out over 20% of all merit, any trust or merit stat is going to be skewed heavily towards what those 15 people want.

Some of these people are trustworthy, others, not so much, but none of them have come close to demonstrating it is appropriate to having anywhere near the amount of influence they have. 

I'm just pointing out that you're derailing multiple threads with generic cryptohunter-style rants and grievances against the "systems". Create your own thread, show the evidence of malfeasance (or don't, you seem to be good with that too) and discuss it there instead of polluting the rest of the forum with it. I'll even stop by to find out how I'm supposed to make my merit minions to do what I "want", because I got like a 1000 of them and they're all extremely unruly.

If you don't like the result of the calculation that I suggested (which LoyceV hasn't even agreed to do) you're free to not use it.

[Jet Cash]

I don't have many members in my trust list, but most of them seem to rank high in the most distrusted list. I guess this is why I tend not to use the trust list for much.

[xolxol]

Those who excluded lauda and the gang surely the reason why they received red tags,this whole forum is going to die soon.The admin himself cant see what the real problem is,bunch of monkeys are getting into DT position with the past abuses/extortions,what a freaky forum bitcointalk has turned.

[FFrankie]

Something seems broken because I wouldn't have an issue sending first without escrow to the first 20 people On that list

[LoyceV]

Most distrusts are obviously from cryptohunter / Thule et al (like my distrust) 

To be fair, Thule changed most of his Trust list here.
I have a new exclusion too from someone I don't know. Luckily, I'm in good company:

Trust list for: Upgrade00 (Trust: awaiting update) (42 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP) (created 2019-04-20_Sat_09.37h)
Upgrade00 Distrusts:
1. ~mprep (Trust: 70: -0 / +7) (DT1! (19) 347 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
2. ~LoyceV (Trust: 108: -0 / +16) (DT1! (45) 2510 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

Any chance of getting a similar list ordered by the difference between the number of users who trust and distrust a user?

     1. 383 (=392 inclusions - 9 exclusions): theymos (Trust: 197: -0 / +21) (4237 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
     2. 193 (=236 inclusions - 43 exclusions): OgNasty (Trust: -8: -6 / +56) (649 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
     3. 127 (=138 inclusions - 11 exclusions): dooglus (Trust: 120: -0 / +12) (126 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
     4. 124 (=126 inclusions - 2 exclusions): minerjones (Trust: 798: -0 / +88) (604 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
     5. 118 (=120 inclusions - 2 exclusions): Cyrus (Trust: 85: -0 / +9) (105 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
     6. 113 (=114 inclusions - 1 exclusions): John (John K.) (Trust: 153: -0 / +16) (88 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
     7. 105 (=129 inclusions - 24 exclusions): Blazed (Trust: 597: -0 / +60) (93 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
     8. 103 (=124 inclusions - 21 exclusions): gmaxwell (Trust: 140: -0 / +14) (1156 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
     9. 102 (=112 inclusions - 10 exclusions): LoyceV (Trust: 108: -0 / +16) (2510 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
    10. 101 (=106 inclusions - 5 exclusions): philipma1957 (Trust: 170: -0 / +17) (646 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
.......
....... (click for a longer list)
.......
  9130. -15 (=0 inclusions - 15 exclusions): kken01 (Trust: neutral) (9 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
  9131. -15 (=0 inclusions - 15 exclusions): pirashki (Trust: neutral) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
  9132. -15 (=0 inclusions - 15 exclusions): BeEvil Banned! (Trust: neutral) (31 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
  9133. -16 (=0 inclusions - 16 exclusions): Luana Trade (Trust: -128: -7 / +0) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
  9134. -17 (=10 inclusions - 27 exclusions): jonald_fyookball (Trust: -7: -3 / +1) (2 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
  9135. -19 (=16 inclusions - 35 exclusions): dogie (Trust: 30: -0 / +3) (78 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
  9136. -19 (=0 inclusions - 19 exclusions): S_Therapist (Trust: -8: -3 / +0) (265 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
  9137. -21 (=0 inclusions - 21 exclusions): game-protect (Trust: -4096: -12 / +0) (5 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
  9138. -52 (=116 inclusions - 168 exclusions): Lauda (Trust: 301: -0 / +31) (871 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
  9139. -56 (=37 inclusions - 93 exclusions): Quickseller (Trust: -8178: -13 / +14) (448 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

LoyceV, would you be able to calculate the sum of all trust scores of one's "excluders"? Or sum of merit scores? Perhaps do the same for "includers" and then calculate the difference. Or some sort of other metric in addition to the number of exclusions, which is heavily skewed by sockpuppets and bus-and-bicycle schemes.

I think I'll skip this one. Too much work

At the moment many of us are distrusted by the same people who also seem to hate busses and bicycles.

Luckily, Newbie Trust lists don't matter for other users, and by creating a bad list they kinda disqualify themselves from being serious users.

None of that means anything when 15 people have sent 20.7% of all merit ever sent.

I calculated 19.34% as of last Friday.

I am just pointing out that considering that who is on DT is ultimately based on merit, and that 15 people have given out over 20% of all merit, any trust or merit stat is going to be skewed heavily towards what those 15 people want.

It's not ideal, but it's something. If users without earned Merit could vote, the users with most sockpuppets would get to decide.

Some of these people are trustworthy, others, not so much, but none of them have come close to demonstrating it is appropriate to having anywhere near the amount of influence they have.

It is indeed scary how one post from me changes someone from DT1 (1) to DT1 (-5), without excluding him by myself. But that is how the system is supposed to work: voting based on available data.

Something seems broken because I wouldn't have an issue sending first without escrow to the first 20 people On that list

See:

I encourage anyone to create their own Trust list. Don't confuse your Trust list with Feedback though:

• Feedback: people you trust (or don't trust: red)
• Trust list: people who's judgement on others you trust (or don't trust: ~)

[Quickseller]

None of that means anything when 15 people have sent 20.7% of all merit ever sent.

I calculated 19.34% as of last Friday.

I had calculated it from the merit stats page, most generous senders - all time when I wrote that post, and I just recalculated it to ~19.35% from the same page just now (perhaps I made a calculation error when I made my previous post). I don't think the ~1.5% discrepancy changes my point.

This would be less of a concern if the merit system was used solely to decide who gets to rank up.

I am just pointing out that considering that who is on DT is ultimately based on merit, and that 15 people have given out over 20% of all merit, any trust or merit stat is going to be skewed heavily towards what those 15 people want.

It's not ideal, but it's something. If users without earned Merit could vote, the users with most sockpuppets would get to decide.

I agree that implementing the current DT system without merit consideration would not be a step in the right direction, but I also think the DT changes implemented early this year was not a step in the right direction either.

The DT system has never been perfect, but I think every change in how it was implemented has been a step in the wrong direction ever since it was originally implemented. 

Some of these people are trustworthy, others, not so much, but none of them have come close to demonstrating it is appropriate to having anywhere near the amount of influence they have.

It is indeed scary how one post from me changes someone from DT1 (1) to DT1 (-5), without excluding him by myself. But that is how the system is supposed to work: voting based on available data.

There is a lot of data available, but that does not mean this is all the consideration people use, and it does not mean people do not use coercion to get people to chance their inputs to the data, so that the underlying data is changed.

You mentioned that someone with a lot of sockpuppets without the consideration of merit, however that is only the most glaring conflict of interest in which someone can get themselves added to DT. There have been instances in which people have sent trust/merit to close business associates, to people they have traded with many times (and most probably wish to continue trading with), and to their friends, all without anyone batting an eye.

There may be some cases in which it may be appropriate to give merit and/or trust and/or a trust inclusion to people with the above relationships, but if this happens enough, the data does not reflect that a given person has (or doesn't have) judgement valued by many people, or that the person can be reasonably trusted (or cannot be reasonably trusted) with your money -- it is more a reflection of how many of the above types of relationships you have engaged in, particularly with the right people. Further, as you are well aware, many people are confused as to the difference between a trust rating and a trust list, and as such, someone who has traded with many people over time are likely to be reflected as having many trust inclusions.

Also if someone were to speak truth to power, you may see your various scores be negatively affected.

[dogie]

9135. -19 (=16 inclusions - 35 exclusions): dogie (Trust: 30: -0 / +3) (78 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

This is what happens when you have one or two crazy people following you with armadas of accounts: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1064824.0

[TMAN]

shit only 6th on the list?

come on, surely I got more enemies than that..

[Lauda]

9135. -19 (=16 inclusions - 35 exclusions): dogie (Trust: 30: -0 / +3) (78 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

This is what happens when you have one or two crazy people following you with armadas of accounts: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1064824.0

Welcome to the club. Being #1 excluded is a sign of you making a difference in a certain way.

[JayJuanGee]

9135. -19 (=16 inclusions - 35 exclusions): dogie (Trust: 30: -0 / +3) (78 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

This is what happens when you have one or two crazy people following you with armadas of accounts: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1064824.0

Welcome to the club. Being #1 excluded is a sign of you making a difference in a certain way.

I like those [war battle] red marks (or scratches?) on your hat, even though they scare me, too.    

[OgNasty]

Any chance of getting a similar list ordered by the difference between the number of users who trust and distrust a user?

    1. 383 (=392 inclusions - 9 exclusions): theymos (Trust: 197: -0 / +21) (4237 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
    2. 193 (=236 inclusions - 43 exclusions): OgNasty (Trust: -8: -6 / +56) (649 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
    3. 127 (=138 inclusions - 11 exclusions): dooglus (Trust: 120: -0 / +12) (126 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
    4. 124 (=126 inclusions - 2 exclusions): minerjones (Trust: 798: -0 / +88) (604 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
    5. 118 (=120 inclusions - 2 exclusions): Cyrus (Trust: 85: -0 / +9) (105 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
    6. 113 (=114 inclusions - 1 exclusions): John (John K.) (Trust: 153: -0 / +16) (88 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
    7. 105 (=129 inclusions - 24 exclusions): Blazed (Trust: 597: -0 / +60) (93 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
    8. 103 (=124 inclusions - 21 exclusions): gmaxwell (Trust: 140: -0 / +14) (1156 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
    9. 102 (=112 inclusions - 10 exclusions): LoyceV (Trust: 108: -0 / +16) (2510 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
   10. 101 (=106 inclusions - 5 exclusions): philipma1957 (Trust: 170: -0 / +17) (646 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
.......
....... (click for a longer list)
.......

Thanks, this seems much more reflective of real trust on this forum.

[Quickseller]

9135. -19 (=16 inclusions - 35 exclusions): dogie (Trust: 30: -0 / +3) (78 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

This is what happens when you have one or two crazy people following you with armadas of accounts: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1064824.0

Welcome to the club. Being #1 excluded is a sign of you making a difference in a certain way.

Nonsense. Dogie has many exclusions because of a single trade dispute with a single person who happens to be a persistent troll. It has nothing to do with any contribution he has given.

Your exclusions are the result of your long history of unethical behavior.

[Lauda]

Nonsense. Dogie has many exclusions because of a single trade dispute with a single person who happens to be a persistent troll. It has nothing to do with any contribution he has given.

Your exclusions are the result of your long history of unethical behavior.

Whatever helps you sleep at night kiddo.

[dogie]

9135. -19 (=16 inclusions - 35 exclusions): dogie (Trust: 30: -0 / +3) (78 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

This is what happens when you have one or two crazy people following you with armadas of accounts: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1064824.0

Welcome to the club. Being #1 excluded is a sign of you making a difference in a certain way.

Nonsense. Dogie has many exclusions because of a single trade dispute with a single person who happens to be a persistent troll. It has nothing to do with any contribution he has given.

Your exclusions are the result of your long history of unethical behavior.

IDK what it was but it wasn't even a trade dispute, that was just something he made up after 9 months of using the item. Crazies just be crazies sometimes.

[LoyceV]

Dogie is indeed excluded by several Newbies who were last active around the same date. It nicely shows the importance of a Merit requirement for voting power.

Trust list for: dogie (Trust: 30: -0 / +3) (78 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP) (created 2019-04-27_Sat_21.41h)
Back to index

~dogie is Distrusted by:
1. CanaryInTheMine (Trust: 193: -0 / +23) (5 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
2. yxt (Trust: 80: -0 / +8) (31 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
3. kano (Trust: 20: -0 / +2) (153 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
4. Xian01 (Trust: 20: -0 / +2) (17 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
5. PatMan (Trust: 10: -0 / +1) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
6. Bicknellski (Trust: -2: -1 / +0) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
7. shitaifan2013 (Trust: neutral) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
8. torepia (Trust: neutral) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
9. IYFTech (Trust: neutral) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
10. poeEDgar (Trust: -3: -2 / +1) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
11. Mattzees (Trust: neutral) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
12. valkir (Trust: 30: -0 / +3) (4 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
13. suchmoon (Trust: 67: -0 / +11) (DT1! (41) 1990 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
14. Tupsu (Trust: 60: -0 / +6) (3 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
15. Guy Corem (Trust: 0: -1 / +2) (29 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
16. GSpgh (Trust: neutral) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
17. cathoderay (Trust: neutral) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
18. Finksy (Trust: 40: -0 / +4) (3 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
19. schwab (Trust: 10: -0 / +1) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
20. .....Really? (Trust: neutral) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
21. mavericklm (Trust: 20: -0 / +2) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
22. lobogil (Trust: neutral) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
23. megahash (Trust: neutral) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
24. deleterase (Trust: neutral) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
25. HmmMAA (Trust: 20: -0 / +3) (5 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
26. sloopy (Trust: neutral) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
27. ChicagoCoinConnection (Trust: neutral) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
28. Ruco (Trust: neutral) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
29. p3yot33at3r (Trust: neutral) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
30. blarneystone (Trust: neutral) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
31. HorusHoraha (Trust: neutral) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
32. Jethroz (Trust: neutral) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
33. zoggie (Trust: neutral) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
34. IconFirm (Trust: neutral) (25 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
35. blurryeyed (Trust: neutral) (7 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

Trust list: backscratchers: users agree, they trust or distrust each other.
Trust list: backstabbers: users disagree, one user trust the other, while the other doesn't trust him.

Source: LoyceV's Trust list viewer.
Get your own Trust list in BBCode at loyce.club/trust.

[dogie]

Dogie is indeed excluded by several Newbies who were last active around the same date. It nicely shows the importance of a Merit requirement for voting power.

0_O Why am I excluded by suchmoon, that seems new.