How legit Negative trusted user is on DT!

[nutildah]

I had no intention to give negative trust but I gave it is a replied of the feedback by iconfirm. Anyway, I am removing that as a courtesy.

Thanks, I appreciate it and I'm pretty sure IconFirm does too.

[1714779971]

1714779971

[1714779971]

1714779971

[1714779971]

1714779971

[1714779971]

1714779971

[Steamtyme]

I had no intention to give negative trust but I gave it is a replied of the feedback by iconfirm. Anyway, I am removing that as a courtesy.

Leaving that feedback caused me to review and exclude you for now, had I not done so I would have after this statement. I've been reviewing and adjusting my custom list without "default trust" so that I can see how things go and weigh whether people remain on my list, get removed (but still visible through others on my list), or excluded.

I'm not interested in seeing new instances of people using DT for negative retaliatory or personal feedback (would love to see all old ones hashed out as well). It truly defeats the purpose of this system imo, and the changes that are trying to be achieved. I'm glad to see you came around and removed it, but it shouldn't have gone that far. Handle it through the community using exclusions and reasoning, reach out to them, whoever included them, or just through and appeal to the community in a thread to discuss that issue.

None of my decisions are set in stone for life. I figured I would put this out there now as you'd see it down the road anyways.

[IconFirm]

@shasan and @iconfirm, would you both consider removing your negative feedbacks about each other? You both have something to offer the forum and it would be a shame if one or the other was dissuaded from continuing their activities based on receiving a red trust.

I had no intention to give negative trust but I gave it is a replied of the feedback by iconfirm. Anyway, I am removing that as a courtesy.

Was starting this thread to damage my reputation which has resulted in other forum members (Pamoldar) leaving incorrect feedback about false allegations against me also a "courtesy"? I'm honoured. I'm sure you do have something to offer this community, but nosying around other peoples trust ratings & trying to get them removed from various users trust levels is not one of them - concentrate on your own trust levels & contribute something positive instead. You can start by contacting Pamoldar, seeing as his feedback is a direct result of this thread, then I'll return your "courtesy".

[shasan]

Was starting this thread to damage my reputation which has resulted in other forum members (Pamoldar) leaving incorrect feedback about false allegations against me also a "courtesy"? I'm honoured. I'm sure you do have something to offer this community, but nosying around other peoples trust ratings & trying to get them removed from various users trust levels is not one of them - concentrate on your own trust levels & contribute something positive instead. You can start by contacting Pamoldar, seeing as his feedback is a direct result of this thread, then I'll return your "courtesy".

See reference which Pamoldar has been given. It is not my business either Pamoldar will remove or give positive or negative. If any DT did anything unfair than you can post it on reputation board, though I don't think there is anything unfair also based on your behavior the negative trust by me was also accurate but removed that as a courtesy. If you don't Remove that I have still no problem, will create post against the feedback if you again is on DT.

[IconFirm]

Then there is no hope for you - back on ignore you go.

Feel free to continue your mastabatory hand blistering one-man witch hunt against forum members who you think should or shouldn't be trusted by others - I'm sure you will make many more friends here.

[mikeywith]

Leaving that feedback caused me to review and exclude you for now

I have not excluded anyone from my list yet, but i really thought of it this time, i hate to see a DT member uses the trust system in this terrible manners, however I would like to assume that it was just a mistake which won't be repeated - therefore I personally would give his "judgments" a second chance.

[nutildah]

Leaving that feedback caused me to review and exclude you for now

I have not excluded anyone from my list yet, but i really thought of it this time, i hate to see a DT member uses the trust system in this terrible manners, however I would like to assume that it was just a mistake which won't be repeated - therefore I personally would give his "judgments" a second chance.

Unlike IconFirm, shasan deleted the feedback already.

Just because someone doesnt agree with the subject of contents of a thread, thats not a good reason to leave negative feedback. Nor is it good to leave retaliatory feedback.

One member rescinded their feedback, the other didn't.

[mikeywith]

Unlike IconFirm, shasan deleted the feedback already.

Shasan is a DT member now, he should be careful with how he uses this "power" and it is our duty to correct him or even remove him from DT if he kept misusing the system, Icofirm is not on DT as for now, so his rating does not matter despite it being inappropriate.

Anyhow both users have not done any thing scammy/worthy of a negative, i hope icofirm would remove his ratings and that they both move on from here.

[shasan]

Shasan is a DT member now, he should be careful with how he uses this "power" and it is our duty to correct him or even remove him from DT if he kept misusing the system, Icofirm is not on DT as for now, so his rating does not matter despite it being inappropriate.

When someone gives you negative trust without valid reason then what does that mean you are a scammer? If you are not a scammer then how you will react, you will keep silence? If you keep silence then what will happen, You agreed with the feedback which you received?

When anyone gives false negative trust what does that mean? The person told a lie and the person who told a lie can't be a scammer? In this sense, that person doesn't deserve any feedback?
I follow many DT and all most all the DT do the same thing which I did.
You can see feedbacks from here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=164822 same type of feedback has been given. If I did wrong then all the DT who gave this type of feedback all did wrong. Isn't it?

Why anyone didn't call for those?

[Mpamaegbu]

It's IconFirm, not ICOFirm btw - never done an ICO & never will....lol

My bad, sorry about unknowingly altering your username. Eyes can easily be deceived sometimes. ICOFirm doesn't even exist in the forum  

The username reminds me of the ICOForum site that once advertised here last year with huge ETH payout for its signature campaign. On a lighter note, even ICOForum doesn't exist anymore. Sad the site couldn't keep its erection on 

[shasan]

It's IconFirm, not ICOFirm btw - never done an ICO & never will....lol

My bad, sorry about unknowingly altering your username. Eyes can easily be deceived sometimes. ICOFirm doesn't even exist in the forum  

The username reminds me of the ICOForum site that once advertised here last year with huge ETH payout for its signature campaign. On a lighter note, even ICOForum doesn't exist anymore. Sad the site couldn't keep its erection on 

ICOFirm was a mispell of IconFirm and I think ICOForum is not related to IconFirm. I don't know much as probably I wasn't active here at that time.

[LoyceV]

When someone gives you negative trust without valid reason then what does that mean you are a scammer?

No, it means someone just disqualified himself from ever deserving a position on DT. If you don't value someone's sent feedback, you can exclude him from your Trust list.
I recently got red trust from someone. I left him neutral trust explaining it, and mentioned it in my reputation thread because I was curious why he left it. I'll never know, because he was banned the same day.

If you are not a scammer then how you will react, you will keep silence? If you keep silence then what will happen, You agreed with the feedback which you received?

This was actually the reason why I created my reputation thread last year, and there's some discussion about it. This was my conclusion at the time:

I kinda want to leave red trust in response, but it doesn't feel right to (ab)use DT-powers to do so. On the other hand, I obviously don't trust someone who leaves me random red trust without any reference link.
So, I'll leave this question for the community: what to do? This question has been answered ("do nothing"), thanks!

And there's this from theymos:

All that being said, I still discourage retaliatory ratings, and with these changes I encourage people to try to "bury the hatchet" and de-escalate rather than trying to use any increased retaliatory power you now have.

My personal opinion: using DT-power to retaliate is bad. When you're on DT, you should just be the bigger man. Who cares what someone on the internet says about you

[shasan]

My personal opinion: using DT-power to retaliate is bad. When you're on DT, you should just be the bigger man. Who cares what someone on the internet says about you Tongue

Thanks for your opinion. Especially it has drawn me attention

Who cares what someone on the internet says about you Tongue

which gives me a lot of inspiration. Thanks a lot.

[Steamtyme]

~snip~
One member rescinded their feedback, the other didn't

I did exclude both of them, just didn't point it out. I get the impression Iconfirm doesn't care about how others see their feedback and that they use it for themselves how they see fit and that's fine. It's up to other members to decide if it suits them to see it or not, which I did.

i hate to see a DT member uses the trust system in this terrible manners, however I would like to assume that it was just a mistake which won't be repeated - therefore I personally would give his "judgments" a second chance.

I hate to see anyone use it in this manner. I think it's especially damaging for DT to do so, as it does label a person for most of the forum to see by default. There is a good chance there judgement does improve but this was a very knee jerk reaction to a minor slight. That's just not what I'm looking for in what I see under profiles. - I do keep untrusted feedback visible as well always.

This doesn't mean I wouldn't reconsider in the future, but for now it was enough, and really has no repercussions to shasan.

When someone gives you negative trust without valid reason then what does that mean you are a scammer? If you are not a scammer then how you will react, you will keep silence? If you keep silence then what will happen, You agreed with the feedback which you received?

No it means they are leaving unmoderated feedback, not that you are a proven scammer. In regards to reaction a neutral feedback about them is appropriate, "silence" in the form of feedback is also acceptable. Just by remaining silent does not mean you agree with the statement, that's extremely loaded and probably explains why you felt the need to retaliate. Some of the best advice I ever got was to just ignore it and move on.

When anyone gives false negative trust what does that mean? The person told a lie and the person who told a lie can't be a scammer? In this sense, that person doesn't deserve any feedback?

Justifying retaliatory feedback doesn't make things better, that just encourages people to devolve to the lowest common denominator.
I follow many DT and all most all the DT do the same thing which I did. 2 wrongs don't make a right.

You can see feedbacks from here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=164822 same type of feedback has been given. If I did wrong then all the DT who gave this type of feedback all did wrong. Isn't it?
Why anyone didn't call for those?

Seeming to become a rarity but I don't go digging for a lot of things. I do a disgusting amount of browsing sometimes and just happen along things. I don't follow DT to keep up with everything, as of this moment I do little more than contribute some votes to people who are on DT1

I happened to read your thread, and your feedback was visible. I disagreed and acted, that's it nothing more. In the future jus try and breathe and move on. I had a similar situation with someone it turns out was fairly established in altcoin mining I believe. Came off night shift and realised I was painted red. I looked at the feedback saw it had no substance, and went to bed. Within hours it was sorted out, they had been removed as a DT, and all I left them a neutral about their feedback habits.

Either way good luck, it's nothing personal.

[shasan]

Justifying retaliatory feedback doesn't make things better, that just encourages people to devolve to the lowest common denominator.
I follow many DT and all most all the DT do the same thing which I did. 2 wrongs don't make a right.

Iconefirm gave negative trust then I gave with a valid point and also removed that once another person told both people to remove negative trust then I did that immediately. So, how much wrong I did cant imagine and for that point you have excluded which is perfect?
Anyone can include/exclude anyone without any reason but as you have pointed a reason that point can't be right. Your point is baseless because you got the point when there was no negative trust by me. If you want to say it is a valid point to exclude me then I want to say if I make a mistake for giving negative trust which was removed before you saw the trust then you did a wrong for excluding base on the negative trust which was vanished before you saw the trust.
So this time 1 mistake and 1 wrong made a right.
Anyway, have a piece of good luck.

[DireWolfM14]

it's nothing personal.

This should be emblazoned on the top of the trust settings page and the feed back form.

There are a couple of people who's contributions to the forum I find very valuable, and for whom I have respect, but who I've explicitly distrusted (~) from my settings.  It's not personal, it's because I don't value their reviews and their judgment on who's trustworthy and why.  

There are people who I've decided not include in my trust network, even though I value their reviews.  The decision was based on whether I value the people they've included, and why.  It's just a vote being cast, and I want the folks for whom I vote to have a similar approach to the trust network.

It's not personal, it's just the practical nature of the trust system and how it works.  Just because I appreciate you as a forum member doesn't mean I trust your judgement.  

[Steamtyme]

I'm going to assume some of the statements lose a little meaning in translation, but will address your concerns non the less.

Iconefirm gave negative trust then I gave with a valid point and also removed that once another person told both people to remove negative trust then I did that immediately. So, how much wrong I did cant imagine and for that point you have excluded which is perfect?
Anyone can include/exclude anyone without any reason but as you have pointed a reason that point can't be right. Your point is baseless because you got the point when there was no negative trust by me. If you want to say it is a valid point to exclude me then I want to say if I make a mistake for giving negative trust which was removed before you saw the trust then you did a wrong for excluding base on the negative trust which was vanished before you saw the trust.
So this time 1 mistake and 1 wrong made a right.
Anyway, have a piece of good luck.

Yes, you did remove the feedback. That doesn't change the fact that you left it in the first place, the act in itself was what I had a problem with. You have also stated you removed it because someone told you to. From my point of view you need some more experience in leaving feedback, or how to handle receiving feedback. You can label it how you want but I feel I have a valid point and will move forward with that, for the time being. Again this is just for what I want to see in my trust network, and does not affect your trust score in anyway.

How I set up my list is right for me, you can label my actions as wrong and that's your point of view. I don't petition others to follow my reasoning or way of doing things. If someone likes my reasoning they can chose to do the same.

~snip~

That's some sound reasoning right there. Keep it up.