So you have DTs who do not want you to talk openly?

[suchmoon]

IMO there have been several steps towards "decentralization" that were meant to simply give the superficial appearance of decentralization. There is further evidence of this when the trust list didn't go in the way they liked, Theymos simply changed the rules to move it in his personally preferred direction as he always does.

It would have been far easier for him to move it any direction when he had sole control over DT1 but I'm sure you'll come up with another bowl of word salad to explain how it makes sense for you to peddle this conspiracy theory and at the same time to beg the big bad theymos to enforce your "standards".

[TECSHARE]

IMO there have been several steps towards "decentralization" that were meant to simply give the superficial appearance of decentralization. There is further evidence of this when the trust list didn't go in the way they liked, Theymos simply changed the rules to move it in his personally preferred direction as he always does.

It would have been far easier for him to move it any direction when he had sole control over DT1 but I'm sure you'll come up with another bowl of word salad to explain how it makes sense for you to peddle this conspiracy theory and at the same time to beg the big bad theymos to enforce your "standards".

Except this way he gets to pretend he decentralized the system so he doesn't look like a total hypocrite every time he invents new "features" to put a lid on anyone he doesn't personally agree with. There doesn't need to be any conspiracy, but that is interesting you would use that terminology to make a lame attempt to invalidate observable facts. Keep toading toady.

[o_e_l_e_o]

to make a lame attempt to invalidate observable facts.

The only actual fact here is that theymos did decentralize the DT1 list by placing it entirely in the hands of the user base via their own trust lists, as opposed to his own handpicked list of users as it was before. Whether or not this was done to "put a lid on people he doesn't agree with" is pure conjecture based on your gut feeling and nothing else, not a fact as you seem to be suggesting.

I'm also curious as to how you think theymos has manipulated the publically viewable individual trust lists of however many users to obtain his desired goal (whatever that may be) without anyone realising.

[TECSHARE]

to make a lame attempt to invalidate observable facts.

The only actual fact here is that theymos did decentralize the DT1 list by placing it entirely in the hands of the user base via their own trust lists, as opposed to his own handpicked list of users as it was before. Whether or not this was done to "put a lid on people he doesn't agree with" is pure conjecture based on your gut feeling and nothing else, not a fact as you seem to be suggesting.

I'm also curious as to how you think theymos has manipulated the publically viewable individual trust lists of however many users to obtain his desired goal (whatever that may be) without anyone realising.

Actually, he has been doing it since he created exclusions. He didn't like a rating I had left, and not everyone on DT1 would remove me from their trust lists, so PURELY BY COINCIDENCE I am sure, trust list exclusions were then created and I became the first exclusion by him and Badbear. This is demonstrably manipulation on his part to get the results he personally wants. He didn't manipulate trust lists, he manipulated the formula for how it is calculated until it basically handed control of it back to the group he desired on a silver platter. You will remember the so called attempted "default trust hijacking" that was going on, and then he again modified the system and that wasn't happening any more. These are all publicly observable events. I think the word you are looking for is "caring" not "realizing".

[TheNewAnon135246]

So you really think that Theymos added a feature to the current trust system purely to be able to exclude you? Talk about having a big ego.

[BitcoinSupremo]

I am not here for making friends, different from the assholes(DT GANG)

Meaning who?

The point is with DT1 qualification it is still room for more abusive feedbacks. No one have answered me yet, why is more trusted a person who leave abusive feedback like marlboroza compared to one who have dealt thousand and thousand of dollars in Computer Hardware and Currency Exchange section ? This is the BIGGEST flawing point of this forum.

Then your issue isn't with the system... it's with the people in the system.

Meaning you don't like how the decentralized system ended up and you want to centralize it in your favor.

Still no answer, why is a user like marlboroza which has contributed NOTHING financially to the forum more trusted than a user who resides in Currency Exchange and Goods, Computer Hardware which has put at risk thousand of dollars, this make no sense to me and looks like a fully centralized system rather than decentralization. This still remains the biggest flaw of the forum itself, including the trust system.

People are being tagged for something some users on DT think they will do, I have bought accounts (it is still allowed as far as I know) but have not scammed anyone and I have made deals here with people and Paypal risky ones.

[Hhampuz]

I am not here for making friends, different from the assholes(DT GANG)

Meaning who?

The point is with DT1 qualification it is still room for more abusive feedbacks. No one have answered me yet, why is more trusted a person who leave abusive feedback like marlboroza compared to one who have dealt thousand and thousand of dollars in Computer Hardware and Currency Exchange section ? This is the BIGGEST flawing point of this forum.

Then your issue isn't with the system... it's with the people in the system.

Meaning you don't like how the decentralized system ended up and you want to centralize it in your favor.

Still no answer, why is a user like marlboroza which has contributed NOTHING financially to the forum more trusted than a user who resides in Currency Exchange and Goods, Computer Hardware which has put at risk thousand of dollars, this make no sense to me and looks like a fully centralized system rather than decentralization. This still remains the biggest flaw of the forum itself, including the trust system.

People are being tagged for something some users on DT think they will do, I have bought accounts (it is still allowed as far as I know) but have not scammed anyone and I have made deals here with people and Paypal risky ones.

What you are suggesting is even more stupid, do you know how easy it would be to game a system that relies on money being involved?

[BitcoinSupremo]

I am not here for making friends, different from the assholes(DT GANG)

Meaning who?

The point is with DT1 qualification it is still room for more abusive feedbacks. No one have answered me yet, why is more trusted a person who leave abusive feedback like marlboroza compared to one who have dealt thousand and thousand of dollars in Computer Hardware and Currency Exchange section ? This is the BIGGEST flawing point of this forum.

Then your issue isn't with the system... it's with the people in the system.

Meaning you don't like how the decentralized system ended up and you want to centralize it in your favor.

Still no answer, why is a user like marlboroza which has contributed NOTHING financially to the forum more trusted than a user who resides in Currency Exchange and Goods, Computer Hardware which has put at risk thousand of dollars, this make no sense to me and looks like a fully centralized system rather than decentralization. This still remains the biggest flaw of the forum itself, including the trust system.

People are being tagged for something some users on DT think they will do, I have bought accounts (it is still allowed as far as I know) but have not scammed anyone and I have made deals here with people and Paypal risky ones.

What you are suggesting is even more stupid, do you know how easy it would be to game a system that relies on money being involved?

I think it is far more easy to game a system where money is not involved. I trust more users like minerjones, OgNasty, TECSHARE who have contributed massively to the forum and not your bullshit propaganda friends.

[TECSHARE]

So you really think that Theymos added a feature to the current trust system purely to be able to exclude you? Talk about having a big ego.

You people are so predictable. Yeah you are right, he just went around personally asking people to remove me from their lists because he didn't want me on DT2. Then when he couldn't get it done that way very shortly after exclusions were created and I was the very first one excluded, by Theymos and his main moderator Badbear OFC. This was all to protect some one who turned out to be a con artist BTW. Theymos made me bag hold his own embarrassment for him to cover for his own mistakes, I am just here to return what is rightfully his property. Yep, I am just imagining this and it is my huge ego, certainly not his huge ego.

What you are suggesting is even more stupid, do you know how easy it would be to game a system that relies on money being involved?

Yeah you are right. It certainly is much easier to spend years and doing hundreds of trades with tons of trusted members and be trusted with thousands in value, than it is to run around and plaster hundreds of people red shooting yourself up to the top of the DT in a quarter of the time never having risked anything.

[Hhampuz]

I think it is far more easy to game a system where money is not involved. I trust more users like minerjones, OgNasty, TECSHARE who have contributed massively to the forum and not your bullshit propaganda friends.

It's easy when you are using users to your preference, rather than the system as a whole.

Do you know how much positive trust has been flowing around for gamed deals with money involed? Short term loans, selling $1 items with unlimited stock etc. etc.

Bullshit propaganda friends is interesting though, last time I looked anyone was free to exclude users that they don't want to see ratings from, if you are a high ranking member that is yet to realize this I'm not sure what you've been up to.

[Vod]

Do you know how much positive trust has been flowing around for gamed deals with money involed? Short term loans, selling $1 items with unlimited stock etc. etc.

You are correct Hhampuz.  A script kiddie can hack Microsoft/etc keys and build up quite a lot of trust quickly.   There are many ways to build trust just by selling items and not contributing anything else to the forum.  It's much harder to get respected knowledgeable users to trust you, and I think that is the issue a lot of these sellers have had over the past four years.  Gravy train is over.

The trust system may have a few issues, but it's a lot better than the centralized one we had before.  And it's improving with time.  

[Hhampuz]

You are correct Hhampuz.  A script kiddie can hack Microsoft/etc keys and build up quite a lot of trust quickly.   There are many ways to build trust just by selling items and not contributing anything else.  It's much harder to get respected knowledgeable users to trust you, and I think that is the issue a lot of these sellers have had over the past four years.

The trust system may have a few issues, but it's a lot better than the centralized one we had before.  And it's improving with time. 

Exactly. Then it's up to me what that trust entails. Some people I might trust with straight up BTC/Phyiscal items while I perhaps wouldn't trust them to create a userscript or a wallet generator. Which is also why we have comments that can be added (or so I thought).

[actmyname]

Still no answer, why is a user like marlboroza which has contributed NOTHING financially to the forum more trusted than a user who resides in Currency Exchange and Goods, Computer Hardware which has put at risk thousand of dollars, this make no sense to me and looks like a fully centralized system rather than decentralization. This still remains the biggest flaw of the forum itself, including the trust system.

Who are you talking about?

And here's the deal... the positive trust comes from different users on bitcointalk. You don't seem to have a problem with that part of it except for the fact that the trust isn't going the way that you want it.

People are being tagged for something some users on DT think they will do, I have bought accounts (it is still allowed as far as I know) but have not scammed anyone and I have made deals here with people and Paypal risky ones.

Assume that you don't know whether the person you're trading with was the same user that built their history around their account or not.

How are you meant to trust them? That user you're trading with has multiple identities, as far as anyone is concerned.