Feedback needed on risked amount

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

EcuaMobi, dbshck and me left feedback for OgNasty where we put 500 in the risked BTC field. I noticed Vod's friendly counter negative rating for that. I received a PM from EcuaMobi this morning and requested to update my feedback if I can. He explained the logic is that we did not risked anything personally so we should enter 0 as risked amount.

And, I see now EcuaMobi, dbshck updated their feedback and Vod updated his feedback with this,

Just a friendly counter to the 500 BTC that Pamoldar did not risk with OG, based on Theymos' definition in the reference link. - "Risked BTC" is how much money you could have lost if the person you're rating had turned out to be a scammer.

So it's now only to counter my feedback and the logic we see here is,

"Risked BTC" is how much money you could have lost if the person you're rating had turned out to be a scammer.

When EcuaMobi PMed me, my response was this,

Thanks for the PM brother. Not sure if I agree or disagree with you. One mind says I agree (sure I personally did not risked any btc) but another mind says that I am right in my view and I do not see I should change anything. Here is the explanation:

I thought I left a trust rating, not feedback of a trade. I believe trust rating can be seen from thousands of angles.

Besides, it's a positive feedback for someone who returned 500 BTC (keyword 500 BTC, over 4 millions in dollar!), I do not think this risked amount is going to change anything but towards good.

Anyway, how are you going to interpret this?

- If you want to make a rating stronger, increase "Risked BTC". 50 extra risked BTC is equivalent to an additional rating.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=211858.msg2221664#msg2221664

The interpretation of my trust rating is that, the value of this trust rating is 500BTC which makes the rating stronger. I could put 1000BTC but I have witnesses 500 BTC so this is the highest I have gone.

Please point me where I am wrong in my viewpoint?

Thanks again brother.

<snipped>

Feel free to share it publicly. This may help me to understand (when several users will give their opinions) that there is something wrong from my side.

As I mentioned in the PM that feedback from several users will help me and Here, I am in need of your feedback.


a) Should I revise my feedback because theymos said,

"Risked BTC" is how much money you could have lost if the person you're rating had turned out to be a scammer.

b) Or, should I keep the feedback as it is because theymos said,

- If you want to make a rating stronger, increase "Risked BTC". 50 extra risked BTC is equivalent to an additional rating.

The interpretation of my trust rating is that, the value of this trust rating is 500BTC which makes the rating stronger. I could put 1000BTC but I have witnesses 500 BTC so this is the highest I have gone.

Please help me with your view in the comment with a choice of a or b.

Thanks everyone in advance.

[1713560223]

1713560223

[1713560223]

1713560223

[1713560223]

1713560223

[1713560223]

1713560223

[1713560223]

1713560223

[DarkStar_]

- If you want to make a rating stronger, increase "Risked BTC". 50 extra risked BTC is equivalent to an additional rating.

^ This doesn't apply any more and has not for quite some time. Just change your trust rating to zero risked and be done with it as it won't make a difference.

[Vod]

It really comes down to a choice:

1) trust Theymos wrote what he did for a reason
2) interpret Theymos' words however you want.

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

2) interpret Theymos' words however you want.

So I was not wrong in my interpretation?

[Quickseller]

- If you want to make a rating stronger, increase "Risked BTC". 50 extra risked BTC is equivalent to an additional rating.

^ This doesn't apply any more and has not for quite some time. Just change your trust rating to zero risked and be done with it as it won't make a difference.

The algorithm for trust ratings previously would take the extra 50BTC risked amount into consideration, and it now no longer does.

When theymos made the statement, it was true, however he later changed how trust ratings are calculated, and his statement is no longer true. The current algorithm can be found here, and is posted below:

Code:

if there are no negative ratings
	score = 0
	for each rating, oldest to newest
		if this rater has already been counted
			continue
		score += min(10, round_up(months since rating))
else
	score = unique_positive - 2^(unique_negative)
	if score >= 0
		start_time = time of first negative
		score = unique_positive since start_time - unique_negative since start_time
		if(score < 0)
			return ??? (orange)
			
move score to range [-9999,9999]
return score
[/quote]

[Vod]

2) interpret Theymos' words however you want.

So I was not wrong in my interpretation?

You can interpret my words however you want as well.  As long as you know you're breaking a forum guideline, I don't care what you do.  

Edit to replace rule with guideline.  

[Bitcoin_Arena]

I think using zero risked BTC would be more than OK for your feedback since you personally didn't not directly or indirectly entrust Ognasty to keep the BTC.

The person who should have left the risked amount in the feedback could have been Theymos but on his feedback he also just left there Zero.

[Vod]

The person who should have left the risked amount in the feedback could have been Theymos but on his feedback he also just left there Zero.

That is incorrect.  Theymos correctly left the 500 BTC as amount risked. 

[Quickseller]

2) interpret Theymos' words however you want.

So I was not wrong in my interpretation?

You can interpret my words however you want as well.  As long as you know you're breaking a forum rule, I don't care what you do. 

This is a lie. You know very well the trust system if not moderated.

[nutildah]

EcuaMobi, dbshck and me left feedback for OgNasty where we put 500 in the risked BTC field. I noticed Vod's friendly counter negative rating for that. I received a PM from EcuaMobi this morning and requested to update my feedback if I can. He explained the logic is that we did not risked anything personally so we should enter 0 as risked amount.

That's correct; you should definitely update it to 0 BTC since it was not your BTC being risked.

Just noticed a bunch of other people chimed in with similar opinions.

You can interpret my words however you want as well.  As long as you know you're breaking a forum rule, I don't care what you do. 

What rule is that?

[Vod]

What rule is that?

Made a mistake.  I did think it was a rule, but I looked at my reference link and saw it mentions guideline.   Sorry - I edited my post.

[LoyceV]

I'm going to take a slightly different approach, as this feels like a discussion on mere semantics.
On top of the feedback page, the forum shows this:

Risked BTC amount is money that the person could have stolen or did steal.

I've left red feedback based on this a few times (example), even though I didn't lose anything myself.

Based on the above, I'd say the amount of 500 BTC shown by both Pamoldar and Vod is correct (archived).
However, I'd say the color of the feedback boils down to this:

    Positive - You trust this person or had a successful trade.
    Neutral - Comments. Your rating will not affect this person's trust score.
    Negative - You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer.

I don't think returning 500 BTC justifies negative feedback.

[theymos]

The "increase risked BTC to increase the strength" thing only applied for a brief period of time. It didn't work well, so I removed it. It has no effect on anything, and I will probably remove "risked BTC" entirely in the future.

I don't think that it's a big deal to put ridiculous values in that field, though probably you shouldn't. For reporting something second-hand, there's never been a standard, and as far as I'm concerned you can do whatever you want. Since it doesn't actually affect anything, it's basically the same to have riskedBTC=1 with a comment of "he stole BTC" as to just say in the comment "he stole 1 BTC".

[EcuaMobi]

The "increase risked BTC to increase the strength" thing only applied for a brief period of time. It didn't work well, so I removed it. It has no effect on anything, and I will probably remove "risked BTC" entirely in the future.

I don't think that it's a big deal to put ridiculous values in that field, though probably you shouldn't. For reporting something second-hand, there's never been a standard, and as far as I'm concerned you can do whatever you want. Since it doesn't actually affect anything, it's basically the same to have riskedBTC=1 with a comment of "he stole BTC" as to just say in the comment "he stole 1 BTC".

Thanks for your input. I really think you should update the Marketplace trust to avoid further confusion, as requested.

[SaltySpitoon]

Personally I absolutely disregard someone's feedback as soon as I find a single incorrect detail. If you want to leave someone a positive feedback that says 0 risked BTC, but the comment says, "Held 500 BTC for the forum" thats fine. As soon as you fill in that 500 BTC as risked, you've lost all credibility in my opinion, and the same is true for countering feedback with false risked BTC.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

I will probably remove "risked BTC" entirely in the future.

That's probably a good idea, since it's basically a value that can be made to be whatever members want it to be.  It's not eBay, where the value of a transaction is known, and most feedback left on bitcointalk is probably not from doing deals anyway.  Eliminating that field isn't going to do any harm, and it'll probably do some good.  And frankly I don't think anybody cares about it if they even see the value when looking at someone's trust.

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

After carefully considering the response above I have decided to remove the risked BTC and updated my feedback for OG. I would not bother to remove the risked BTC since it has no use (which I learnt today) but I have done it so that Vod removes his counter feedback. EcuaMobi and me talked about it earlier but I had to post it to get rid of my hesitations and to hear the community.

Thanks everyone especially EcuaMobi to bring this into my attention and I totally agree with theymos that the Risked BTC field should be removed.