Bitcoin Forum
July 23, 2021, 11:42:26 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.21.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 [All]
  Print  
Author Topic: Trust flags  (Read 11156 times)
theymos
Administrator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4186
Merit: 8569


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 03:13:36 AM
Merited by Lauda (41), EFS (10), Welsh (10), Mr. Big (10), suchmoon (9), Foxpup (6), mprep (5), actmyname (5), joniboini (5), ICOEthics (5), mhanbostanci (3), franckuestein (3), LoyceV (2), AicecreaME (2), DdmrDdmr (2), TalkStar (2), philipma1957 (1), malevolent (1), Daniel91 (1), Quickseller (1), Lafu (1), o48o (1), redsn0w (1), sujonali1819 (1), finaleshot2016 (1), Steamtyme (1), sheenshane (1), TheBeardedBaby (1), samcrypto (1), asu (1), DireWolfM14 (1), richminded (1), MagicByt3 (1), bozo333 (1), Financisto (1), daglordjames (1), sncc (1), singlebit (1)
 #1

I think that several of the problems with Trust were because three different goals were being jammed into one system:
 1. Getting a general idea of someone's trade history and trustworthiness in one convenient location, sort of like reviews on sites like EBay.
 2. Warning newbies/guests who don't know how to research properly about high-risk people.
 3. Deterring scams by creating a cost to scamming (ie. you'll "lose" a veteran account).
 
To improve this, I've split up these use-cases:

Use-case #1 is the old trust system, but I made the descriptions on the rating types a bit more general and removed the concept of a trust score. The numbers are now "distinct positive raters / distinct neutral raters / distinct negative raters". You should give these ratings for anything which you think would impact someone's willingness to trade with the person, but you should not use trust ratings to attack a person's opinions or otherwise talk about things which would not be relevant to reasonable prospective traders.

Use-cases 2 and 3 will be handled by a new system of flags. You can create a flag using a link on a person's trust page.

A newbie-warning flag is active if there are more people supporting such a flag than opposing it. It shows a banner on topics started by the flagged user for guests and for users with less than 7 days of login time. For all users, a "#" is shown next to their trust scores.

For contractual violations only, a scammer flag can be created. This is the only thing which causes the "Warning: trade with extreme caution" warning to return. It also triggers a banner similar to the newbie-warning banner which is visible to all users. A scammer flag requires 3 more supporting users than opposing users to become active.

A new scammer flag should be created for each separate alleged incident. In the spirit of forgiveness/redemption, scammer flags expire 3 years after the incident if the contract was casual/implied, and 10 years after the incident if the contract was written. These expiration times might be administratively changed in specific cases.

Creating or supporting a scammer flag is actively affirming a set of pretty clear fact-statements. If someone knowingly supports a flag containing incorrect fact-statements, then that is crystal-clear abuse, and I will seek to have such people removed from DT ASAP. People who are habitually wrong, even not knowingly, should also be removed.

Only users in your trust network count as supporting or opposing flags. For guests, the default trust network is used.

Also, a few miscellaneous changes:
 - All of the sections on users' trust pages are now paginated, so the page doesn't expand to massive size anymore.
 - The ordering of sent feedback is now consistent with the other sections.
 - "Risked BTC" is removed.

PM me if you find bugs.

1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1627083746
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1627083746

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1627083746
Reply with quote  #2

1627083746
Report to moderator
Pffrt
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162
Merit: 294


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 03:27:24 AM
 #2

Just noticed the changes.
Trust score of The-one-above-all is zero now although he has 11 negative feedback.

Changes-
1. Trust score removed (Not a good idea in my opinion but I wish it help the overall system.)
2. Risked BTC removed (Good step since no use of it at all)
3. Neutral are visible. (Best change since in the previous system, neutral has no usage without clicking on the trust page.)

I am still confused about the flag   Huh

Got it. A valid link can create a flag.
Steamtyme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1414
Merit: 1986


Betnomi.com Sportsbook, Casino and Poker


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 03:28:05 AM
 #3

I think this is a great tweak to the system. I am glad to see that Neutral will now have a place beside the other 2 ratings. Going to take a while to get used to the flag system but I'm glad to see Newbies were given a grace period to be given extra guidance and warnings.

A new scammer flag should be created for each separate alleged incident. In the spirit of forgiveness/redemption, scammer flags expire 3 years after the incident if the contract was casual/implied, and 10 years after the incident if the contract was written. These expiration times might be administratively changed in specific cases.

I am wondering will users be able to remove a scammer flag early in the spirit of forgiveness. Do users in your trust network automatically support flags or do they need to take action?
Quote
Creating or supporting a scammer flag is actively affirming a set of pretty clear fact-statements. If someone knowingly supports a flag containing incorrect fact-statements, then that is crystal-clear abuse, and I will seek to have such people removed from DT ASAP. People who are habitually wrong, even not knowingly, should also be removed.

I think the actively seeking to have abuse removed from DT is the deterrent people finally needed to hear to make changes to how the system was working.

Edit: Got my neutral ratings, which I was asking about again shortly before this lol. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5095156.msg51435817#msg51435817




Edit: I see now that flags can't be removed.

I'm curious now about the having to create a topic before leaving a flag. I understand it for the contracts because there should be a scam accusation. Can we use a community thread for flagging potential scammers? I ask because it says you can create 1 thread if you tag flag many users, or can this be a simple thread that states I flag people for these reasons and leave it at that.

theymos
Administrator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4186
Merit: 8569


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 03:35:28 AM
 #4

I am wondering will users be able to remove a scammer flag early in the spirit of forgiveness. Do users in your trust network automatically support flags or do they need to take action?

The original accuser can withdraw their support, but they can't delete the flag. So other users could take it up even if they withdraw.

Flags need to be actively supported.

Here's a user with a flag that you could support/oppose:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=157669
And if you log out or use a newbie account, you can see the banner on their topic:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2690003.0

Can we use a community thread for flagging potential scammers? I ask because it says you can create 1 thread if you tag flag many users, or can this be a simple thread that states I flag people for these reasons and leave it at that.

Yes, but make sure that if someone goes there, it's clear what the flag is about.

Scammer flags should usually each have distinct topics.

1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
Hhampuz
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1834
Merit: 3428


Meh.


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 03:36:21 AM
Merited by mprep (3), malevolent (1), redsn0w (1), Steamtyme (1)
 #5

Could we get page numbers as on boards/in PM's so I can jump to a specific page rather than just "Next"?

Not a big deal though.

███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
██▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀█████████
████████████▀▀       ▀▀████
█████▀▀▀▀▀▀             ███
██████████    ▄█████▄    ██
██████████    ███████    ██
██████████    ▀█████▀    ██
█████▄▄▄▄▄▄             ███
████████████▄▄       ▄▄████
██▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
.
|●/
●/
●/
SLOTS
GAME SHOW
LIVE CASINO
●/
●/
ROULETTE
BLACKJACK
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ▄▄ ▄
|      ███▄
          █         ▄▄▄▄
  ▄█▀▀▀▀▀▀     ▄▄▄████████▄▄
▄█▀       ▄▄▄████████████████▄
▀██▄  ▄▄███████████████████████▄
  ▀██████████████████████████████▄
    ███████████████████████████████▀
    ▐█████████████████████████████ ███▄
    ▐███████████▀▀█████████████████▄ ▀▀█
  ▐█████▀██████     ███▀ ███  ▐████▀
   ███▀   ████     ▄██   ▐██  ▐██▀
    ██     ▀▀██▄   ██     ██   ▀
   ████       ███ ███     ███


    ▄██▄▄    ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄  ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
▄▄████████████████████▄▄▀██████████▄▄
▀█████████████████████████████████████▄
    ▀▀▀▀▀███████████████████████████████
          ▀███████████████████████████▀█
             ▀▀█████████████▀▄███████▀
              █▄▀▀██████████▐██████▀▄
              ▐███▄▀█████▄  ▐████▀▄███
              ████▀  ▀████  ▐███▀ ████▌
            ▄███▀      ██▀   ██▀   ███
          ▄███▀     ▄███▀  ▄███  ▄███
|
▄▄███████▄▄
▄█████████████▄
███████▌ ▐███████
████████  █████████
█████▀▀   ▄▄███████
███████  ██████████
█████▌      ▄████
▀█████████████▀
▀▀███████▀▀
▄▄███████▄▄
▄█████████████▄
█████▌      ▄████
███████  ██████████
LITECOIN DEPOSITS
AVAILABLE NOW

.
     TWITTER     |     DISCORD     
|..PLAY NOW..
sandy-is-fine
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1871
Merit: 1202


AKA Ms-overzealous-condecsending-explitive-account


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 03:37:32 AM
Merited by mindrust (1)
 #6

This has removed the "visibility" of just about every scammer in the system especially since all those previously marked as such lose their "warning" tags which while they didn't make a lot of difference it was better than nothing. In order to create a "warning"  theoretically one would have to go back, retag then create a thread for each neg they post with a new "flag" which will fill the system with messages.  The vast majority of users (mostly new) will see 3 small font numbers under a name which will have no meaning.
suchmoon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2744
Merit: 6426


https://bpip.org


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 03:39:50 AM
 #7

How are the existing ratings converted into the new flags?

theymos
Administrator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4186
Merit: 8569


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 03:41:08 AM
 #8

How are the existing ratings converted into the new flags?

They're not. I decided that too many negative ratings aren't flag-worthy, and there's no way to automatically determine it. If you believe that a past negative rating is flag-worthy, you'll need to create a flag.

1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
Pffrt
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162
Merit: 294


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 03:44:05 AM
 #9

How are the existing ratings converted into the new flags?

They're not. I decided that too many negative ratings aren't flag-worthy, and there's no way to automatically determine it. If you believe that a past negative rating is flag-worthy, you'll need to create a flag.
Can everyone create a flag? I have seen add flag option in users profile. Does this have any affect by DT member? Or everyone can create flag and if get support, it will be active.
Got it.
Only users in your trust network count as supporting or opposing flags. For guests, the default trust network is used.
hd49728
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1064
Merit: 655



View Profile
June 12, 2019, 03:45:28 AM
Last edit: June 12, 2019, 04:40:53 AM by hd49728
Merited by Quickseller (1), Piggy (1)
 #10

This is why I checked my profile page early today, I saw something strange, but did not know what it is (I meant different format).


A scammer flag requires 3 more supporting users than opposing users to become active.
It means if someone received 4 scammer supporting flags, while only get 1 scammer opposing flag; the account will be flagged as potential scammer (based on your clarification above). But I have a curious that it means the flag system does not account for weight of user trust. Everyone has same weight with their flags, only one per user. Do I get it right?
In addition, for this case:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=157669
By now, what I saw are:
- No matter how many supportive users to flag this account (5, 10, or 50) - with total supports are greater than opposition, with one oppostion for example, the flag status will be only displayed as Active / Inactive.
- There is no scale of flags: moderate, serious, extremely serious based on the ratio between Support/ Opposition.

What is difference between newsilike (Yellow Flag Box) and SafeDice (Red Flag Box)


They both get active flags, but one is in yellow flag, and another one is in red flag.
Their profile pages look different too:


Let me guess:
Yellow is for active flags.
Red: is for trust.
So, if someone got both red trust and active flag, their flag boxes will be displayed in Red.
Furthermore, Trust Warning is prioritised than flag:
If someone only get active flag: profile page will be shown with #, like newsilike.

But if someone get both red trust, and active flag: profile page will be shown with Trust Warning, there is no #, like SafeDice.

Lastly, what doest the meaning of smaller font size and grey color of supporters?

.freebitcoin.       ▄▄▄█▀▀██▄▄▄
   ▄▄██████▄▄█  █▀▀█▄▄
  ███  █▀▀███████▄▄██▀
   ▀▀▀██▄▄█  ████▀▀  ▄██
▄███▄▄  ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀  ▄▄██████
██▀▀█████▄     ▄██▀█ ▀▀██
██▄▄███▀▀██   ███▀ ▄▄  ▀█
███████▄▄███ ███▄▄ ▀▀▄  █
██▀▀████████ █████  █▀▄██
 █▄▄████████ █████   ███
  ▀████  ███ ████▄▄███▀
     ▀▀████   ████▀▀
BITCOIN
DICE
EVENT
BETTING
WIN A LAMBO !

.
            ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄███████████▄▄▄▄▄
▄▄▄▄▄██████████████████████████████████▄▄▄▄
▀██████████████████████████████████████████████▄▄▄
▄▄████▄█████▄████████████████████████████▄█████▄████▄▄
▀████████▀▀▀████████████████████████████████▀▀▀██████████▄
  ▀▀▀████▄▄▄███████████████████████████████▄▄▄██████████
       ▀█████▀  ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀  ▀█████▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
.PLAY NOW.
theymos
Administrator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4186
Merit: 8569


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 03:49:12 AM
Merited by LoyceV (1)
 #11

Can everyone create a flag? I have seen add flag option in users profile. Does this have any affect by DT member? Or everyone can create flag and if get support, it will be active.

Anyone can create them, but support/opposition is only counted from people in your trust network. So if a newbie creates one, probably it will not be active from anyone's perspective, and it will thus have no effect unless it gets additional support from others.

These limits are in place:
 - Per 180 days, you can only give 1 flag of each type to a given user. So you can't give someone multiple written-contract-violation flags in 180 days, for example.
 - Globally, per year you can only create 1 flag per activity point you have, but at least 1/year.

This is why I checked my profile page early today, I saw something strange, but did not know what it is

Those are neutral ratings.

1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
Steamtyme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1414
Merit: 1986


Betnomi.com Sportsbook, Casino and Poker


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 03:49:57 AM
 #12

Can we use a community thread for flagging potential scammers? I ask because it says you can create 1 thread if you tag flag many users, or can this be a simple thread that states I flag people for these reasons and leave it at that.

Yes, but make sure that if someone goes there, it's clear what the flag is about.

Scammer flags should usually each have distinct topics.

Okay I see from your example that you don't necessarily have to create a thread. You can link to any topic that shows reasoning. So in theory I went and created a flag from a Negative feedback I left for a Selfmod/locked topic. I could have used that topic as my link as opposed to this one I threw together

suchmoon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2744
Merit: 6426


https://bpip.org


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 03:52:06 AM
 #13

Here's a user with a flag that you could support/oppose:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=157669

Ok, this user now has 3 supporters for the flag but still no "trade with extreme caution", only the "#" sign. What am I missing?

Edit: got it, it's the "red flag" (confusingly worded I must say) non-contractual flag. We may need better explanations on some of those things.

theymos
Administrator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4186
Merit: 8569


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 03:53:45 AM
 #14

Ok, this user now has 3 supporters for the flag but still no "trade with extreme caution", only the "#" sign. What am I missing?

A contract-violation flag has to be created for that.

1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
WhyFhy
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 854
Merit: 112


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 03:54:02 AM
 #15

Whats the cure for newbie accounts leaving multiple retaliatory feedbacks, weird thing with this guy in hardware section just marking everyone negative. Then logged into this account and tagged lots of people just looking out for each other within the same topic and timestamps.
-edit with VERY false feedbacks about loans?


The most valuable collectors item is bitcoin itself.
suchmoon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2744
Merit: 6426


https://bpip.org


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 04:05:04 AM
 #16

So if I understand this correctly, when I create a contract violation flag I'm counted as the first supporter and I'll need two more if I want someone to have "trade with extreme caution". For the "newbie" flag I don't need anyone else to support it, it's shown immediately. I wish the "#" would be more prominent though, and the less-than-3-supporters contract violation flags had some sort of indicator too. Not red and scary, just more visible.

DarkStar_
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2128
Merit: 2637


Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 04:08:31 AM
Merited by suchmoon (4), Welsh (3)
 #17

Just to confirm, you are not allowed to create a contract violation flag unless you were personally harmed, correct?

theymos
Administrator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4186
Merit: 8569


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 04:09:00 AM
 #18

Here someone created a contract-violation flag:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=9
Since that's clearly a test account, feel free to support it or oppose it as a test.

Note that right now it's only linked in a small note on the target user's trust page:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=2626817
And listed on their inactive-flags page:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=2626817;page=iflags
And shown as an entry in the sender's sent ratings:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=2626816;page=sent

If it gets enough support, it will no longer be listed in "inactive flags", and will instead move to "active flags".

So if I understand this correctly, when I create a contract violation flag I'm counted as the first supporter and I'll need two more if I want someone to have "trade with extreme caution".

Correct.

You can create both a newbie-warning and contract-violation flag if you want.

Just to confirm, you are not allowed to create a contract violation flag unless you were personally harmed, correct?

Correct.

1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
Quickseller
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2506
Merit: 2106


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 04:14:34 AM
Last edit: June 12, 2019, 04:25:49 AM by Quickseller
 #19

This should reduce the amount of drama around here, by a lot. It should also make the trust system more fair.


How is support/opposition to a flag displayed? Are those who are in my trust network always shown in larger font and first, and those outside of my trust network in smaller font and second, and then sorted by UID after determining if a person is in/out of my trust network?

edit:
On the pagination of trust pages, would it be possible to list pages number in a way similar to how page numbers are displayed on threads? If not, can we have a way to skip to the last page? I have a lot of sent trust ratings, and the current implementation makes it difficult to review my recently sent ratings.
theymos
Administrator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4186
Merit: 8569


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 04:23:17 AM
 #20

SafeDice has the honor of being the first to get an active scammer flag: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=396610

How is support/opposition to a flag displayed? Are those who are in my trust network always shown in larger font and first, and those outside of my trust network in smaller font and second, and then sorted by UID after determining if a person is in/out of my trust network?

Right, except that they're sorted by activity.

1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
suchmoon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2744
Merit: 6426


https://bpip.org


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 04:24:27 AM
Merited by Vod (2)
 #21

I'm starting to dislike that the flags have lots of words in them but no facts (you have to click links to see the supporting info). Not sure how it's gonna end up looking like in the long run but someone with multiple flags might be confusing to figure out. And what if the accuser ninja-edits the thread, that might cause trouble for the supporting DT members.

NLNico
Legendary
*
hacker
Offline Offline

Activity: 1876
Merit: 1264


DiceSites.com owner


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 04:28:25 AM
 #22

Here someone created a contract-violation flag:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=9
Since that's clearly a test account, feel free to support it or oppose it as a test.

I wonder which wannabe hacker tried to test some stuff Roll Eyes



Seems all good, lol.

cabalism13
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1145


Soon To Be Married ★Oct 23, 2021★


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 04:29:10 AM
 #23

As I've seen some of the users that commited scams doesn't have any Red as of now, and from ehat I'm seeing is that once they have also got a few positive feedbacks they'll have green ones.

Huh
All in all, I just still like the previous one  Undecided
Now -9999 Trust Scores won't be seen anymore 😂

     BUY CRYPTO AT REASONABLE RATES     
▄▄███████▄▄
▄█████▀ ▀█████▄
██████ ▄█▄ ██████
██████ █████ ██████
█████ ▄ ███ ▄ █████
████▌▐██ █ ██▌▐████
███▄ ▀▀▌ ▐▀▀ ▄███
▀████▄▄ ▄▄████▀
▀▀███████▀▀
▄▄███████▄▄
▄█████▀█▀█████▄
████        ▀████
███████  ███  █████
███████      ▀█████
███████  ███  █████
████        ▄████
▀█████▄█▄█████▀
▀▀███████▀▀
▄▄███████▄▄
▄█████▀▀▀█████▄
██████   ▐███████
██████▌   ▀▀███████
█████▀    ▄████████
████▄    ▀▀▀▀▀▀████
███▌         ▄███
▀█████████████▀
▀▀███████▀▀
&OTHER
COINS
NLNico
Legendary
*
hacker
Offline Offline

Activity: 1876
Merit: 1264


DiceSites.com owner


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 04:31:16 AM
 #24

As I've seen some of the users that commited scams doesn't have any Red as of now, and from ehat I'm seeing is that once they have also got a few positive feedbacks they'll have green ones.

Huh
All in all, I just still like the previous one  Undecided
Now -9999 Trust Scores won't be seen anymore

With an active flag it becomes a bit more clear: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=396610

Curious indeed how it looks if flag but still few (old) positives.

Basically it will take some time for all flags to be made, but should be fine in long-run.

Quickseller
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2506
Merit: 2106


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 04:34:36 AM
 #25

I'm starting to dislike that the flags have lots of words in them but no facts (you have to click links to see the supporting info). Not sure how it's gonna end up looking like in the long run but someone with multiple flags might be confusing to figure out. And what if the accuser ninja-edits the thread, that might cause trouble for the supporting DT members.
The purpose of the trust system is to be a tool for others to gauge the ability to trust someone. If a person is not doing their own research on a person to the extent they are not even willing to click on a few links, they will soon be parted with their money.

I also don't think it is necessary to support/oppose a flag immidiately once created. There can be some time for a person to respond, and others to review and discuss the evidence before a decision is made to support/oppose a flag. Theymos said in the OP that you should be removed from DT if you support inaccurate flags, even temporarily, so you should confirm that you agree with the flag, and confirm there isn't any good counter-arguments before supporting a flag.


I created flags for the person I believe to be a serial scammer listed here.
cabalism13
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1145


Soon To Be Married ★Oct 23, 2021★


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 04:38:20 AM
 #26

As I've seen some of the users that commited scams doesn't have any Red as of now, and from ehat I'm seeing is that once they have also got a few positive feedbacks they'll have green ones.

Huh
All in all, I just still like the previous one  Undecided
Now -9999 Trust Scores won't be seen anymore

With an active flag it becomes a bit more clear: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=396610

Curious indeed how it looks if flag but still few (old) positives.

Basically it will take some time for all flags to be made, but should be fine in long-run.
I see, now I get it. Though it looks fancy 😂, so we need to work with those flags again to see Reds on the previous users who has it, am I right? So vicious spammersand newbies that asking for loans will lost their current tags? They might see this unnatural and it may be ignored for some reason?  

Going with the flow takes time really... I just hope this would have a great result for the community.




Now I'm about to be curious on what will happen to Lauda's Trust Feedbacks coming from the pajeets 😂

     BUY CRYPTO AT REASONABLE RATES     
▄▄███████▄▄
▄█████▀ ▀█████▄
██████ ▄█▄ ██████
██████ █████ ██████
█████ ▄ ███ ▄ █████
████▌▐██ █ ██▌▐████
███▄ ▀▀▌ ▐▀▀ ▄███
▀████▄▄ ▄▄████▀
▀▀███████▀▀
▄▄███████▄▄
▄█████▀█▀█████▄
████        ▀████
███████  ███  █████
███████      ▀█████
███████  ███  █████
████        ▄████
▀█████▄█▄█████▀
▀▀███████▀▀
▄▄███████▄▄
▄█████▀▀▀█████▄
██████   ▐███████
██████▌   ▀▀███████
█████▀    ▄████████
████▄    ▀▀▀▀▀▀████
███▌         ▄███
▀█████████████▀
▀▀███████▀▀
&OTHER
COINS
Quickseller
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2506
Merit: 2106


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 04:41:23 AM
 #27

I see, now I get it. Though it looks fancy 😂, so we need to work with those flags again to see Reds on the previous users who has it, am I right? So vicious spammersand newbies that asking for loans will lost their current tags? They might see this unnatural and it may be ignored for some reason? 
It is not appropriate to use a flag on a spammer. I also don't think it is necessary to create a flag on a newbie account created to try to get a loan, as I don't think many are going to fall for this scam, and the negative rating will still be there.
suchmoon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2744
Merit: 6426


https://bpip.org


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 04:42:11 AM
Merited by cabalism13 (1)
 #28

The other issue is that there is no good way to link to a specific flag from an accusation thread saying "if you want to support this accusation, go here". You can link to the inactive flag list or to the trust page, but the actual flag could be there or not, depending on viewing person's trust list. And if the scammer has multiple flags then extra steps will be needed to verify which one is the one you want to support.

I'm sure we'll figure it out but it seems a bit clunky and error-prone.

Quickseller
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2506
Merit: 2106


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 04:46:33 AM
 #29

The other issue is that there is no good way to link to a specific flag from an accusation thread saying "if you want to support this accusation, go here". You can link to the inactive flag list or to the trust page, but the actual flag could be there or not, depending on viewing person's trust list. And if the scammer has multiple flags then extra steps will be needed to verify which one is the one you want to support.
I don't think the intention is for people to be leaving knee-jerk reaction support/opposition to flags. If you are going to support/oppose a flag, you should read it, check the thread that it is referencing, and check to make sure the OP listed in the flag matches the OP of the thread in question.
NLNico
Legendary
*
hacker
Offline Offline

Activity: 1876
Merit: 1264


DiceSites.com owner


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 04:49:01 AM
Last edit: June 12, 2019, 05:07:42 AM by NLNico
Merited by theymos_away (5), suchmoon (4)
 #30

The other issue is that there is no good way to link to a specific flag from an accusation thread saying "if you want to support this accusation, go here". You can link to the inactive flag list or to the trust page, but the actual flag could be there or not, depending on viewing person's trust list. And if the scammer has multiple flags then extra steps will be needed to verify which one is the one you want to support.

I'm sure we'll figure it out but it seems a bit clunky and error-prone.

I actually did link to the flag in my SafeDice thread because when you create the flag you go to something like: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=30 (eg a direct link.)

If you want to get it from the trust page, you would have to figure out the ID by hovering support/oppose/delete and make the link - but not that easy.

edit: actually that link is also the reference link for "(Created flag)" at "Sent feedback" - so easy to get there.

Steamtyme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1414
Merit: 1986


Betnomi.com Sportsbook, Casino and Poker


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 04:54:02 AM
 #31

I'm wondering if people are linking to direct threads what happens if that thread is trashed? Is the forum archiving these or would it be best practice for people to archive first as opposed to direct linking. I was thinking about this with some of the Self mod/locked topics if they chose to trash them, or if for some reason a thread was reported to be trashed.

Also just to clarify does this show up !!! for all scammer flags regardless of whether they have Negative feedback? (Assuming it's active)

Edit: Can there be a note or inability to create a flag placed on Banned accounts. This could save people some work if there is nothing left by the account they feel could result in a scam.

Quickseller
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2506
Merit: 2106


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 05:00:06 AM
 #32

A scammer flag requires 3 more supporting users than opposing users to become active.
It means if someone received 4 scammer supporting flags, while only get 1 scammer opposing flag; the account will be flagged as potential scammer (based on your clarification above). But I have a curious that it means the flag system does not account for weight of user trust. Everyone has same weight with their flags, only one per user. Do I get it right?
Each person only gets one vote, and your vote will only count when someone else is viewing the person's account if you are in their trust network.

What is difference between (Yellow Flag Box)[/url] and  (Red Flag Box)
The Yellow is for when someone is showing "red flags" of being a scammer while the Red box is when the person actually scammed someone.





suchmoon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2744
Merit: 6426


https://bpip.org


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 05:02:03 AM
 #33

I'm wondering if people are linking to direct threads what happens if that thread is trashed? Is the forum archiving these or would it be best practice for people to archive first as opposed to direct linking. I was thinking about this with some of the Self mod/locked topics if they chose to trash them, or if for some reason a thread was reported to be trashed.

Always archive if in doubt. But the concern I have is that as a supporter (or opponent) I have no way to attach the archive of what I'm supporting or opposing at the time. This might discourage DT members from supporting flags from less-known members even if the facts seem credible enough - because of the risk that the accuser might edit/remove the thread. Maybe that's the intent, not sure, we'll have to see how this develops.

BitcoinGirl.Club
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834
Merit: 1843


Bleeding🩸? No! 🤣


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 05:02:47 AM
 #34

The other issue is that there is no good way to link to a specific flag from an accusation thread saying "if you want to support this accusation, go here". You can link to the inactive flag list or to the trust page, but the actual flag could be there or not, depending on viewing person's trust list. And if the scammer has multiple flags then extra steps will be needed to verify which one is the one you want to support.

I'm sure we'll figure it out but it seems a bit clunky and error-prone.
To test the flag with a the test account theymos mentioned here, I left a normal flag, not the "written contract" or the other one.

So I see the flag is visible to his trust page: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=2626817;dt
Now if someone wants to support/Oppose it then they can and or the can support/Oppose the other flags for the same user: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=2626817;page=iflags

Question: A bit confuse to see my flag in the active trust page without having support from enough users 🙄
May be I am the flag creator of that specific flag?

████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████

████

████

████

████

████
     ▄▄▄ ▄▄███▄▄
    ███ ▄██████▀▀█▄▄
   ▐██ ▄██████  ▄████▄
   ▐█ ▄███████████████   █▄
   █ ▄█████████████▀▀  ▄███
   ▌▄████████▀▀▀  ▄▄▄████▀
   ▀▀▀▀▀   ▄▄▄██████▀▀ ▄
███████████████▀▀▀  ▄▄██
 ▀███████▄▄▄▄▄▄███████▀
      ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄▄███▀
        ▀██████████▄
           ▀▀▀▀ ▄█▀
               █▀
..Blender..
..W A L L E T
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████

████

████

████

████

████
[BTC
  BTC
.
BTC
Full control
over your funds
             ▄▄████▄▄
         ▄▄████████████▄▄
      ▄██████████ █████████▄
█▀█▄▄▄███████████ █▀█▀██████
▀▀▀         ▀████      ▀████
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀█▀▀▄    █ ████  ████
     ▄▄▄ ▀▄ ▀▀▀▀█        ███
     █▄█   ▀▀▀▀▀█ █████  ███
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█       ▄██
   ▄▄▄     ▄█████ █▄█▄████
   █▄█▀▀▀▀███████ ██████▀
            ▀████████▀▀
              ▀▀██▀▀
].ANONYMOUS...............
.SEGWIT ADDRESSES..
.TRUSTED.....................
// /.
       ▄▄████████▄▄
     ▄█████▀▀▀▀█████▄
    ████▀        ▀▀███▄
   ███▀            ▀███  █▄
  ▐███              ▀▀▀▄███
  ▐███            ▄▄▄████▀
  ▀▀▀      ▄▄▄██████▀▀▄
███████████████▀▀▀  ▄▄██
 ▀███████▄▄▄▄▄▄███████▀
      ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄▄███▀
        ▀██████████▄
           ▀▀▀▀ ▄█▀
               █▀
.
From the creators of
Blender.io
suchmoon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2744
Merit: 6426


https://bpip.org


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 05:06:49 AM
 #35

Question: A bit confuse to see my flag in the active trust page without having support from enough users 🙄
May be I am the flag creator of that specific flag?

The yellow box flag (which confusingly has words "red flag" in it but I digress) is shown immediately, only needs one supporter (or rather more supporters than opponents).

The red box flag needs 3 more supporters than opponents.

Edit: DarkStar_ made it disappear.

hd49728
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1064
Merit: 655



View Profile
June 12, 2019, 05:11:09 AM
 #36

The yellow box flag (which confusingly has words "red flag" in it but I digress) is shown immediately, only needs one supporter (or rather more supporters than opponents).

The red box flag needs 3 more supporters than opponents.

Edit: DarkStar_ made it disappear.
Maybe you were wrong, both newsilike and SafeDice have enough supports for Active Scam Flag, but their Flag Boxes have different colors. It seems that the assumption of QuickSeller is right.
The Yellow is for when someone is showing "red flags" of being a scammer while the Red box is when the person actually scammed someone.
What is difference between newsilike (Yellow Flag Box) and SafeDice (Red Flag Box)


They both get active flags, but one is in yellow flag, and another one is in red flag.
Their profile pages look different too:


Let me guess:
Yellow is for active flags.
Red: is for trust.
So, if someone got both red trust and active flag, their flag boxes will be displayed in Red.
Furthermore, Trust Warning is prioritised than flag:
If someone only get active flag: profile page will be shown with #, like newsilike.

But if someone get both red trust, and active flag: profile page will be shown with Trust Warning, there is no #, like SafeDice.

Lastly, what doest the meaning of smaller font size and grey color of supporters?


.freebitcoin.       ▄▄▄█▀▀██▄▄▄
   ▄▄██████▄▄█  █▀▀█▄▄
  ███  █▀▀███████▄▄██▀
   ▀▀▀██▄▄█  ████▀▀  ▄██
▄███▄▄  ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀  ▄▄██████
██▀▀█████▄     ▄██▀█ ▀▀██
██▄▄███▀▀██   ███▀ ▄▄  ▀█
███████▄▄███ ███▄▄ ▀▀▄  █
██▀▀████████ █████  █▀▄██
 █▄▄████████ █████   ███
  ▀████  ███ ████▄▄███▀
     ▀▀████   ████▀▀
BITCOIN
DICE
EVENT
BETTING
WIN A LAMBO !

.
            ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄███████████▄▄▄▄▄
▄▄▄▄▄██████████████████████████████████▄▄▄▄
▀██████████████████████████████████████████████▄▄▄
▄▄████▄█████▄████████████████████████████▄█████▄████▄▄
▀████████▀▀▀████████████████████████████████▀▀▀██████████▄
  ▀▀▀████▄▄▄███████████████████████████████▄▄▄██████████
       ▀█████▀  ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀  ▀█████▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
.PLAY NOW.
BitcoinGirl.Club
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834
Merit: 1843


Bleeding🩸? No! 🤣


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 05:11:21 AM
 #37


Edit: DarkStar_ made it disappear.
Yeah it moved to Inactive section LOL : http://prntscr.com/o0qpjn
So help me here:
This was supported by me and QS, opposed by DS but it's now inactive. So how many vote we need it to be active. Getting a bit confused.

████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████

████

████

████

████

████
     ▄▄▄ ▄▄███▄▄
    ███ ▄██████▀▀█▄▄
   ▐██ ▄██████  ▄████▄
   ▐█ ▄███████████████   █▄
   █ ▄█████████████▀▀  ▄███
   ▌▄████████▀▀▀  ▄▄▄████▀
   ▀▀▀▀▀   ▄▄▄██████▀▀ ▄
███████████████▀▀▀  ▄▄██
 ▀███████▄▄▄▄▄▄███████▀
      ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄▄███▀
        ▀██████████▄
           ▀▀▀▀ ▄█▀
               █▀
..Blender..
..W A L L E T
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████

████

████

████

████

████
[BTC
  BTC
.
BTC
Full control
over your funds
             ▄▄████▄▄
         ▄▄████████████▄▄
      ▄██████████ █████████▄
█▀█▄▄▄███████████ █▀█▀██████
▀▀▀         ▀████      ▀████
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀█▀▀▄    █ ████  ████
     ▄▄▄ ▀▄ ▀▀▀▀█        ███
     █▄█   ▀▀▀▀▀█ █████  ███
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█       ▄██
   ▄▄▄     ▄█████ █▄█▄████
   █▄█▀▀▀▀███████ ██████▀
            ▀████████▀▀
              ▀▀██▀▀
].ANONYMOUS...............
.SEGWIT ADDRESSES..
.TRUSTED.....................
// /.
       ▄▄████████▄▄
     ▄█████▀▀▀▀█████▄
    ████▀        ▀▀███▄
   ███▀            ▀███  █▄
  ▐███              ▀▀▀▄███
  ▐███            ▄▄▄████▀
  ▀▀▀      ▄▄▄██████▀▀▄
███████████████▀▀▀  ▄▄██
 ▀███████▄▄▄▄▄▄███████▀
      ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄▄███▀
        ▀██████████▄
           ▀▀▀▀ ▄█▀
               █▀
.
From the creators of
Blender.io
Quickseller
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2506
Merit: 2106


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 05:11:24 AM
 #38

I'm wondering if people are linking to direct threads what happens if that thread is trashed? Is the forum archiving these or would it be best practice for people to archive first as opposed to direct linking. I was thinking about this with some of the Self mod/locked topics if they chose to trash them, or if for some reason a thread was reported to be trashed.

Always archive if in doubt. But the concern I have is that as a supporter (or opponent) I have no way to attach the archive of what I'm supporting or opposing at the time. This might discourage DT members from supporting flags from less-known members even if the facts seem credible enough - because of the risk that the accuser might edit/remove the thread. Maybe that's the intent, not sure, we'll have to see how this develops.
I don't think there is very much from you writing in the thread "I am supporting/opposing this flag because...." and giving a justification. You could even quote the specific parts of the OP of the thread that make you believe it to be appropriate to support/oppose a flag.
Steamtyme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1414
Merit: 1986


Betnomi.com Sportsbook, Casino and Poker


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 05:14:54 AM
 #39

Always archive if in doubt. But the concern I have is that as a supporter (or opponent) I have no way to attach the archive of what I'm supporting or opposing at the time. This might discourage DT members from supporting flags from less-known members even if the facts seem credible enough - because of the risk that the accuser might edit/remove the thread. Maybe that's the intent, not sure, we'll have to see how this develops.

Good advice. That's a good point you bring up. There isn't anyway to add in a more robust reference if the flag is direct linked in that manner. This is probably something that will have to be addressed, but I don't see it leaving many gaps of opportunity. Not sure the best workaround for that.

I wonder can the user that received the Flag can counter it themselves?  


Edit: DarkStar_ made it disappear.
Yeah it moved to Inactive section LOL : http://prntscr.com/o0qpjn
So help me here:
This was supported by me and QS, opposed by DS but it's now inactive. So how many vote we need it to be active. Getting a bit confused.

If you don't have QS in your trust network I believe their vote isn't included in the tally for this to be visible to you.

Edit: I supported it, not sure if I'm in your network but that may have made it visible

The yellow box flag (which confusingly has words "red flag" in it but I digress) is shown immediately, only needs one supporter (or rather more supporters than opponents).

The red box flag needs 3 more supporters than opponents.

Edit: DarkStar_ made it disappear.
Maybe you were wrong, both newsilike and SafeDice have enough supports for Active Scam Flag, but their Flag Boxes have different colors. It seems that the assumption of QuickSeller is right.
The Yellow is for when someone is showing "red flags" of being a scammer while the Red box is when the person actually scammed someone.

Those are 2 different Flags - One is the Newbie warning and the other the is a contractual violation. I believe that they display differently on the page.

suchmoon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2744
Merit: 6426


https://bpip.org


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 05:16:05 AM
 #40


Edit: DarkStar_ made it disappear.
Yeah it moved to Inactive section LOL : http://prntscr.com/o0qpjn
So help me here:
This was supported by me and QS, opposed by DS but it's now inactive. So how many vote we need it to be active. Getting a bit confused.

You and DS are in DT, QS is not so he doesn't count. Your support minus DS opposition = 0, box not shown. Yellow box needs more supporters than opponents (at least one more). Red box needs three more supporters than opponents. Only users in DT (or your custom trust network if you use that) count as supporters or opponents.

NLNico
Legendary
*
hacker
Offline Offline

Activity: 1876
Merit: 1264


DiceSites.com owner


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 05:19:50 AM
 #41

I wonder can the user that received the Flag can counter it themselves?  
Yes, it is possible: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=32 but if user not in DT (well your trust network).. I guess it's equal to a new account opposing it.

BitcoinGirl.Club
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834
Merit: 1843


Bleeding🩸? No! 🤣


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 05:24:34 AM
 #42



Edit: I supported it, not sure if I'm in your network but that may have made it visible


I am not seeing any difference when I try it with ";dt" and without ";dt"
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=2626817;dt
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=2626817



Both you and DS are not in my trust network yet.


You and DS are in DT, QS is not so he doesn't count. Your support minus DS opposition = 0, box not shown. Yellow box needs more supporters than opponents (at least one more). Red box needs three more supporters than opponents. Only users in DT (or your custom trust network if you use that) count as supporters or opponents.
Yes I missed the DT part. It made sense for me after Steamtyme's vote.

████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████

████

████

████

████

████
     ▄▄▄ ▄▄███▄▄
    ███ ▄██████▀▀█▄▄
   ▐██ ▄██████  ▄████▄
   ▐█ ▄███████████████   █▄
   █ ▄█████████████▀▀  ▄███
   ▌▄████████▀▀▀  ▄▄▄████▀
   ▀▀▀▀▀   ▄▄▄██████▀▀ ▄
███████████████▀▀▀  ▄▄██
 ▀███████▄▄▄▄▄▄███████▀
      ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄▄███▀
        ▀██████████▄
           ▀▀▀▀ ▄█▀
               █▀
..Blender..
..W A L L E T
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████

████

████

████

████

████
[BTC
  BTC
.
BTC
Full control
over your funds
             ▄▄████▄▄
         ▄▄████████████▄▄
      ▄██████████ █████████▄
█▀█▄▄▄███████████ █▀█▀██████
▀▀▀         ▀████      ▀████
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀█▀▀▄    █ ████  ████
     ▄▄▄ ▀▄ ▀▀▀▀█        ███
     █▄█   ▀▀▀▀▀█ █████  ███
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█       ▄██
   ▄▄▄     ▄█████ █▄█▄████
   █▄█▀▀▀▀███████ ██████▀
            ▀████████▀▀
              ▀▀██▀▀
].ANONYMOUS...............
.SEGWIT ADDRESSES..
.TRUSTED.....................
// /.
       ▄▄████████▄▄
     ▄█████▀▀▀▀█████▄
    ████▀        ▀▀███▄
   ███▀            ▀███  █▄
  ▐███              ▀▀▀▄███
  ▐███            ▄▄▄████▀
  ▀▀▀      ▄▄▄██████▀▀▄
███████████████▀▀▀  ▄▄██
 ▀███████▄▄▄▄▄▄███████▀
      ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄▄███▀
        ▀██████████▄
           ▀▀▀▀ ▄█▀
               █▀
.
From the creators of
Blender.io
rhomelmabini
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078
Merit: 504


No Gods or Kings. Only Bitcoin


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 05:32:52 AM
 #43

Lastly, what doest the meaning of smaller font size and grey color of supporters?



I wanted to know it as well because for flag there's only "Support" and "Oppose" options and there's no such thing as neutral. What is it really meant to those italicized member on the flag?

And to create a flag will there be a specific board it will be posted?

███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
██▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀█████████
████████████▀▀       ▀▀████
█████▀▀▀▀▀▀             ███
██████████    ▄█████▄    ██
██████████    ███████    ██
██████████    ▀█████▀    ██
█████▄▄▄▄▄▄             ███
████████████▄▄       ▄▄████
██▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
.
|●/
●/
●/
SLOTS
GAME SHOW
LIVE CASINO
●/
●/
ROULETTE
BLACKJACK
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ▄▄ ▄
|      ███▄
          █         ▄▄▄▄
  ▄█▀▀▀▀▀▀     ▄▄▄████████▄▄
▄█▀       ▄▄▄████████████████▄
▀██▄  ▄▄███████████████████████▄
  ▀██████████████████████████████▄
    ███████████████████████████████▀
    ▐█████████████████████████████ ███▄
    ▐███████████▀▀█████████████████▄ ▀▀█
  ▐█████▀██████     ███▀ ███  ▐████▀
   ███▀   ████     ▄██   ▐██  ▐██▀
    ██     ▀▀██▄   ██     ██   ▀
   ████       ███ ███     ███


    ▄██▄▄    ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄  ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
▄▄████████████████████▄▄▀██████████▄▄
▀█████████████████████████████████████▄
    ▀▀▀▀▀███████████████████████████████
          ▀███████████████████████████▀█
             ▀▀█████████████▀▄███████▀
              █▄▀▀██████████▐██████▀▄
              ▐███▄▀█████▄  ▐████▀▄███
              ████▀  ▀████  ▐███▀ ████▌
            ▄███▀      ██▀   ██▀   ███
          ▄███▀     ▄███▀  ▄███  ▄███
|
▄▄███████▄▄
▄█████████████▄
███████▌ ▐███████
████████  █████████
█████▀▀   ▄▄███████
███████  ██████████
█████▌      ▄████
▀█████████████▀
▀▀███████▀▀
▄▄███████▄▄
▄█████████████▄
█████▌      ▄████
███████  ██████████
LITECOIN DEPOSITS
AVAILABLE NOW

.
     TWITTER     |     DISCORD     
|..PLAY NOW..
COOLCRYPTOVATOR
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1724


Need Campaign Manager? Telegram: @COOLCRYPTOVATOR


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 05:37:38 AM
 #44

So for every red flags we need create thread so that other DT member will aware about flags. Also other members will aware by "#" symbol but need to enter on profile.





.
.




░██████████████████░
████████████████████
█████████▀░░░███████
█████████░░▄████████
███████▀▀░░▀▀███████
███████▄▄░░▄▄███████
█████████░░█████████

█████████░░█████████

█████████▄▄█████████

████████████████████

░██████████████████░
░██████████████████░
████████████████████
████████████▀▀▀█▀███
███░▀█████▀░░░░░▀███
███▌░░░▀▀▀░░░░░░████
████▄░░░░░░░░░░░████
█████▀░░░░░░░░░█████

██████▄░░░░░▄▄██████

█████▄▄▄▄███████████

████████████████████

░██████████████████░
░██████████████████░
████████████████████
████████████████████
███████████▀▀░░▐████
███████▀▀░░░░░█████
████▀░░░▄█▀░░░▐█████
█████▄▄█▀░░░░░██████

███████▌▄▄▄▐██████

████████████████████

████████████████████

░██████████████████░
BitcoinGirl.Club
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834
Merit: 1843


Bleeding🩸? No! 🤣


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 05:38:04 AM
 #45


I wanted to know it as well because for flag there's only "Support" and "Oppose" options and there's no such thing as neutral. What is it really meant to those italicized member on the flag?


They are not in the DT network. Their vote do not count.

Quote
And to create a flag will there be a specific board it will be posted?
No.

████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████

████

████

████

████

████
     ▄▄▄ ▄▄███▄▄
    ███ ▄██████▀▀█▄▄
   ▐██ ▄██████  ▄████▄
   ▐█ ▄███████████████   █▄
   █ ▄█████████████▀▀  ▄███
   ▌▄████████▀▀▀  ▄▄▄████▀
   ▀▀▀▀▀   ▄▄▄██████▀▀ ▄
███████████████▀▀▀  ▄▄██
 ▀███████▄▄▄▄▄▄███████▀
      ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄▄███▀
        ▀██████████▄
           ▀▀▀▀ ▄█▀
               █▀
..Blender..
..W A L L E T
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████

████

████

████

████

████
[BTC
  BTC
.
BTC
Full control
over your funds
             ▄▄████▄▄
         ▄▄████████████▄▄
      ▄██████████ █████████▄
█▀█▄▄▄███████████ █▀█▀██████
▀▀▀         ▀████      ▀████
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀█▀▀▄    █ ████  ████
     ▄▄▄ ▀▄ ▀▀▀▀█        ███
     █▄█   ▀▀▀▀▀█ █████  ███
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█       ▄██
   ▄▄▄     ▄█████ █▄█▄████
   █▄█▀▀▀▀███████ ██████▀
            ▀████████▀▀
              ▀▀██▀▀
].ANONYMOUS...............
.SEGWIT ADDRESSES..
.TRUSTED.....................
// /.
       ▄▄████████▄▄
     ▄█████▀▀▀▀█████▄
    ████▀        ▀▀███▄
   ███▀            ▀███  █▄
  ▐███              ▀▀▀▄███
  ▐███            ▄▄▄████▀
  ▀▀▀      ▄▄▄██████▀▀▄
███████████████▀▀▀  ▄▄██
 ▀███████▄▄▄▄▄▄███████▀
      ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄▄███▀
        ▀██████████▄
           ▀▀▀▀ ▄█▀
               █▀
.
From the creators of
Blender.io
Quickseller
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2506
Merit: 2106


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 05:46:36 AM
 #46

So for every red flags we need create thread so that other DT member will aware about flags. Also other members will aware by "#" symbol but need to enter on profile.
You need to create a thread and obtain support from others that the flag is accurate.

Each type of flags make very specific statements that articulate how/why a person is unsafe to deal with.
LoyceV
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2282
Merit: 8483


Thick-Skinned Gang Leader


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 05:52:52 AM
 #47

For contractual violations only, a scammer flag can be created.
Can I also create a scammer flag for alt-accounts of the contract violator? Example: BetKing.io violated a contract, but BetKing Support, dean nolan and PocketRocketsCasino are his alt-accounts.

bones261
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1806
Merit: 1823



View Profile
June 12, 2019, 05:58:20 AM
 #48

I gather that if someone creates a flag and I support the flag, the person does not need to have scammed me as well, I just have to believe the evidence the flagger presented. Correct? Also, if exchange xyz makes an exit scam, is that considered one incident that can only be flagged once? Or can each victim make their own flag?
Quickseller
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2506
Merit: 2106


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 06:00:04 AM
Merited by LoyceV (1)
 #49

For contractual violations only, a scammer flag can be created.
Can I also create a scammer flag for alt-accounts of the contract violator? Example: BetKing.io violated a contract, but BetKing Support, dean nolan and PocketRocketsCasino are his alt-accounts.
I would argue that if the flag is true in regards to a business, the flag should be applicable to agents or employees of the businesses in most circumstances.

If someone were to resign from said business, and they did not play a role in the underlying facts that cause the flag to be accurate, the flag would probably be no longer appropriate for the now former employee.

There might be other circumstances in which a flag might not be appropriate, for example someone being hired by a business to clean up the mess surrounding the scam that resulted in the flag.

I gather that if someone creates a flag and I support the flag, the person does not need to have scammed me as well, I just have to believe the evidence the flagger presented. Correct? Also, if exchange xyz makes an exit scam, is that considered one incident that can only be flagged once? Or can each victim make their own flag?
Each person can create a flag, however it will probably be redundant to to create more than a handful.

Also, if a person exit scammed, they generally will not continue trying to trade. If they never login again, getting the person flagged is probably redundant, if they try to continue trading, they should be flagged.
BitcoinGirl.Club
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834
Merit: 1843


Bleeding🩸? No! 🤣


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 06:01:40 AM
 #50

For contractual violations only, a scammer flag can be created.
Can I also create a scammer flag for alt-accounts of the contract violator? Example: BetKing.io violated a contract, but BetKing Support, dean nolan and PocketRocketsCasino are his alt-accounts.
If there is a proof of connection (same person/company) then it should be practical.

████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████

████

████

████

████

████
     ▄▄▄ ▄▄███▄▄
    ███ ▄██████▀▀█▄▄
   ▐██ ▄██████  ▄████▄
   ▐█ ▄███████████████   █▄
   █ ▄█████████████▀▀  ▄███
   ▌▄████████▀▀▀  ▄▄▄████▀
   ▀▀▀▀▀   ▄▄▄██████▀▀ ▄
███████████████▀▀▀  ▄▄██
 ▀███████▄▄▄▄▄▄███████▀
      ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄▄███▀
        ▀██████████▄
           ▀▀▀▀ ▄█▀
               █▀
..Blender..
..W A L L E T
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████

████

████

████

████

████
[BTC
  BTC
.
BTC
Full control
over your funds
             ▄▄████▄▄
         ▄▄████████████▄▄
      ▄██████████ █████████▄
█▀█▄▄▄███████████ █▀█▀██████
▀▀▀         ▀████      ▀████
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀█▀▀▄    █ ████  ████
     ▄▄▄ ▀▄ ▀▀▀▀█        ███
     █▄█   ▀▀▀▀▀█ █████  ███
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█       ▄██
   ▄▄▄     ▄█████ █▄█▄████
   █▄█▀▀▀▀███████ ██████▀
            ▀████████▀▀
              ▀▀██▀▀
].ANONYMOUS...............
.SEGWIT ADDRESSES..
.TRUSTED.....................
// /.
       ▄▄████████▄▄
     ▄█████▀▀▀▀█████▄
    ████▀        ▀▀███▄
   ███▀            ▀███  █▄
  ▐███              ▀▀▀▄███
  ▐███            ▄▄▄████▀
  ▀▀▀      ▄▄▄██████▀▀▄
███████████████▀▀▀  ▄▄██
 ▀███████▄▄▄▄▄▄███████▀
      ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄▄███▀
        ▀██████████▄
           ▀▀▀▀ ▄█▀
               █▀
.
From the creators of
Blender.io
roosbit
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 672
Merit: 41

Xive.io


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 06:02:48 AM
 #51

I am wondering will users be able to remove a scammer flag early in the spirit of forgiveness. Do users in your trust network automatically support flags or do they need to take action?

The original accuser can withdraw their support, but they can't delete the flag. So other users could take it up even if they withdraw.

Flags need to be actively supported.

Here's a user with a flag that you could support/oppose:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=157669
And if you log out or use a newbie account, you can see the banner on their topic:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2690003.0
Scenario one talks more of a flag being supported but in the event of the flag being outweighed by opposers does that mean the flag won't stand ??
And what happens in the case of a deadlock were support=oppose


Admin can we get a child board in meta for all FLAGS

██████ ████████████████▐          X  I  V  E          ▌███████████████ ███████
Your go-to BTC mining platform for legitimate cloud hosting and cloud mining contracts
[    TWITTER    ]  [   FACEBOOK   ]  [  INSTAGRAM  ]  [    YOUTUBE    ]  [   LINKEDIN   ]
BitcoinGirl.Club
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834
Merit: 1843


Bleeding🩸? No! 🤣


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 06:04:18 AM
 #52

I gather that if someone creates a flag and I support the flag, the person does not need to have scammed me as well, I just have to believe the evidence the flagger presented. Correct? Also, if exchange xyz makes an exit scam, is that considered one incident that can only be flagged once? Or can each victim make their own flag?
Each victim can make their own flag.

████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████

████

████

████

████

████
     ▄▄▄ ▄▄███▄▄
    ███ ▄██████▀▀█▄▄
   ▐██ ▄██████  ▄████▄
   ▐█ ▄███████████████   █▄
   █ ▄█████████████▀▀  ▄███
   ▌▄████████▀▀▀  ▄▄▄████▀
   ▀▀▀▀▀   ▄▄▄██████▀▀ ▄
███████████████▀▀▀  ▄▄██
 ▀███████▄▄▄▄▄▄███████▀
      ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄▄███▀
        ▀██████████▄
           ▀▀▀▀ ▄█▀
               █▀
..Blender..
..W A L L E T
████
████
████
████
████
████
████
████

████

████

████

████

████
[BTC
  BTC
.
BTC
Full control
over your funds
             ▄▄████▄▄
         ▄▄████████████▄▄
      ▄██████████ █████████▄
█▀█▄▄▄███████████ █▀█▀██████
▀▀▀         ▀████      ▀████
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀█▀▀▄    █ ████  ████
     ▄▄▄ ▀▄ ▀▀▀▀█        ███
     █▄█   ▀▀▀▀▀█ █████  ███
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█       ▄██
   ▄▄▄     ▄█████ █▄█▄████
   █▄█▀▀▀▀███████ ██████▀
            ▀████████▀▀
              ▀▀██▀▀
].ANONYMOUS...............
.SEGWIT ADDRESSES..
.TRUSTED.....................
// /.
       ▄▄████████▄▄
     ▄█████▀▀▀▀█████▄
    ████▀        ▀▀███▄
   ███▀            ▀███  █▄
  ▐███              ▀▀▀▄███
  ▐███            ▄▄▄████▀
  ▀▀▀      ▄▄▄██████▀▀▄
███████████████▀▀▀  ▄▄██
 ▀███████▄▄▄▄▄▄███████▀
      ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄▄███▀
        ▀██████████▄
           ▀▀▀▀ ▄█▀
               █▀
.
From the creators of
Blender.io
Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2674
Merit: 2884


Terminated.


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 06:09:00 AM
 #53

Have fun with the scammers being on a roll again. I ain't creating 5k flags.

"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"
😼 Bitcoin Core (onion)
theymos
Administrator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4186
Merit: 8569


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 06:12:30 AM
 #54

Can I also create a scammer flag for alt-accounts of the contract violator? Example: BetKing.io violated a contract, but BetKing Support, dean nolan and PocketRocketsCasino are his alt-accounts.

Yes, one of the victims can.

I gather that if someone creates a flag and I support the flag, the person does not need to have scammed me as well, I just have to believe the evidence the flagger presented.

Correct.

Also, if exchange xyz makes an exit scam, is that considered one incident that can only be flagged once? Or can each victim make their own flag?

It's probably best if one of the victims makes a flag and the rest support it.

1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
mightyDTs
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 31
Merit: 0


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 06:20:00 AM
 #55

Have fun with the scammers being on a roll again. I ain't creating 5k flags.
Is anyone asking you or you are asking to change the system in your favor? Whatever it is, good luck.

I told you all that a change is coming. Enjoy it.

Good work theymos.

Good bye from mightyDTs
JayJuanGee
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 2688
Merit: 4330


ESG, KYC & AML are attack vectors on bitcoin


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 06:27:10 AM
 #56

Have fun with the scammers being on a roll again. I ain't creating 5k flags.
Is anyone asking you or you are asking to change the system in your favor? Whatever it is, good luck. I told you all that a change is coming. Enjoy it.

I think that Lauda makes a good point about how much redundant work seems necessary, especially if there is no algorithm or something that converts or counts past work.... or maybe a kind of transition period in which some of the past work would still have some kind of effect - though the raw data is still there (meaning the actual trust feedback(s) that had already been given).  They just don't have a trust number affiliated with them, any longer....   I find it a bit confusing, at least at the moment... and I am not sure how much repeated work is going to be needed to be carried out by some of the red trust work horses of the past (including whether some of the work of the red trust work horses of the past is being thrown out the window through this change).

Of course, we have to deal with ESG, KYC & AML, but each of them are attack vectors on bitcoin to be avoided or minimized.

Put BTC here: 35EVP8EePt8dyvKHaB7bXaRmKLm22YgRCA

How much alt coin diversification is necessary? if you are investing in Bitcoin, then perhaps 0%?
Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2674
Merit: 2884


Terminated.


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 06:30:10 AM
 #57

Have fun with the scammers being on a roll again. I ain't creating 5k flags.
Is anyone asking you or you are asking to change the system in your favor? Whatever it is, good luck. I told you all that a change is coming. Enjoy it.
I think that Lauda makes a good point about how much redundant work seems necessary, especially if there is no algorithm or something that converts or counts past work.... or maybe a kind of transition period in which some of the past work would still have some kind of effect - though the raw data is still there (meaning the actual trust feedback(s) that had already been given).  They just don't have a trust number affiliated with them, any longer....   I find it a bit confusing, at least at the moment... and I am not sure how much repeated work is going to be needed to be carried out by some of the red trust work horses of the past (including whether some of the work of the red trust work horses of the past is being thrown out the window through this change).
In many cases it would require action from a total of 3 members per the tagged user. All in all, it's probably closer to 5k flags and at least 5k-10k support clicks. Who has time to do that? It's just not plausible (even though it would be worth it).

"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"
😼 Bitcoin Core (onion)
Quickseller
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2506
Merit: 2106


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 06:37:28 AM
 #58

Have fun with the scammers being on a roll again. I ain't creating 5k flags.
Is anyone asking you or you are asking to change the system in your favor? Whatever it is, good luck. I told you all that a change is coming. Enjoy it.

I think that Lauda makes a good point about how much redundant work seems necessary, especially if there is no algorithm or something that converts or counts past work.... or maybe a kind of transition period in which some of the past work would still have some kind of effect - though the raw data is still there (meaning the actual trust feedback(s) that had already been given).  They just don't have a trust number affiliated with them, any longer....   I find it a bit confusing, at least at the moment... and I am not sure how much repeated work is going to be needed to be carried out by some of the red trust work horses of the past (including whether some of the work of the red trust work horses of the past is being thrown out the window through this change).
The purpose of the new system is to demonstrate that there is consensus that someone is not safe to trade with. The ability to one person to label a person as a scammer is being removed, which is a good thing.

If it is clear a person is a scammer, this should be a nonissue, but controversial ratings will be more difficult to backup. 
Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2674
Merit: 2884


Terminated.


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 06:40:11 AM
 #59

Two problems already:

Quote
An Error Has Occurred!
That topic does not exist, or it is self-moderated or locked.

Quote
5) the incident occurred roughly in the month given above.
In many cases, the "incident" has been going on for a considerable time before being discovered.

The purpose of the new system is to demonstrate that there is consensus that someone is not safe to trade with. The ability to one person to label a person as a scammer is being removed, which is a good thing.

If it is clear a person is a scammer, this should be a nonissue, but controversial ratings will be more difficult to backup. 
Don't worry, you'll be flagged again.

"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"
😼 Bitcoin Core (onion)
JayJuanGee
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 2688
Merit: 4330


ESG, KYC & AML are attack vectors on bitcoin


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 06:43:14 AM
 #60

Have fun with the scammers being on a roll again. I ain't creating 5k flags.
Is anyone asking you or you are asking to change the system in your favor? Whatever it is, good luck. I told you all that a change is coming. Enjoy it.

I think that Lauda makes a good point about how much redundant work seems necessary, especially if there is no algorithm or something that converts or counts past work.... or maybe a kind of transition period in which some of the past work would still have some kind of effect - though the raw data is still there (meaning the actual trust feedback(s) that had already been given).  They just don't have a trust number affiliated with them, any longer....   I find it a bit confusing, at least at the moment... and I am not sure how much repeated work is going to be needed to be carried out by some of the red trust work horses of the past (including whether some of the work of the red trust work horses of the past is being thrown out the window through this change).
The purpose of the new system is to demonstrate that there is consensus that someone is not safe to trade with. The ability to one person to label a person as a scammer is being removed, which is a good thing.

If it is clear a person is a scammer, this should be a nonissue, but controversial ratings will be more difficult to backup.  


Yes... overall I get the purpose as you describe, which seems quite legitimate, but I still stand by my earlier post concerning some of the seeming problematic transitional work aspects.. and seemingly even some necessity for repeated work that might not get carried out because frequently people do not like to go back and repeat work that they have already done.. and that would have been more fresh in their mind when they had done it earlier, as compared to now or after the passage of time.  This will cause some members who deserve negative ratings to receive a blank slate that they might not deserve.. and that blank slate might not get returned to where it should be... but yeah, hopefully no babies die along the way... and during this transition period.

Of course, we have to deal with ESG, KYC & AML, but each of them are attack vectors on bitcoin to be avoided or minimized.

Put BTC here: 35EVP8EePt8dyvKHaB7bXaRmKLm22YgRCA

How much alt coin diversification is necessary? if you are investing in Bitcoin, then perhaps 0%?
Quickseller
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2506
Merit: 2106


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 06:45:51 AM
 #61

Have fun with the scammers being on a roll again. I ain't creating 5k flags.
Is anyone asking you or you are asking to change the system in your favor? Whatever it is, good luck. I told you all that a change is coming. Enjoy it.

I think that Lauda makes a good point about how much redundant work seems necessary, especially if there is no algorithm or something that converts or counts past work.... or maybe a kind of transition period in which some of the past work would still have some kind of effect - though the raw data is still there (meaning the actual trust feedback(s) that had already been given).  They just don't have a trust number affiliated with them, any longer....   I find it a bit confusing, at least at the moment... and I am not sure how much repeated work is going to be needed to be carried out by some of the red trust work horses of the past (including whether some of the work of the red trust work horses of the past is being thrown out the window through this change).
The purpose of the new system is to demonstrate that there is consensus that someone is not safe to trade with. The ability to one person to label a person as a scammer is being removed, which is a good thing.

If it is clear a person is a scammer, this should be a nonissue, but controversial ratings will be more difficult to backup. 


Yes... overall I get the purpose as you describe, which seems quite legitimate, but I still stand by my earlier post concerning some of the seeming problematic transitional work aspects.. and seemingly even some necessity for repeated work that might not take get carried out because frequently people do not like to go back and repeat work that they have already done.. and that would have been more fresh in their mind when they had done it earlier, as compared to now or after the passage of time.
Negative ratings still exist and show up as having unique negative ratings on their trust number.
Steamtyme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1414
Merit: 1986


Betnomi.com Sportsbook, Casino and Poker


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 06:48:17 AM
Last edit: June 12, 2019, 11:26:43 AM by Steamtyme
 #62

Let's not forget these are complementary systems. It's just like having more signs on the highway. The old system is still there with the ability to leave feedback. So really there is no need to go back over everything in the past.
Quote
Positive - You think that this person is unlikely to scam anyone.
Neutral - Other comments.
Negative - You think that trading with this person is high-risk. You might also be able to add a flag.

The ratings are still there and moving forward the flags can be applied as needed. You really only have to go back to flag cases you think are still active. Which is why my previous mention of something indicating a banned user or preventing a flag from being created can prevent unnecessary flags.

I created a flag for an implied contract for ky94PjDw I made it for 3 years and 1 month. So I'm wondering how it gets handled, right now it appears:

Despite the 3 year limitation it can be created
If made active, will it immediately disappear due to the time limitations on these?
Is there a permanent record of previous flags for which the time has been served?

Edit:
So this received enough support to but remained as expired, it does still show up under " inactive flags".

theymos can you elaborate on the whole concept of these flags disappearing. In the case of the newbie warning flag, if all supporters and the creator of the flag remove their support on that does the flag and it's warning dissapear?

TheBeardedBaby
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330
Merit: 2425


Wearing my signature for free :) tnx BestChange.


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 07:04:20 AM
Last edit: June 12, 2019, 09:11:50 AM by iasenko
Merited by bones261 (2), mprep (1), LoyceV (1), redsn0w (1)
 #63

I can put a flag on my own account. This should be disabled as before.



Edited: Seems like I can also Support or Oppose the flag myself.





.
.




░██████████████████░
████████████████████
█████████▀░░░███████
█████████░░▄████████
███████▀▀░░▀▀███████
███████▄▄░░▄▄███████
█████████░░█████████

█████████░░█████████

█████████▄▄█████████

████████████████████

░██████████████████░
░██████████████████░
████████████████████
████████████▀▀▀█▀███
███░▀█████▀░░░░░▀███
███▌░░░▀▀▀░░░░░░████
████▄░░░░░░░░░░░████
█████▀░░░░░░░░░█████

██████▄░░░░░▄▄██████

█████▄▄▄▄███████████

████████████████████

░██████████████████░
░██████████████████░
████████████████████
████████████████████
███████████▀▀░░▐████
███████▀▀░░░░░█████
████▀░░░▄█▀░░░▐█████
█████▄▄█▀░░░░░██████

███████▌▄▄▄▐██████

████████████████████

████████████████████

░██████████████████░
Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2674
Merit: 2884


Terminated.


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 07:07:00 AM
 #64

Let's not forget these are complementary systems. It's just like having more signs on the highway. The old system is still there with the ability to leave feedback. So really there is no need to go back over everything in the past.
Quote
Positive - You think that this person is unlikely to scam anyone.
Neutral - Other comments.
Negative - You think that trading with this person is high-risk. You might also be able to add a flag.

The ratings are still there and moving forward the flags can be applied as needed.
A negative rating right now is completely useless and will be disregarded by the supermajority of the users (the same way that neutral ratings always have been). I'd actually advise against leaving them to save yourself the time and trouble; just skip straight into scammer flags.

"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"
😼 Bitcoin Core (onion)
Steamtyme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1414
Merit: 1986


Betnomi.com Sportsbook, Casino and Poker


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 07:12:49 AM
 #65

I can put a flag on my own account. This should be disabled as before.

I opposed it, nothing but slanderous lies  Tongue

A negative rating right now is completely useless and will be disregarded by the supermajority of the users (the same way that neutral ratings always have been). I'd actually advise against leaving them to save yourself the time and trouble; just skip straight into scammer flags.

That's unfortunate then. It still shows up right there on any board that displays it, just as visible. The only change there is that there isn't a trust score which I felt was less informative than a tally of all feedback left. I do think I'll still be leaving a healthy mix of them all, just going to be a while figuring out when to use what. I still like the idea of using the negatives because there is no guarantee that they'll be activated in a timely fashion, so it's a good back up.

Quickseller
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2506
Merit: 2106


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 07:17:59 AM
 #66

A negative rating right now is completely useless and will be disregarded by the supermajority of the users (the same way that neutral ratings always have been). I'd actually advise against leaving them to save yourself the time and trouble; just skip straight into scammer flags.

That's unfortunate then. It still shows up right there on any board that displays it, just as visible. The only change there is that there isn't a trust score which I felt was less informative than a tally of all feedback left. I do think I'll still be leaving a healthy mix of them all, just going to be a while figuring out when to use what. I still like the idea of using the negatives because there is no guarantee that they'll be activated in a timely fashion, so it's a good back up.
I don't see any reason why people will outright ignore negative ratings. They will still review the ratings, and take them into consideration, but if there is no clear articulation as to why or how they are unsafe to trade with, they will be rightfully ignored.

I don't think it will be possible to weaponize the trust system anymore. Or at least it will be much more difficult to do so. 
TECSHARE
In memoriam
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3318
Merit: 1954


First Exclusion Ever


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 07:38:49 AM
 #67

Have fun with the scammers being on a roll again. I ain't creating 5k flags.
Is anyone asking you or you are asking to change the system in your favor? Whatever it is, good luck. I told you all that a change is coming. Enjoy it.
I think that Lauda makes a good point about how much redundant work seems necessary, especially if there is no algorithm or something that converts or counts past work.... or maybe a kind of transition period in which some of the past work would still have some kind of effect - though the raw data is still there (meaning the actual trust feedback(s) that had already been given).  They just don't have a trust number affiliated with them, any longer....   I find it a bit confusing, at least at the moment... and I am not sure how much repeated work is going to be needed to be carried out by some of the red trust work horses of the past (including whether some of the work of the red trust work horses of the past is being thrown out the window through this change).
In many cases it would require action from a total of 3 members per the tagged user. All in all, it's probably closer to 5k flags and at least 5k-10k support clicks. Who has time to do that? It's just not plausible (even though it would be worth it).

I think that is kind of the point, that people who make an industry of leaving negative ratings aren't incentivized to do so any more, leaving the task to those directly effected. You personally have done more to bring about this change than anyone. I won't hold my breath for the sky falling, but you feel free to.
Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2674
Merit: 2884


Terminated.


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 07:41:45 AM
Last edit: June 12, 2019, 07:51:58 AM by Lauda
 #68

I can put a flag on my own account. This should be disabled as before.

I opposed it, nothing but slanderous lies  Tongue

A negative rating right now is completely useless and will be disregarded by the supermajority of the users (the same way that neutral ratings always have been). I'd actually advise against leaving them to save yourself the time and trouble; just skip straight into scammer flags.

That's unfortunate then. It still shows up right there on any board that displays it, just as visible. The only change there is that there isn't a trust score which I felt was less informative than a tally of all feedback left. I do think I'll still be leaving a healthy mix of them all, just going to be a while figuring out when to use what. I still like the idea of using the negatives because there is no guarantee that they'll be activated in a timely fashion, so it's a good back up.
This also means that the previous guideline for negative ratings is not valid anymore. You don't need to be scammed, not even close to that. You can, much more freely, leave negative ratings. It's all about those unconsidered side-effects.  Roll Eyes This reminds me that the prime time to tag HostFat/Bcash/BSV with new flags.

"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"
😼 Bitcoin Core (onion)
hd49728
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1064
Merit: 655



View Profile
June 12, 2019, 07:50:00 AM
 #69


I wanted to know it as well because for flag there's only "Support" and "Oppose" options and there's no such thing as neutral. What is it really meant to those italicized member on the flag?


They are not in the DT network. Their vote do not count.
You likely were wrong. I even can flag myself, and my name in Support List is not in italic font style or grey color
Please check it there: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=1520746

As iasenko suggeted, users should not be able to flag themselves. Maybe it is a bug.
I can put a flag on my own account. This should be disabled as before.

.freebitcoin.       ▄▄▄█▀▀██▄▄▄
   ▄▄██████▄▄█  █▀▀█▄▄
  ███  █▀▀███████▄▄██▀
   ▀▀▀██▄▄█  ████▀▀  ▄██
▄███▄▄  ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀  ▄▄██████
██▀▀█████▄     ▄██▀█ ▀▀██
██▄▄███▀▀██   ███▀ ▄▄  ▀█
███████▄▄███ ███▄▄ ▀▀▄  █
██▀▀████████ █████  █▀▄██
 █▄▄████████ █████   ███
  ▀████  ███ ████▄▄███▀
     ▀▀████   ████▀▀
BITCOIN
DICE
EVENT
BETTING
WIN A LAMBO !

.
            ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄███████████▄▄▄▄▄
▄▄▄▄▄██████████████████████████████████▄▄▄▄
▀██████████████████████████████████████████████▄▄▄
▄▄████▄█████▄████████████████████████████▄█████▄████▄▄
▀████████▀▀▀████████████████████████████████▀▀▀██████████▄
  ▀▀▀████▄▄▄███████████████████████████████▄▄▄██████████
       ▀█████▀  ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀  ▀█████▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
.PLAY NOW.
Quickseller
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2506
Merit: 2106


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 07:54:09 AM
 #70

This reminds me that the prime time to tag HostFat/Bcash/BSV with new flags.
I think these are examples of people the trust system upgrade is intended to protect -- those who have disagreeing opinions from those on DT (and in power) -- and who should not be receiving flags.
Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2674
Merit: 2884


Terminated.


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 07:55:34 AM
 #71

This reminds me that the prime time to tag HostFat/Bcash/BSV with new flags.
I think these are examples of people the trust system upgrade is intended to protect -- those who have disagreeing opinions from those on DT (and in power) -- and who should not be receiving flags.
Anyone who has bought either one of those coins thinking it was Bitcoin has been outright scammed. There are thousands of these victims. I will be leaving them, especially on HostFat. You can cry somewhere else.

"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"
😼 Bitcoin Core (onion)
redsn0w
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1778
Merit: 1042


#Free market


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 08:06:13 AM
 #72

For example Lauda left a flag (that is labeled as inactive) to quickseller (reference: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5152349.0)



What do you think about it?
Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2674
Merit: 2884


Terminated.


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 08:08:12 AM
 #73

What do you think about it?
I think I should be blacklisted as the victims are gone or afraid to speak out, and acting on their behalf is against the format. Smiley

"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"
😼 Bitcoin Core (onion)
TECSHARE
In memoriam
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3318
Merit: 1954


First Exclusion Ever


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 08:08:39 AM
 #74

This reminds me that the prime time to tag HostFat/Bcash/BSV with new flags.
I think these are examples of people the trust system upgrade is intended to protect -- those who have disagreeing opinions from those on DT (and in power) -- and who should not be receiving flags.

Let Lauda bury themselves... they are now fighting an uphill battle.
Quickseller
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2506
Merit: 2106


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 08:18:08 AM
 #75

For example Lauda left a flag (that is labeled as inactive) to quickseller (reference: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5152349.0)



What do you think about it?

I think this is a good opportunity to test theymos' credibility when he said this:
Creating or supporting a scammer flag is actively affirming a set of pretty clear fact-statements. If someone knowingly supports a flag containing incorrect fact-statements, then that is crystal-clear abuse, and I will seek to have such people removed from DT ASAP.

Those supporting those type of flags should very clearly be blacklisted from the trust system, both on DT1 and DT2.

What do you think about it?
I think I should be blacklisted as the victims are gone or afraid to speak out, and acting on their behalf is against the format. Smiley
Roll Eyes

More projection I see.
Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2674
Merit: 2884


Terminated.


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 08:20:38 AM
 #76

For example Lauda left a flag (that is labeled as inactive) to quickseller (reference: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5152349.0)



What do you think about it?

I think this is a good opportunity to test theymos' credibility when he said this:
Creating or supporting a scammer flag is actively affirming a set of pretty clear fact-statements. If someone knowingly supports a flag containing incorrect fact-statements, then that is crystal-clear abuse, and I will seek to have such people removed from DT ASAP.
Those supporting those type of flags should very clearly be blacklisted from the trust system, both on DT1 and DT2.
It's excellent. Most DT members will be afraid to support this move; the more do and show that they actually do back up their words, the more fun this will be. Wipe out most of the old DT for flagging a known scammer, that will show them abusers! Cheesy Direct link to flag is here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=35.

FYI, BSV has already been handled. Next is HostFat and Bcash.

"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"
😼 Bitcoin Core (onion)
Quickseller
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2506
Merit: 2106


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 08:23:26 AM
 #77

For example Lauda left a flag (that is labeled as inactive) to quickseller (reference: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5152349.0)



What do you think about it?

I think this is a good opportunity to test theymos' credibility when he said this:
Creating or supporting a scammer flag is actively affirming a set of pretty clear fact-statements. If someone knowingly supports a flag containing incorrect fact-statements, then that is crystal-clear abuse, and I will seek to have such people removed from DT ASAP.
Those supporting those type of flags should very clearly be blacklisted from the trust system, both on DT1 and DT2.
It's excellent. Most DT members will be afraid to support this move; the more do and show that they actually do back up their words, the more fun this will be. Wipe out most of the old DT for flagging a known scammer, that will show them abusers! Cheesy Direct link to flag is here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=35.
Well to be entirely fair, there are a decent number of scammers who support you on DT, so blacklisting these people would not be all that bad.
Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2674
Merit: 2884


Terminated.


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 08:25:46 AM
 #78

Well to be entirely fair, there are a decent number of scammers who support you on DT, so blacklisting these people would not be all that bad.
Yawn. Is this all you got? You got a dose of hopium, thinking you'll get back to scamming again just before I flagged you again. Kiss



Looks great to me. Most of your threads are fraudulent, and it should be shown as such.

"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"
😼 Bitcoin Core (onion)
TheNewAnon135246
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2198
Merit: 1938


฿uy ฿itcoin


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 08:25:54 AM
Merited by mindrust (1)
 #79

This reminds me that the prime time to tag HostFat/Bcash/BSV with new flags.
I think these are examples of people the trust system upgrade is intended to protect -- those who have disagreeing opinions from those on DT (and in power) -- and who should not be receiving flags.

Craig Wright is pretending to be Satoshi and he plagiarized the Bitcoin whitepaper. There are countless of examples shown here: https://stopcraigwright.com. Anyone actively supporting BSV is claiming that it is Bitcoin. BSV is a scam.
Quickseller
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2506
Merit: 2106


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 08:49:43 AM
 #80

This reminds me that the prime time to tag HostFat/Bcash/BSV with new flags.
I think these are examples of people the trust system upgrade is intended to protect -- those who have disagreeing opinions from those on DT (and in power) -- and who should not be receiving flags.

Craig Wright is pretending to be Satoshi and he plagiarized the Bitcoin whitepaper. There are countless of examples shown here: https://stopcraigwright.com. Anyone actively supporting BSV is claiming that it is Bitcoin. BSV is a scam.
It sounds to me like you are supporting weaponizing the trust system. You should be blacklisted.

If you have technical arguments as to why BSV is inferior to bitcoin, or other altcoins, you should make them. While I acknowledge you are incapable of making a well rounded argument, about anything, I do not doubt that others who are smart can make arguments against BSV, and people can judge for themselves if they want to buy/use it.
coinlocket$
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1344
Merit: 1364


One of the world's leading Bitcoin-powered casinos


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 08:58:39 AM
Last edit: June 12, 2019, 09:09:31 AM by coinlocket$
Merited by LoyceV (1), yogg (1), redsn0w (1), TheBeardedBaby (1)
 #81

1st feedback is visual

I think the code of trust score should be Bolded on the profile to be more effective

Before talking more on it, I need to study it see u later.




 Grin


       ▀
   ▄  ███ ███
      ▄▄▄ ▀▀▀
▀  ▀  ███     ███
      ▄▄▄ ▄▄▄ ▀▀▀
▀  ▀  ███ ███
      ▄▄▄     ███
▀  ▀  ███     ▀▀▀
   ▄  ▄▄▄ ███
      ███ ▀▀▀
       ▄
.
Bitcasino.io
.
Loyalty Club
.
Casino boost
.
2000+ Games
.
Weekly tourneys
.
24/7 Support
.
Fast Payouts
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
██████████████████▀▀███████
█████████████▀▀▀    ███████
████████▀▀▀   ▄▀   ████████
█████▄     ▄█▀     ████████
████████▄ █▀      █████████
█████████▌▐       █████████
██████████ ▄██▄  ██████████
████████████████▄██████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
██████▀███████▀   ▀▀▀▄█████
█████▌  ▀▀███▌       ▄█████
█████▀               ██████
█████▄              ███████
██████▄            ████████
███████▄▄        ▄█████████
██████▄       ▄████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
██████▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀██████
████░░░▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄░░░████
███░░▄█████████████▀▀▄░░███
███░░████▀▀░░░░░▀▀█▄▄█░░███
███░░███▀░▄█████▄░▀███░░███
███░░███░░███████░░███░░███
███░░███▄░▀█████▀░▄███░░███
███░░████▄▄░░░░░▄▄████░░███
███░░▀███████████████▀░░███
████░░░▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀░░░████
██████▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄██████
███████████████████████████
.
...SIGN UP...
yahoo62278
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2576
Merit: 2635


Do you need a manager? @yahoo62278 on telegram


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 09:06:50 AM
Merited by JayJuanGee (1)
 #82

For example Lauda left a flag (that is labeled as inactive) to quickseller (reference: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5152349.0)



What do you think about it?

I think this is a good opportunity to test theymos' credibility when he said this:
Creating or supporting a scammer flag is actively affirming a set of pretty clear fact-statements. If someone knowingly supports a flag containing incorrect fact-statements, then that is crystal-clear abuse, and I will seek to have such people removed from DT ASAP.

Those supporting those type of flags should very clearly be blacklisted from the trust system, both on DT1 and DT2.

What do you think about it?
I think I should be blacklisted as the victims are gone or afraid to speak out, and acting on their behalf is against the format. Smiley
Roll Eyes

More projection I see.
I deleted my support as I was just testing the flag system, but if someone flags you over the self escrow ordeal I will support that and keep it there.

Still reading this thread and new system and seems like a lot of extra work but it does force a user to show their work so to speak. Should we go through all our previous feedbacks left and flag users for scam activities? For example, in my case I have a few bounty cheaters and signature campaign cheaters?


███████████████████████████
███████ ▀█████████▀ ███████
██████▌ ▄  ▀███▀  ▄ ▐██████
██████ ▐███     ▄██▌ ██████
█████▌ ██▀▀▀   ▀▀▀██ ▐█████
████▀    ▄██▄ ▄██▄▄ ▀ ▀████
███▌  ▄██▀▀█████▀▀███▄ ▐███
███  ▀████▄▄███▄▄████▀  ███
████▄  ▀█ ███████ █▀  ▄████
██████▄  ▀██   ██▀  ▄██████
████████▄  ▀█ █▀  ▄████████
██████████▄     ▄██████████
███████████████████████████
.WOLF.BET.██████
██████
██████
██████
██████
██████
██████
██████
██████
██████
██████
██████
██████
█████████████████     
██▀▄▄▄▀███▀▄▄▄▀██    ▀▀█▀▀
██ ███ ███ ███ ██     
███▄▄▄█████▄▄▄███
███▀▀▀███▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
██ ███ ██ █████████████████
██▄▀▀▀▄██ ██████████▀▄▄▄▀██
█████████ ██████████ ███ ██
          ███████████▄▄▄███
          ███▀▀▀███████████
         ██ ███ ██████████
 ▀▀█▀▀    ██▄▀▀▀▄██████████
         █████████████████
..DICE..██████
██████
██████
██████
██████
██████
██████
██████
██████
██████
██████
██████
██████

 
██  ████████████
 
   ██  ███████
 
 ██  ███████
 
  ██  ████████
 
██  ████████████
..SPORTS BETTING..██████
██████
██████
██████
██████
██████
██████
██████
██████
██████
██████
██████
██████
..PLAY NOW..
yogg
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2170
Merit: 2841


Coldkey™ -- coldkey.eu


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 09:12:51 AM
 #83

I deleted my support as I was just testing the flag system, but if someone flags you over the self escrow ordeal I will support that and keep it there.

It's a shame that we cannot use self-moderated and/or locked threads as references for flag. What about archives ? They prevent some posts from being edited.
This thread & msg wouldn't work but is highly relevant : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1171059.msg12421096#msg12421096

.

        _ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ_
      ŠŠŠŠŠŠ¯Š¯ŠŠŠŠŠŠ
    ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ¯_¯ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ
  ŠŠ¯Š¯ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ¯Š¯ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ¯¯ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ_
  ŠŠ¯_¯ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ¯_¯ŠŠŠŠŠŠ¯¯¯ŠŠŠ¯¯¯ŠŠŠŠŠ¯ŠŠŠŠŠ¯¯ŠŠŠŠŠ
ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ¯ŠŠŠ¯ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ¯ŠŠŠŠŠ_ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ¯¯ŠŠŠŠ_
ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ_¯ŠŠŠ¯_ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ¯¯ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ¯ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ¯
ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ¯¯Š¯ŠŠŠŠ¯ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ¯
ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ¯_ŠŠŠ_¯ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ¯¯ŠŠ¯ŠŠ¯ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ¯¯¯ŠŠŠ¯
ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ_ŠŠŠ_ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ¯ŠŠŠŠ¯ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ¯Š
  ŠŠ_¯_ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ_¯_ŠŠŠŠŠ
  ŠŠ_Š_ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ_Š_ŠŠ
    ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ_¯_ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ
      ŠŠŠŠŠŠ_Š_ŠŠŠŠŠŠ
        ¯ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ¯
COLDKEY
.
. C O L D   S T O R A G E    W A L L E T  F O R    E V E R Y O N E..
.

             _ŠŠŠŠ__   _
Š_          ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ¯_
ŠŠŠ        ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ¯
ŠŠŠŠŠ_     ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ
__ŠŠŠŠŠŠ____ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ
¯ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ
  ¯ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ
  __ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ
   ¯ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ¯
    __ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ¯
¯¯ŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ¯
    ¯¯¯¯¯
coinlocket$
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1344
Merit: 1364


One of the world's leading Bitcoin-powered casinos


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 09:17:43 AM
 #84

Another feedback

I have over 1000 Negative feedback sent to abusers and with the new limited feedbacks for page on trust profile https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=1339716 is a nightmare to navigate them.

Can you please rollback this page as it was before?

For people with a lot of feedbacks is impossible so search something there.



       ▀
   ▄  ███ ███
      ▄▄▄ ▀▀▀
▀  ▀  ███     ███
      ▄▄▄ ▄▄▄ ▀▀▀
▀  ▀  ███ ███
      ▄▄▄     ███
▀  ▀  ███     ▀▀▀
   ▄  ▄▄▄ ███
      ███ ▀▀▀
       ▄
.
Bitcasino.io
.
Loyalty Club
.
Casino boost
.
2000+ Games
.
Weekly tourneys
.
24/7 Support
.
Fast Payouts
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
██████████████████▀▀███████
█████████████▀▀▀    ███████
████████▀▀▀   ▄▀   ████████
█████▄     ▄█▀     ████████
████████▄ █▀      █████████
█████████▌▐       █████████
██████████ ▄██▄  ██████████
████████████████▄██████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
██████▀███████▀   ▀▀▀▄█████
█████▌  ▀▀███▌       ▄█████
█████▀               ██████
█████▄              ███████
██████▄            ████████
███████▄▄        ▄█████████
██████▄       ▄████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
██████▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀██████
████░░░▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄░░░████
███░░▄█████████████▀▀▄░░███
███░░████▀▀░░░░░▀▀█▄▄█░░███
███░░███▀░▄█████▄░▀███░░███
███░░███░░███████░░███░░███
███░░███▄░▀█████▀░▄███░░███
███░░████▄▄░░░░░▄▄████░░███
███░░▀███████████████▀░░███
████░░░▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀░░░████
██████▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄██████
███████████████████████████
.
...SIGN UP...
LoyceV
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2282
Merit: 8483


Thick-Skinned Gang Leader


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 09:19:41 AM
 #85

A negative rating right now is completely useless and will be disregarded by the supermajority of the users (the same way that neutral ratings always have been). I'd actually advise against leaving them to save yourself the time and trouble; just skip straight into scammer flags.
Neutral tags serve a purpose. Some examples from the feedback I left:
Quote
See Reference link for a signed message that proves ownership of the account.
Shasan has a temp ban. If you need to contact him, use other means.
Leaves fake red trust to spam hunters after theymos wiped all yobit signatures.
I tagged this account as being stolen on August 7, 2018. It has been recovered by the original owner on February 22, 2019.
These have nothing to do with scams, it's more like adding sticky notes to a user. And indeed, they're intended to be ignored by users.
From what I understand, you can only create Flags when you've been scammed. That means negative ratings still serve a purpose.



I like the much bigger warning on topics created by a Flagged scammer! It also makes sense to only create Flags for users that scammed you personally. That means it's really worth the extra effort, and it shouldn't be used at massive numbers. I've checked all my feedback, and only one person (with 4 accounts) really qualifies for a Flag. Can I request Flag support here?



I have over 1000 Negative feedback sent to abusers and with the new limited feedbacks for page on trust profile https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=1339716 is a nightmare to navigate them.

Can you please rollback this page as it was before?

For people with a lot of feedbacks is impossible so search something there.
I'd like to see at least 1000 ratings per page, that's high enough to make searching easier, and low enough to load the page quickly.

TheBeardedBaby
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330
Merit: 2425


Wearing my signature for free :) tnx BestChange.


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 09:22:34 AM
 #86

We need a log for all the flag activity now, all the created flags + those who support or oppose them.
I can change my support to opposition as many times as I want no restrictions there. I've tested it on my own Flag which I created.

Just a side note> I can create a new flag after 180 days of creation of the first one.
and the Trust feedback are rearranged from top to bottom- newest to oldest.





.
.




░██████████████████░
████████████████████
█████████▀░░░███████
█████████░░▄████████
███████▀▀░░▀▀███████
███████▄▄░░▄▄███████
█████████░░█████████

█████████░░█████████

█████████▄▄█████████

████████████████████

░██████████████████░
░██████████████████░
████████████████████
████████████▀▀▀█▀███
███░▀█████▀░░░░░▀███
███▌░░░▀▀▀░░░░░░████
████▄░░░░░░░░░░░████
█████▀░░░░░░░░░█████

██████▄░░░░░▄▄██████

█████▄▄▄▄███████████

████████████████████

░██████████████████░
░██████████████████░
████████████████████
████████████████████
███████████▀▀░░▐████
███████▀▀░░░░░█████
████▀░░░▄█▀░░░▐█████
█████▄▄█▀░░░░░██████

███████▌▄▄▄▐██████

████████████████████

████████████████████

░██████████████████░
LoyceV
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2282
Merit: 8483


Thick-Skinned Gang Leader


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 09:26:15 AM
Last edit: June 12, 2019, 10:23:46 PM by LoyceV
 #87

We need a log for all the flag activity now, all the created flags + those who support or oppose them.
If Vod doesn't beat me to it, I'll cook something up when I have time. Don't expect it within a few weeks though.
Update: see LoyceV's Trust Flag viewer.

o_e_l_e_o
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358
Merit: 6582


Wear a mask, slow the spread


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 09:29:02 AM
Merited by suchmoon (4), DdmrDdmr (1), Tytanowy Janusz (1)
 #88

I'm curious as to what we should be doing about the obvious attempted, but not yet successful, scams. Things like:

  • Promoting a doubler, "Send 0.2 ETH to get 2 ETH back", 20% a day ROI, that kind of thing
  • Promoting obvious Ponzis, "HYIP", etc.
  • Selling gift cards or codes at a huge discount from a locked/self moderated thread with auto-buy links
  • Obvious sockpuppet accounts leaving fake vouches for any of the above

These are all blatantly obvious scam attempts to any experienced user, but can and do regularly fool newbies in to parting with their coins. Are we expected to create a brand new thread in Reputation for each and every one to link to with a flag? Is simply linking to the thread they started acceptable? What about leaving them red trust as well explaining the reasons behind the flag?

Also, do newbie-warning flags expire the same as scammer flags?

babo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2576
Merit: 2281



View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 09:34:38 AM
 #89

1st feedback is visual

I think the code of trust score should be Bolded on the profile to be more effective

Before talking more on it, I need to study it see u later.




 Grin

you win the internet prize for fast meme ever Cheesy

rotfl

ot: big bag theory ROCKS

.freebitcoin.       ▄▄▄█▀▀██▄▄▄
   ▄▄██████▄▄█  █▀▀█▄▄
  ███  █▀▀███████▄▄██▀
   ▀▀▀██▄▄█  ████▀▀  ▄██
▄███▄▄  ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀  ▄▄██████
██▀▀█████▄     ▄██▀█ ▀▀██
██▄▄███▀▀██   ███▀ ▄▄  ▀█
███████▄▄███ ███▄▄ ▀▀▄  █
██▀▀████████ █████  █▀▄██
 █▄▄████████ █████   ███
  ▀████  ███ ████▄▄███▀
     ▀▀████   ████▀▀
BITCOIN
DICE
EVENT
BETTING
WIN A LAMBO !

.
            ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄███████████▄▄▄▄▄
▄▄▄▄▄██████████████████████████████████▄▄▄▄
▀██████████████████████████████████████████████▄▄▄
▄▄████▄█████▄████████████████████████████▄█████▄████▄▄
▀████████▀▀▀████████████████████████████████▀▀▀██████████▄
  ▀▀▀████▄▄▄███████████████████████████████▄▄▄██████████
       ▀█████▀  ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀  ▀█████▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
.PLAY NOW.
LoyceV
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2282
Merit: 8483


Thick-Skinned Gang Leader


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 09:34:42 AM
 #90

I'm curious as to what we should be doing about the obvious attempted, but not yet successful, scams.
Red trust and a Newbie-warning Flag?

Steamtyme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1414
Merit: 1986


Betnomi.com Sportsbook, Casino and Poker


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 09:47:15 AM
 #91

I'm curious as to what we should be doing about the obvious attempted, but not yet successful, scams.
Red trust and a Newbie-warning Flag?

Agreed. It's no different to the threads I plan to generically link when I find Selfmod/locked sales topics with nothing more than an off forum communication.



Has anyone thought much about what they are considering a loose commitment and written contract. I'm guessing it should go further than the "typed word= written contract". What would the standards be for pushing towards a 10 year Flag versus a 3 year flag.

o_e_l_e_o
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358
Merit: 6582


Wear a mask, slow the spread


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 09:54:31 AM
 #92

Agreed. It's no different to the threads I plan to generically link when I find Selfmod/locked sales topics with nothing more than an off forum communication.
Generically link to where? A single reputation thread? That would be a much preferable outcome than having to create a single thread for every single flag for the same cluster of reasons.

Has anyone thought much about what they are considering a loose commitment and written contract. I'm guessing it should go further than the "typed word= written contract". What would the standards be for pushing towards a 10 year Flag versus a 3 year flag.
On first thought, I would have said a "casual or implied" agreement would be something along the lines of winning an auction, buying an item, or taking out a loan, where as a "written contract" would be someone signing a message from a staked address, implicitly agreeing to a stated contract. This would mean the "written contract" flag would only be used very rarely, but I suspect that might be theymos' intention given his push towards a culture of forgiveness.

Steamtyme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1414
Merit: 1986


Betnomi.com Sportsbook, Casino and Poker


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 10:12:24 AM
Merited by o_e_l_e_o (1)
 #93

Generically link to where? A single reputation thread? That would be a much preferable outcome than having to create a single thread for every single flag for the same cluster of reasons.
You can see how I set something up rather quickly to try it out. Here's the post  in this thread.
Quote
On first thought, I would have said a "casual or implied" agreement would be something along the lines of winning an auction, buying an item, or taking out a loan, where as a "written contract" would be someone signing a message from a staked address, implicitly agreeing to a stated contract. This would mean the "written contract" flag would only be used very rarely, but I suspect that might be theymos' intention given his push towards a culture of forgiveness.

That makes sense. It may help people establish an expectation when entering certain agreements. I could see there being a services aspect to it as well, covering things like an Escrow/Lender exit scam. I guess we'll see how this develops further. The OP gives the impression that the flags might be moderated the more I reread through it. Considering there seems to be the potential for recourse if abused, and that there is a "wrong" way to use this.

Creating or supporting a scammer flag is actively affirming a set of pretty clear fact-statements. If someone knowingly supports a flag containing incorrect fact-statements, then that is crystal-clear abuse, and I will seek to have such people removed from DT ASAP. People who are habitually wrong, even not knowingly, should also be removed.

morvillz7z
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162
Merit: 1643


Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 10:51:33 AM
Last edit: June 12, 2019, 11:31:24 AM by morvillz7z
Merited by o_e_l_e_o (1)
 #94

Under sent feedback/comments it only shows "(Created flag)" in red.

Wouldn't it be better to have what regular trust feedback has, an option to make a comment?

Now you have to click a link and then click another link. I'd rather have a brief description of what the flag is for [1] and a direct path to the referenced topic.

[1] - Before and After

  ▄▄█████▄▄███████▄▄
 ███████████
     ▀▀███▄
█████████████        ▀██▄
█████████████          ██▄
███████████            ██▄
██▀▀█████▀▀              ██
██                       ██
██                       ██
▀██                     ██▀
 ▀██                   ██▀
  ▀██▄               ▄██▀
    ▀███▄▄       ▄▄███▀
       ▀▀█████████▀▀
███████████    LEADING CRYPTO SPORTSBOOK & CASINO    ███████████
MULTI
CURRENCY
1500+
CASINO GAMES
CRYPTO EXCLUSIVE
CLUBHOUSE
FAST & SECURE
PAYMENTS
..PLAY NOW!..
Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2674
Merit: 2884


Terminated.


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 10:55:38 AM
 #95

I deleted my support as I was just testing the flag system, but if someone flags you over the self escrow ordeal I will support that and keep it there.
I can't link to the original thread; my flag is about the self-escrow, it just points out a flaw in the system.

Still reading this thread and new system and seems like a lot of extra work but it does force a user to show their work so to speak. Should we go through all our previous feedbacks left and flag users for scam activities? For example, in my case I have a few bounty cheaters and signature campaign cheaters?
Have fun doing that for several thousand people, three times.

"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"
😼 Bitcoin Core (onion)
LoyceV
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2282
Merit: 8483


Thick-Skinned Gang Leader


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 11:28:44 AM
 #96

Suggestion:
Quote
Warning: One or more bitcointalk.org users have reported that they strongly believe that the creator of this topic is a scammer.
This could be more accurate by replacing "One" by "Three".

The-One-Above-All
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 252
Merit: 56


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 11:40:48 AM
 #97

This reminds me that the prime time to tag HostFat/Bcash/BSV with new flags.
I think these are examples of people the trust system upgrade is intended to protect -- those who have disagreeing opinions from those on DT (and in power) -- and who should not be receiving flags.
Anyone who has bought either one of those coins thinking it was Bitcoin has been outright scammed. There are thousands of these victims. I will be leaving them, especially on HostFat. You can cry somewhere else.

Lauda by that logic you MUST have a scam tag.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=560138.msg6748208#msg6748208


Lying about the dark launch. THOUSANDS of members who purchased believing your LIES there was no premine because you WERE THERE Huh  all those that were scammed into believing the initial distribution was legit.

By your own reasoning above YOU MUST have a scam tag.  For now I believe you can tag yourself. Get on with it.

The other ratings are now just what they always should have been : FEEDBACK that is to be read and examined not just taken at face value that the person has done something wrong.

When you started using red trust to silence and deter people from presenting observable instances of SCAMMING from your own past you ensured the trust sytem had to change. You tried to use the old system to facilitate and hide your OWN scamming. Now you are crying that is no longer possible.

A great day for bitcointalk. Satoshi is celebrating right now. Free speech is returning.

We notice lauda is already refusing to act within the guidelines let's see how long he gets away with it before being put in his place.



I will not be following any broken formats. He can either fix it or blacklist me because I flagged a known scammer if he wants create damage the common good. Up to him. Last change made DT less relevant, this change makes it next to completely irrelevant. I don't care about nor support liberalist bullshit.

Already people are refusing to support his NEW abuse. Now they know their sigs are safe (if they are not scammers) you will notice more people standing up to these bullies.

The common good is getting rid of bullies like you Lauda. You had a good ride scamming, extorting, shady escrowing, top paid sig spots. Looks like soon you will need to compete on a fair level with every other member here not bully your way to extreme advantage.

This new system (if enforced) is HUGE step in returning free speech to this board.


suchmoon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2744
Merit: 6426


https://bpip.org


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 11:40:58 AM
 #98

You likely were wrong. I even can flag myself, and my name in Support List is not in italic font style or grey color

You're always in your own trust network so your vote will show as trusted for yourself. The greyed-out ones are not trusted and don't count in the +1 or +3 thresholds for the boxes to show up.

redsn0w
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1778
Merit: 1042


#Free market


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 11:45:45 AM
Merited by LoyceV (1), o_e_l_e_o (1)
 #99

Suggestion:
Quote
Warning: One or more bitcointalk.org users have reported that they strongly believe that the creator of this topic is a scammer.
This could be more accurate by replacing "One" by "Three".

Nice idea, it would be useful also to add a counter in the flag page. Something like that:


Lafu
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1946
Merit: 1799



View Profile
June 12, 2019, 11:52:44 AM
 #100

Wouldnt it not be better when theymos makes an pinned thread in the reputation section and all can post there flags in there ?

So when we get this not every User has to do there one Flag thread and all flags are in one thread , and i guess this will also help to get maybe some support one some flags they where posted in there !

Dont know if this suggestion was posted already , when yes sry ! 




▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄    ▄▄▄▄                  ▄▄▄   ▄▄▄▄▄        ▄▄▄▄▄   ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄    ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄   ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄   ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
 ▀████████████████▄  ████                 █████   ▀████▄    ▄████▀  ▄██████████████   ████████████▀  ▄█████████████▀  ▄█████████████▄
              ▀████  ████               ▄███▀███▄   ▀████▄▄████▀               ████   ████                ████                   ▀████
   ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█████  ████              ████   ████    ▀██████▀      ██████████████▄   ████████████▀       ████       ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄████▀
   ██████████████▀   ████            ▄███▀     ▀███▄    ████        ████        ████  ████                ████       ██████████████▀
   ████              ████████████▀  ████   ██████████   ████        ████████████████  █████████████▀      ████       ████      ▀████▄
   ▀▀▀▀              ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀   ▀▀▀▀   ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀  ▀▀▀▀        ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀   ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀        ▀▀▀▀       ▀▀▀▀        ▀▀▀▀▀

#1 CRYPTO CASINO & SPORTSBOOK
  WELCOME
BONUS
.INSTANT & FAST.
.TRANSACTION.....
.PROVABLY FAIR.
......& SECURE......
.24/7 CUSTOMER.
............SUPPORT.
BTC      |      ETH      |      LTC      |      XRP      |      XMR      |      BNB      |     more
bill gator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1288
Merit: 1056



View Profile
June 12, 2019, 12:02:15 PM
 #101

A negative rating right now is completely useless ... I'd actually advise against leaving them to save yourself the time and trouble; just skip straight into scammer flags.

It's like you really are a cat; so afraid of a changing environment! Tongue

I'd be careful with taking a liberal approach towards the scammer flags. Your statement makes it sounds like you're just going to replace your previous usage of negative trust with scammer flags, at least that's how I heard it; can you please correct me where I'm wrong?

1. Getting a general idea of someone's trade history and trustworthiness in one convenient location, sort of like reviews on sites like EBay.

For contractual violations only, a scammer flag can be created.

If someone knowingly supports a flag containing incorrect fact-statements, then that is crystal-clear abuse, and I will seek to have such people removed from DT ASAP. People who are habitually wrong, even not knowingly, should also be removed.

Negative ratings are far from useless, and it's almost like you didn't read the OP. If all you've gotten from this thread is "Negatives are useless, we use flags now", then you're in for a bumpy ride.

Side-Note: Any plans to have a "flag history" per user, those that they've created, supported and opposed?
Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2674
Merit: 2884


Terminated.


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 12:04:03 PM
 #102

It's like you really are a cat; so afraid of a changing environment! Tongue

I'd be careful with taking a liberal approach towards the scammer flags. Your statement makes it sounds like you're just going to replace your previous usage of negative trust with scammer flags, at least that's how I heard it; can you please correct me where I'm wrong?
There is no requirement for one to be a scammer to receive a negative rating any more. I will not be participating in the flag games other than for a few notable cases/figures. Once more people start getting scammed because of a lack of victim-created-flags, then liberals might see why such a system is flawed. Then again, liberals like to be blind in spite of evidence. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"
😼 Bitcoin Core (onion)
suchmoon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2744
Merit: 6426


https://bpip.org


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 12:06:22 PM
 #103

On first thought, I would have said a "casual or implied" agreement would be something along the lines of winning an auction, buying an item, or taking out a loan

Why would those not be considered "written"?

I thought "casual or implied" was something not specifically stated. For example you shipped me an item won in an auction but it got damaged in the mail. Neither party had said anything about insurance beforehand. I might have an implied contract claim against you because the sender is typically responsible for delivery.

But if you don't honor the winning bid, or don't ship after taking the money, or fail to do something else that's spelled out in your auction terms - that sounds like a written contract violation.

Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2674
Merit: 2884


Terminated.


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 12:07:40 PM
 #104

But if you don't honor the winning bid, or don't ship after taking the money, or fail to do something else that's spelled out in your auction terms - that sounds like a written contract violation.
Where in the auction is it written that I'm supposed to ship to you after I take your money? Maybe I implied I will ship it to somewhere else regardless of who wins? Funny Swiss-cheese system this is.

"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"
😼 Bitcoin Core (onion)
bill gator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1288
Merit: 1056



View Profile
June 12, 2019, 12:09:26 PM
 #105

There is no requirement for one to be a scammer to receive a negative rating any more. I will not be participating in the flag games other than for a few notable cases/figures.

Was being a scammer a requirement to receive negative ratings before? *Checks self for buggies* Flagging should be left to more clear-cut cases of scamming, if that's what you mean by notable then I have no qualms with that.

Once more people start getting scammed because of a lack of victim-created-flags, then liberals might see why such a system is flawed. Then again, liberals like to be blind in spite of evidence. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I was using the word "liberal" non-politically. That was one of my concerns as well, the fact that it requires a victim to create the flag - I understand the reasoning behind it, but I just hope that a high enough percentage of victims actually follows through and understands the system well enough to use it as intended.

Be nice to the liberals or FH is gonna bite ya!

I think semantic games are going to be our biggest hurdle before actually seeing the flags do their job.
Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2674
Merit: 2884


Terminated.


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 12:11:38 PM
 #106

Was being a scammer a requirement to receive negative ratings before? *Checks self for buggies* Flagging should be left to more clear-cut cases of scamming, if that's what you mean by notable then I have no qualms with that.
Yes and no. It was semi-silently introduced as a "guideline" not long ago; never really enforced, and now it's irrelevant due to flags and removal of the warning. Your rating is valid and my flag on your is also valid, I guess. Maybe. Who knows. It's a terrible system either way; it would have worked if it was like this from day one (maybe).

Be nice to the liberals or FH is gonna bite ya!
Liberals remind me of Patrick's pet rock.

"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"
😼 Bitcoin Core (onion)
TheNewAnon135246
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2198
Merit: 1938


฿uy ฿itcoin


View Profile
June 12, 2019, 12:12:55 PM
 #107

@Theymos, I have opened a scam accusation here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5153498.0

People have lost money/had to recover their funds because of this user and I have included several clear fact-statements in my topic. Would it be against the rules for me to (attempt to) add a scammer flag since I personally haven't dealt with the user in question?
wwzsocki
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1722
Merit: 1498


First 100% Liquid Stablecoin Backed by Gold


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 12:13:23 PM
Merited by DdmrDdmr (1)
 #108

I already see a lot of improvements in this new system and I am sure that it will be much fairer than the previous one.

There is already no way to destroy an account with only one accusation or single vote from DT1 member.

Thought exactly about something like this, that more DT1 members have to agree, that one is a scammer to tag him.

I hope, we finally have a trust system which would be really working and give us the filling of security here on the forum.

Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2674
Merit: 2884


Terminated.


View Profile WWW
June 12, 2019, 12:14:49 PM
 #109

Would it be against the rules for me to (attempt to) add a scammer flag since I personally haven't dealt with the user in question?
Yes. You can only leave the weakest-type flag if you weren't harmed personally.

Just to confirm, you are not allowed to create a contract violation flag unless you were personally harmed, correct?
Correct.

"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"
😼 Bitcoin Core (onion)