Grandfathered Rep

[bluefirecorp_]

Some people were talking about neg-trusting spammers for spamming. This is not appropriate; report the posts, and if that doesn't seem to be working well, come to Meta with specific examples and suggestions.

I said shit before this was defined. Fucking all these additions like trust shit and their rules.

[1715359311]

1715359311

[Thirdspace]

noone neg trusting you for spamming, Vod left neutral feedback trust
there is a negative feedback but it's coming from kokofromdablock who is not in DT list
so it doesn't count to or affect your overall trust rating

[actmyname]

Feel free to leave the forum if you do not like its systems.

The trust system is pretty convoluted... but so is Bitcoin.

[Vod]

noone neg trusting you for spamming, Vod left neutral feedback trust

Deleted that feedback - risked BTC is no more.

[Baronets]

risked BTC is no more.

I think that is a shame. Putting a value on a trade  can be valuable. Some scammers make a number of legitimate small trades to build trust, and then hit the boards with the main scams. The reference can give a clue, but it doesn't help if the trades are arranged via pms.

[TECSHARE]

If you are so worried about your ratings, I can leave you one like you left me because you can't handle people disagreeing with you

[The Sceptical Chymist]

I said shit before this was defined. Fucking all these additions like trust shit and their rules.

I was one of the main culprits tagging shitposters before the merit system was implemented.  It was never a good use of the trust system, and I knew that at the time--but the situation was so out of control that I felt I had to use the tools at my disposal, and the trust system was pretty much the only one I (and actmyname) had.  I haven't negged a shitposter since then, and I've removed all the negs I'd left.  Not sure why you're bitter now, because spammers/shitposters aren't getting tagged that I know of.

Feel free to leave the forum if you do not like its systems.

Eh, that's one solution but I respect people who complain about things as long as those complaints are at least semi-reasonable.  If nobody complained, there would be no progress and there would be a lot of bottled-up anger. 

risked BTC is no more.

That was a good move on Theymos's part to get rid of that field.  I think it got abused more so than used properly.  That information can be written right in the feedback itself.

[AB de Royse777]

~snip~
Eh, that's one solution but I respect people who complain about things as long as those complaints are at least semi-reasonable.  If nobody complained, there would be no progress and there would be a lot of bottled-up anger.  

I could not agree more. The more drama (most of the complains are drama in my opinion) means the more content creating, more time to spend in the forum. This forum is addictive. Once a conversation has built up and if you are deeply involved in it then game on. I have had less sleep many days, even I have responded in topics in my dream (kidding :-P). I mean your brain is active while you are sleeping, perhaps you are thinking about the next response to post and once you find a point you just grab your laptop and post it.

These days I do not do it much though. I guess it's from the experience that I learnt to keep myself calm :-)

My advise for OP: Keep trolling the people you hate LOL
Please do not listen to actmyname and leave us alone :-P

[FFrankie]

I said shit before this was defined. Fucking all these additions like trust shit and their rules.

I was one of the main culprits tagging shitposters before the merit system was implemented.  It was never a good use of the trust system, and I knew that at the time--but the situation was so out of control that I felt I had to use the tools at my disposal, and the trust system was pretty much the only one I (and actmyname) had.  I haven't negged a shitposter since then, and I've removed all the negs I'd left.  Not sure why you're bitter now, because spammers/shitposters aren't getting tagged that I know of.

Feel free to leave the forum if you do not like its systems.

Eh, that's one solution but I respect people who complain about things as long as those complaints are at least semi-reasonable.  If nobody complained, there would be no progress and there would be a lot of bottled-up anger. 

risked BTC is no more.

That was a good move on Theymos's part to get rid of that field.  I think it got abused more so than used properly.  That information can be written right in the feedback itself.

You have pages and pages and pages of sent feedback, you are telling me you went through all of it and removed all of the negatives you left for shitposters How long did they take you?

The risk BTC option should have be removed or updated a long time ago, 50 BTC risked added another feedback score but that feature was added when BTC was suuuuuper cheap.

[actmyname]

You have pages and pages and pages of sent feedback, you are telling me you went through all of it and removed all of the negatives you left for shitposters How long did they take you?

Without automation, it would take quite a bit of time. You can't delete sent feedback from your own profile and have to navigate to each individual account.

Assume that it takes 6 to 8 seconds per account (page load and finding your feedback). I believe The Pharmacist and I had hundreds of sent feedback related to spam. Considering the amount of spam that you could find in those days (as well as currently) it could have easily surpassed 500 different accounts.

Which is equivalent to 50 minutes of purely going through your sent feedback.

[FFrankie]

You have pages and pages and pages of sent feedback, you are telling me you went through all of it and removed all of the negatives you left for shitposters How long did they take you?

Without automation, it would take quite a bit of time. You can't delete sent feedback from your own profile and have to navigate to each individual account.

Assume that it takes 6 to 8 seconds per account (page load and finding your feedback). I believe The Pharmacist and I had hundreds of sent feedback related to spam. Considering the amount of spam that you could find in those days (as well as currently) it could have easily surpassed 500 different accounts.

Which is equivalent to 50 minutes of purely going through your sent feedback.

Is using automation of removing or adding feedback against fourm rules? If there is a script for this I would love it if you guys shared it. But I don't think it's "fair" if an automated tool was used for posting/editting/removing trust.

If there was a tool for reporting spam to moderator I think that is borderline depending on how many errors it makes

[actmyname]

Is using automation of removing or adding feedback against fourm rules? If there is a script for this I would love it if you guys shared it. But I don't think it's "fair" if an automated tool was used for posting/editting/removing trust.

How so? It depends on what you're using it for.

Neither adding nor removing trust would be erroneous provided that you have enough restrictions therein as well as QA afterwards. I especially don't see the harm in automating the removal of feedback.

If there was a tool for reporting spam to moderator I think that is borderline depending on how many errors it makes

If you reported every post in Altcoin Discussion your reporting accuracy would be above 90%. I have no doubts about that.

[Upgrade00]

The introdiction of trust flags (which is solely for scam cases) means that the previous trust system now serves to define the general trustworthiness of a member, which can have various interpretations. I would agree that it had been misused in the past, which k believe is one of the reasons flags were introduced in the first place.

[bluefirecorp_]

noone neg trusting you for spamming, Vod left neutral feedback trust

Deleted that feedback - risked BTC is no more.

Oh, I didn't see the "delete" feedback option. I think my account is "thawed". So many rules to this forum!

risked BTC is no more.

That was a good move on Theymos's part to get rid of that field.  I think it got abused more so than used properly.  That information can be written right in the feedback itself.

So many changes.  

I wonder who was even pulling the data... did I just hit the "#1 largest scammer" by assuming the field?

Tbf, a transactional ID would be more note worthy. I suppose that's what the text field's for though, as long as you're not character limited.

People who believe that data:

[LoyceV]

Is using automation of removing or adding feedback against fourm rules?

The same rules apply to both bots and users.

It's not against the rules. When I came up with the crazy idea to leave a neutral tag on 160,000 banned accounts, theymos said this:

160k trust ratings... well, you're either getting banned for trust spam or you'll force theymos' hand to make some changes

Don't scare me You made me ask theymos:

does it cause problems to the forum if a user leaves feedback to 160,000 users?

It wouldn't significantly bloat the database or anything, but the userpage would definitely time out. Probably you shouldn't.

So this idea is off, Piggy's bot won't tag them.

But since trust pages now have pagination, this could actually work again