Trust Chain or Merit Coin (Is it possible?) Crime-Judgment-Punishment and Right

[Kalemder]

Problem:
You may want to get your money back in case of problems with some trades. In real life, you go to court or bank. Your money will be returned to you if you are found right. This is not possible with Bitcoin. That's why fraud happens. This is possible even if you use Escrow. Escrow only gives you confidence during the sale. What about later problems?

Solution:A reliable court - Trusted members - DT1 Member.
DT1 will judge and vote when there is a problem among the members. When the right option is decided, one person is right and the other is wrong. If fraud has been committed, the transfer is canceled. Forum administrators will do this with DT1 decision. Or, DT1 members are granted node privileges. That is, the chain change authority is found in DT1. Each vote = One node

What do we do if the fraudster spends money?
There will be two options when sending: normal chain, mortgaged chain. For a specified period, the money sent to the mortgaged cannot be spent. Or this money can only be spent as stamped. The person receiving the mortgage coin, must know and accept the terms. That is, they must trust the other party. He should know: This money is in a mortgage chain.

Coin Supply?I think this should be equal to the number of merits. Write quality articles in the forum = Coin Mining

Goal:
* We already have a decentralized coin: Bitcoin.
* We need a central arbitral tribunal for commercial issues.
* Decentralized Ground Jury = DT1
* DT1 members become more meaningful.

My English is not very good. But you understood the main idea.
Can this be done? Let's discuss problems and solutions together.
I can understand better if you write with short sentences : )

Stay safe.

[1714944884]

1714944884

[1714944884]

1714944884

[1714944884]

1714944884

[1714944884]

1714944884

[suchmoon]

Aside from the fact that this doesn't solve the problem that you want to solve (I mean you could just keep the money in escrow longer, same effect), I think it's an extremely bad idea to monetize merits in any way.

[tranthidung]

Without financial benefits, there are many drama in the forum that relate to trust, feedback, and DT members. What will pop up if there will be coins for Trust or Merit (even you propose votes to decentralize it)? I have not yet imagined positive things with it. What I can imagine will be more drama that we all don't need to see.

In some aspect, I see it is not too hard to be included in DT trust list and become DT2 members for example. From DT2, they will gradually move upwards to DT1 members. It's harder but they can.

If there are financial bonuses, there will be more 'corruptions' (something like that) and more related drama.
Theymos created a new trust system with positive / neutral / negative to illuminate or at least reduce drama. If we look at his perspective, we can go to the conclusion that he will never create any type of coins relate to any system of the forum (trust, merit, whatever).

You can buy something, from one, two, three, four times then get positive trust and good feedback, but it does not guarentee or determine that you are the one who are more trusted and reliable in the forum. The one who don't exchange anything is also a good guy.

This is as same as the merit's roles in the forum. Merit plays a boost for good posters to rank up but in contrast it plays as a barrier to rank up for shitposters. Nevertheless, merit does not perfectly help to differentiate between good posters and shitposters. One can make good posts but as subjective instinct of merit give-aways, good posts are not always received merits. Good posters don't turn into shitposters only because of some of their posts are not merited.

If I am reliable, I always am and I don't have to own any Trust coin or positive trust / feedback to be a reliable one.

[LoyceV]

I think it's an extremely bad idea to monetize merits in any way.

Although it would probably be very good for me to monetize Merit, I completely agree this is a very bad idea!

There's already enough drama on DT. For judging transactions, you can use a trusted escrow. For anything else, DT-members (and non-DT-members too for that matter) can "vote" through the feedback system.
I don't want to have power over other people's money by default just because I'm on DT1.

[DireWolfM14]

I'll echo the rest who've said it's a bad idea to monetize merit.

The trade and arbitration issues can be addressed without the forum's participation.  In fact, I think it's best if the forum is not expected to provide such services.

I've been thinking recently about how an escrow cooperative comprised of several trusted members working with a multi-sig wallet could be a good way to prevent scams.  It would require trusted members to volunteer, since payment expectations would be minimal and insignificant.  Members of the cooperative could be voted in by the community, so it would be a "decentralized" organization or at least a democratic one.  I think organizing something within the community and leaving the forum and it's administration out of the picture would be better for everyone involved.  

[Kalemder]

Aside from the fact that this doesn't solve the problem that you want to solve (I mean you could just keep the money in escrow longer, same effect), I think it's an extremely bad idea to monetize merits in any way.

Thanks for your comment @suchmoon.

I think this system is much more effective than using Escrow. I trust the DT1 jury of 100 people more. Only 1 Escrow can judge how much? Just 1 Escrow how fair can be?

DT1 members are natural Escrows. They become more meaningful with Trust Chain.

[LoyceMobile]

I trust the DT1 jury of 100 people more. Only 1 Escrow can judge how much?

I don't think many of those 100 members will be very happy to show up for jury duty for every single case that is debated.

[Kalemder]

I trust the DT1 jury of 100 people more. Only 1 Escrow can judge how much?

I don't think many of those 100 members will be very happy to show up for jury duty for every single case that is debated.

Isn't that what they do? Their mission: to vote, judge and punish (with red trust) when Flag is opened. Only punishment is not enough. The victim must be given his right.

[cabalism13]

I trust the DT1 jury of 100 people more...

DT1 members are natural Escrows. They become more meaningful with Trust Chain.

Not all can be trusted, DT1 can still be manipulated. So I suggest not to openly trust anyone just because they're on DT1, the same goes for an escrow, a Trusted Escrow can also be an Evil User, we really can't tell how anyone could think when handling large amount of money. Everything has risks.
As for the Merit Coin, it was already discussed AFAIK and the outcome of feedbacks isn't good. Simply agreeing with suchmoon.
There can be no other positive solution for this, please don't forget that we are all anonymous here and accounts can be left  behind as long as the user wants it.

The victim must be given his right.

What rights?
To runt? To cry? A loss is a loss. No one can do about the fact that they've been scammed by someone, DTs can only be of help for giving warnings, Red Tags aren't to be considered as punishment. There are no punishment implied to scammers here online, unless they're tracked by someone else.

[suchmoon]

DT1 members are natural Escrows. They become more meaningful with Trust Chain.

DT1 users are trusted for their judgement. Not the same thing as being an escrow. It takes a lot more than 10 trust inclusions to become an actual trusted escrow and not all escrows are equal. There are plenty of people in DT1 whom I could trust with up to 1 bitcoin, very few whom I could trust with a larger amount, and a few whom I wouldn't trust to pick up after their dog.

And since the forum already has it's own coin we should just use the features it provides, like multisig. Getting 100 DT1 members involved wouldn't make it much safer, just more prone to failure.

[Upgrade00]

* We need a central arbitral tribunal for commercial issues.

No, we do not. Centralization breeds corruption.
This would result in more problems than we have now. And at a quick glance, your suggestion looks like a complicated solution, that will lead to lots of discussion and complaints.