[overview] Lauda's DefaultTrust statistics & relevant topics list

[LoyceV]

LoyceV also asked an interesting question along the lines of whether it's intended that DT1 excluded members can still make inclusions/exclusions to other DT1 members, if they are ultimately distrusted by "acting" DT1 members (cant' find quote though).

Your graph nicely confirms what I expected to happen back then. And you probably couldn't find it because I posted it from Mobile:

Lauda had (2) net-inclusions on DT1.
Lauda now has 6 net-inclusions on DT2.
Lauda got blacklisted from DT1.

I have 2 scenarios
1: suppose Lauda wasn't blacklisted, but got 3 more exclusions from other DT1 members. That would mean Lauda was removed from DefaultTrust entirely.

2: the current state (Lauda blacklisted from DT1). Now suppose Lauda gets the same 3 exclusions from DT1. That would mean Lauda still has 3 net-inclusions on DT2 and remains on DefaultTrust.

This means it is possible that a DT1-exclusion leads to a member being on DT which wouldn't happen without blacklisting. This is probably caused by the fact that excluded DT1-members can vote against other DT1-members, but they can't vote against DT2-members.
Is that the intended behaviour of the DefaultTrust system?

I think this is becoming a joke. There's one shithead with -15 still wreaking havoc in DT1, extorting other members with exclusions/inclusions. I think the idea was that such a person would ultimately stop being eligible for DT1 due to not having 10+ inclusions from merit-earning users but that's clearly not happening and with more and more merit being spread around there will be more merited idiots including other idiots.

Isn't his -15 DT1-strength evidence of the DT-system working as intended?

Perhaps exclusions should count against DT1 eligibility (e.g. if you're excluded by 2 users with 250+ merit, then that negates 2 inclusions from users with 250+ merit) but that probably would open other avenues for abuse.

I'd like to see data on what would be changed, but unfortunately I don't have the time to make it.

[1714628581]

1714628581

[1714628581]

1714628581

[1714628581]

1714628581

[1714628581]

1714628581

[suchmoon]

Isn't his -15 DT1-strength evidence of the DT-system working as intended?

Maybe, if the intent was to allow such users to extort other DT1 users. They can't directly affect DT ratings but still can do so indirectly, for example by including someone who is at -1 or excluding someone who is at 0 in DT1.

[Timelord2067]

LoyceV also asked an interesting question along the lines of whether it's intended that DT1 excluded members can still make inclusions/exclusions to other DT1 members, if they are ultimately distrusted by "acting" DT1 members (cant' find quote though).

I think this is becoming a joke. There's one shithead with -15 still wreaking havoc in DT1, extorting other members with exclusions/inclusions. I think the idea was that such a person would ultimately stop being eligible for DT1 due to not having 10+ inclusions from merit-earning users but that's clearly not happening and with more and more merit being spread around there will be more merited idiots including other idiots. Perhaps exclusions should count against DT1 eligibility (e.g. if you're excluded by 2 users with 250+ merit, then that negates 2 inclusions from users with 250+ merit) but that probably would open other avenues for abuse.

Good luck with that voting block idea.   

Isn't his -15 DT1-strength evidence of the DT-system working as intended?

Maybe, if the intent was to allow such users to extort other DT1 users. They can't directly affect DT ratings but still can do so indirectly, for example by including someone who is at -1 or excluding someone who is at 0 in DT1.

I was DT1 (-16) just a few weeks ago thanks in part to persons such as your good self who have peddled in accounts here in the BitCoinTalk Forum which causes instability in people's lives here and in real life.  At the moment I'm DT1 (-7) so yes, the current DT system works as it actually distils not strengthens the damage account traders have here in this forum.

Most if not all of those who distrust me have at one point or another peddled BCT UID's, yourself included which is why I am not concerned.  Sixteen is just a number, so is seven.

[dragonvslinux]

I think this is becoming a joke. There's one shithead with -15 still wreaking havoc in DT1, extorting other members with exclusions/inclusions. I think the idea was that such a person would ultimately stop being eligible for DT1 due to not having 10+ inclusions from merit-earning users but that's clearly not happening and with more and more merit being spread around there will be more merited idiots including other idiots.

Isn't his -15 DT1-strength evidence of the DT-system working as intended?

Maybe, if the intent was to allow such users to extort other DT1 users. They can't directly affect DT ratings but still can do so indirectly, for example by including someone who is at -1 or excluding someone who is at 0 in DT1.

I agree with LoyceV on this one, surely the fact that this user is on -15 shows that what they are doing isn't working, and causing more members to distrust him? I could be wrong, but it seems like there are lots of eyes on this users dubious use of the trust system. Specifically, about 22 DT1 & DT1 members, who collectively should be more than capable of reversing any exclusions/inclusions made. Possibly more relevant to the topic, this user's DT2 strength would be -14, as they are excluded by 1 more DT1 member than included. If this "shithead" (as you kindly put it) was dropped or blacklisted from DT1 then they still wouldn't be on DT2 either. This is very different from the cat's inclusions & exclusions, as this feline would still be on -1 DT1 strength if not blacklisted from DT1. See the difference here?

Perhaps exclusions should count against DT1 eligibility (e.g. if you're excluded by 2 users with 250+ merit, then that negates 2 inclusions from users with 250+ merit) but that probably would open other avenues for abuse.

Merit-based exclusions would clearly wreak havoc on the trust system as you considered, probably also dropping the number of eligible members in half I'd imagine. While I know many DT1 members feel that the number of members on DT1 should be reduced considerably, it would be much more prone to trust abuse from merited sock puppets, than the current conditions imo. It'd be easier to generate exclusions than the current conditions of generating inclusions, if merit took precedent over DT1 strength, which is what you're suggesting.


Indeed, this was the quote I was looking for. Probably didn't find it as it's nearly a year old now  

Your graph nicely confirms what I expected to happen back then. And you probably couldn't find it because I posted it from Mobile:

This means it is possible that a DT1-exclusion leads to a member being on DT which wouldn't happen without blacklisting.

[LoyceV]

Isn't his -15 DT1-strength evidence of the DT-system working as intended?

Maybe, if the intent was to allow such users to extort other DT1 users. They can't directly affect DT ratings but still can do so indirectly, for example by including someone who is at -1 or excluding someone who is at 0 in DT1.

I agree with LoyceV on this one, surely the fact that this user is on -15 shows that what they are doing isn't working, and causing more members to distrust him?

I still think Lauda gets excluded because Lauda stirred up too many users. That's like being the opposite of Switzerland and increases the number of exclusions because more and more different users get a say in DT1. What if in the near future there are 15 users like peloso on DT1? All with DT1-strength -15. And what if they all decide to do this:

Aren't you tired of this order anymore?
Do you like someone to give you orders?

So let's revolutionize together

Add me to your trust list and I'll add you
Give me feedback and I'll give you

They'll all be back on DT1!
Retaliation is not a big problem if only a few users do it, but when it becomes a majority, the DT-system fails.

Any chance you can make a graph on the number of DT1-members with negative strength per week? My gut feeling tells me it's slowly increasing.

[dragonvslinux]

Isn't his -15 DT1-strength evidence of the DT-system working as intended?

Maybe, if the intent was to allow such users to extort other DT1 users. They can't directly affect DT ratings but still can do so indirectly, for example by including someone who is at -1 or excluding someone who is at 0 in DT1.

I agree with LoyceV on this one, surely the fact that this user is on -15 shows that what they are doing isn't working, and causing more members to distrust him?

What if in the near future there are 15 users like peloso on DT1? All with DT1-strength -15.

If that occurs, then I'd probably be providing the statistics and requesting a quote from you in a year from now  

Until then, this isn't the case and I don't think it will be. There are many theoretical "what if" scenarios, but personally I'm more interested in "what is" scenarios (the present), as there are enough of them already without needing to speculate on the potential future. If the present scenarios are dealt with then the future will likely follow suit. Speculating too much on the future means you're not focusing on the present imo. Not to say theoretical scenarios are irrelevant, but they might take some time to mature to becoming relevant.

Any chance you can make a graph on the number of DT1-members with negative strength per week? My gut feeling tells me it's slowly increasing.

All negative strength users can be found within the "elected" and "un-elected" graphs: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5256829.0
I wasn't intending to do this per week, as shifting users from sheet to sheet is a bit annoying, but intending to do so after each DT update when more changes occur.

[adultbit]

Fuck that LOL A lot will be kicked out of the campaigns!