Red tags = no longer effective and pose a real threat to honest members.

[bonesjonesreturns]

Let's look at how red tags are now being used.

1. Proven scammers will give red tags to those that whistle blow on them

2. Proven scammers will mutually remove red tags from each other to get a clean trust sheet. This is the MAD scenario between scammers or factions predicted by some members previously. 

3. Proven scammers are now threatening to red tag people if they apply to work with chipmixer or if they do get employed. It's all about the money and nothing to do with protecting the forum as I have said all along.


There is clear undeniable evidence of these things happening


So the question is why red tags are not removed. Since they are being used to facilitate scammers and endanger honest members.

Why?

If there is proof of scam we have type 2 and 3 flags

If there is strong evidence of attempted financial scamming or setting up a financial  scam there is type 1 flag


What is the real purpose or reasoning to retain this dangerous corrupted red tag shitty system?

This latest threat to red tag people if they try to work with chipmixer is not as bad as tolerating scammers trust abusing their whistleblowers but it is the final straw..

I want to know the reason why red tags are still here? Looks suspicious


They provide no extra benefit and are crushing free speech, and facilitating scams and scammers.

Please debunk these claims if you can.

Research first though please.  

[malevolent]

If negative ratings are no longer effective, they shouldn't be of a threat to anyone.

And if proven scammers are actually threatening to red tag people, their threats aren't worth anything because they aren't even on DefaultTrust.

[pixie85]

Are you afraid of being tagged by a proven scammer OP or are you afraid of being tagged by someone for an abuse? Your trust looks like you've started a fight with a few people and came here looking for allies.
 
If someone tags you for trying to take a spot in a signature campaign just write about it and if you're able to prove it you'll get a counter positive from one of the trusted members.

To be honest, you don't look like someone who would be allowed into the bitmixer campaign, so you don't have to worry about that at least.

[Vod]

And if proven scammers are actually threatening to red tag people, their threats aren't worth anything because they aren't even on DefaultTrust.

Maybe three years ago, but not today.

I'm hoping Theymos introduced the flag system to eventually replace the tag system.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

This latest threat to red tag people if they try to work with chipmixer is not as bad as tolerating scammers trust abusing their whistleblowers but it is the final straw..

I saw the drama in one of the threads about Chipmixer (and commented on it), but the only thing I've seen is that Lauda had tagged a single member--brought up in another thread by muslol67.

Truthfully I've always hated the trust system here, and the main reason for that is that anyone can leave anyone else a neg or a positive and no proof of trade has to be provided.  That's quite obviously led to tons of trust abuse, but it's just something that I've come to accept over the years.  I don't think there's any ideal way to create a trust system, and if Theymos makes any changes he's going to no doubt be criticized because the solution isn't perfect.

I'm curious: is there any more recent evidence of the trust system being used against Chipmixer applicants or participants?

[suchmoon]

I'm curious: is there any more recent evidence of the trust system being used against Chipmixer applicants or participants?

A couple of months ago Kalemder was tagged by Lauda and got removed from the campaign recently, but (allegedly) not because of that red trust.

I don't know any other cases. One could claim that some potential applicants won't be considered because they already got red trust but it's ultimately up to DarkStar_. There are some DT-red-trusted¹ participants in the campaign so he seems to be doing this on a case-by-case basis.

Edit: I checked couple of users who I was certain had red trust and they don't anymore. Perhaps the DT lottery changed things around. At any rate, they didn't get automatically kicked out of the campaign so the point above still stands.


¹ - some of those red tags are done by users who complain very loudly about DT unfairness and such so there is a great deal of irony in all this.

[TECSHARE]

...I'm curious: is there any more recent evidence of the trust system being used against Chipmixer applicants or participants?

No, this is just more D.A.R.V.O. tactics as is standard operating procedure by the worst abusers.

If negative ratings are no longer effective, they shouldn't be of a threat to anyone.

And if proven scammers are actually threatening to red tag people, their threats aren't worth anything because they aren't even on DefaultTrust.

Sorry but this logic is garbage. They are pointless in achieving their goal, that being protecting new users from fraud. They do however serve as an effective way to get those same users to avoid trading with people who really shouldn't have them. Additionally a lot of these "proven scammers" have shitloads of alts as well as people loyal to them still on DT taking retribution on their behalf.

It is really simple. If I put 20 plastic Easter eggs in a bowl and fill them each with $100, and you pay $50 to pick one it is a great deal right? If I then dump 40 more empty ones into the bowl, it is not that great any more is it? Now imagine 20 of those 40 eggs are filled with poisonous spiders. Now the once great deal becomes a liability. This is exactly what is happening with the trust system. It has gone from useful, to not very useful, to counterproductive via over use of negative ratings, dilution of their effectiveness in achieving their goal, to becoming a liability to the user base by allowing them to be used to hide and perpetrate fraud.

The only way to even begin to mitigate this damage is to require evidence of theft, violation of contractual agreements, or violation of applicable laws before rating or flagging. Anyone can accuse anyone else freely without substance, if evidence is required, that also requires the manufacturing of evidence to make a false accusation, which is a much more difficult bar to reach. The trust system as it is, is far from useless, it is now counterproductive.

[bonesjonesreturns]

If negative ratings are no longer effective, they shouldn't be of a threat to anyone.

And if proven scammers are actually threatening to red tag people, their threats aren't worth anything because they aren't even on DefaultTrust.

Not effective = net negative for the forum aka dog shit. Lol they are effective for scammers and scammer supporters and those wanting bo competition for their sig spots or their sponsors or who want to trade red tag removals to hide their scamming.  Then yes they can provide additional extra value over the flagging system. Of course the level 1 flag needs to be tightened up.  It needs be where they can produce strong evidence of intent to scam financially or setting up a scam.

Red tags are redundant now we have flags. The flags should be used in the way I just described.
There is no sensible argument to retain red tags.

If you can provide a sensible argument that demonstrates red tags should remain rather than use the flagging system as I describe then simply state it here. There are a host of undeniable insoluble problems that subjective red tagging create. Many of which facilitate scamming.


Red tags are net negative.
Therefore they are not effective aka they are not net positive any longer.

I just stated 3 undeniable examples of how red trust has been used. Those have been covered several times before and the principle that red tags can be exploited like that stands.

As for the last one since the first 2 have been covered a few times before

Here
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5247288.msg54400757#msg54400757

Again it is undeniable that the scammer lauda who has already used red tags to punish those that whistleblow on his scamming past.  

Now is saying he will red tag members if they apply for and are accepted by chipmixer.

There is no good reason to retain red tags and multiple clear and undeniable reasons to get rid of the free speech crushing scammer facilitating, sig campaign controlling dog shit.


I say to anyone here provide an argument to retain it that stands up to scrutiny.

It is clearly impossible to do so because nobody can?

The only people seeking to retain it are those that do not want a fair and honest playing field here and a bunch of scammers who want to use it to scam with impunity.

If you want credible and valuable trust system they gives out legitimate warnings without facilitating scammers and crushing free speech then use the flagging system as I am suggesting and others have been suggesting for around a year now.

How many times and how many more clear abuses of red tags must this place put up with from the same bunch of fucked up a scamming dirt bags with multiple counts of directly dangerous financial behaviors who are supporting others with similar histories of financial dangerous behaviors.

This latest " I'll red tag you if you get on chipmixer" lol
What a coincidence? The same proven scammer that gives red trust out to members who whistle blow on him

Delete this red tag crap , any member asking to retain it is a retard or scumbag.

[Vod]

This is exactly what is happening with the trust system. It has gone from useful, to not very useful, to counterproductive via over use of negative ratings, dilution of their effectiveness in achieving their goal, to becoming a liability to the user base by allowing them to be used to hide and perpetrate fraud.

If you're not willing to look at your sent trust as abusive, why would you expect anyone else to do the same? 

Everyone believes they are correct in their abusive ratings - including you.   

Instead of complaining, try doing something.

[bonesjonesreturns]

This is exactly what is happening with the trust system. It has gone from useful, to not very useful, to counterproductive via over use of negative ratings, dilution of their effectiveness in achieving their goal, to becoming a liability to the user base by allowing them to be used to hide and perpetrate fraud.

If you're not willing to look at your sent trust as abusive, why would you expect anyone else to do the same?  

Everyone believes they are correct in their abusive ratings - including you.  

Instead of complaining, try doing something.

This is not the point at all.

There should be no " please do the right thing"  or please dont create fake red tags for your own personal reasons.  There should be no option to do the wrong thing.

Delete the subjectivity and room for choosing not to abuse. There should be no room to abuse.

You have clear proof of scamming then type 2 or 3 flag

You have strong evidence of attempting to scam or setting up a scam type 1 flag


Someone finds that you have scammed before = tough shit you are a scammer you don't get to punish whistleblowers

One scammer says to a other let's remove each others red tags = tough shit there are no red tags to get you off the hook you have a flag and a ton of ppl supporting it

Someone doesnt agree with you bogus politics = tough shit they are not a scammer so you dont get to devalue the trust system with your crying

You want to hog all the sig spots and discredit your competitors unfairly = tough shit red tags are gone no more finding excuses to red tag and no more threatening to red tag them just for applying lol


Just remove the tagging system it is destructive net negative crap.
The evidence is clear.  I see no credible defense ever published here yet.

The only people begging to retain it are wearing chipmixer and on DT, of course they want to retain the status quo.
They dont want to be on a level playing field because they are mostly a bunch of corrupt scammy shit posters.
Imagine these dregs had to compete on a level playing field.

[Vod]

This is not the point at all.

There should be no " please do the right thing"  or please dont create fake red tags for your own personal reasons.  There should be no option to do the wrong thing.

It is a valid point.   Techy has been complaining about trust abuse for a decade while being a founder of it.  He believes his feedback is correct and ours is wrong.

Changing rules will do nothing against those who think they are above them.

[bonesjonesreturns]

This is not the point at all.

There should be no " please do the right thing"  or please dont create fake red tags for your own personal reasons.  There should be no option to do the wrong thing.

It is a valid point.   Techy has been complaining about trust abuse for a decade while being a founder of it.  He believes his feedback is correct and ours is wrong.

Changing rules will do nothing against those who think they are above them.

I would doubt TS would abuse the trust system in the way I have mentioned.

I would doubt you would abuse it in the ways I mention above either.
Having said that I would have doubted you would be supporting scammers and befriending such low life trash

But who does what now is not important. It needs to be the future we fix. When all tags are deleted all abuse will be deleted. Ĺ

There needs to be absolutely no way to abuse the rules at all for anyone. This is scamming and directly financially dangerous behaviors we are dealing with.

Anyway we need to look to the future since the past is past but can be fixed so to have no weighting on the future.

We need to have rules for the flags.

We need to enforce the rules.

Rules that are not enforced are just weak suggestions that will be ignored.
A few rule beakers will be made examples of and off we go. All good little rule followers.

I note flag 2 and 3 are being followed nicely.

Why ? Because they are not a subjective mess wide open to abuse.

[DarkStar_]

A couple of months ago Kalemder was tagged by Lauda and got removed from the campaign recently, but (allegedly) not because of that red trust.

The removal was not negative trust based (IIRC, they were in the campaign for some period of time with a -1, but were removed when they had +1/-1).

[Lauda]

A couple of months ago Kalemder was tagged by Lauda and got removed from the campaign recently, but (allegedly) not because of that red trust.

The removal was not negative trust based (IIRC, they were in the campaign for some period of time with a -1, but were removed when they had +1/-1).

Was I even in DT at the time he got kicked? Probably not(?). Unrelated it was.

[bonesjonesreturns]

A couple of months ago Kalemder was tagged by Lauda and got removed from the campaign recently, but (allegedly) not because of that red trust.

The removal was not negative trust based (IIRC, they were in the campaign for some period of time with a -1, but were removed when they had +1/-1).

Was I even in DT at the time he got kicked? Probably not(?). Unrelated it was.

Well your threat that you would be giving red trust to members for applying and working with chipmixer is still threatening to trust abuse them. This is totally wrong and dangerous.

The fact you gave PN7 A red tag and then it was removed when QS started being a lot less sure you were and extortionist and scammer and removed his red tags on you? Hmm. Funny how 2 people so sure for years the other is a super dangerous scammer then both together mutually decide to remove red tags and be pals at the very same instant.

I noted when PN7 said something you didnt like the other day you suddenly said... hmmm starting to sound like QS again. Like a shut up or you get a red tag back on PN7

what about the red tags you gave to whistleblowers who presented evidence of  your scamming?

I mean you are an extreme example of scamming piece of shit that should have never been near the trust system
However if you can and do abuse red tags like this others can.  

Get rid of red tags. Go to flags only and prevent the system facilitating scammers like lauda.

He is a blatant and super stupid and greedy scammer so easy to spot. There will be more subtle ones around playing similar games.

[Lauda]

Well your threat that you would be giving red trust to members for applying and working with chipmixer is still threatening to trust abuse them.

The fact you gave PN7 A red tag and then it was removed when QS started being a lot less sure you were and extortionist and scammer and removed his red tags on you? Hmm. Funny how 2 people so sure for years the other is a super dangerous scammer then both together mutually decide to remove red tags and be pals at the very same instant.

I noted when PN7 said something you didnt like the other day you suddenly said... hmmm starting to sound like QS again. Like a shut up or you get a red tag back on PN7

what about the red tags you gave to whistleblowers who presented evidence of  your scamming?

Very simple answer to all of this:

[bonesjonesreturns]

Well your threat that you would be giving red trust to members for applying and working with chipmixer is still threatening to trust abuse them.

The fact you gave PN7 A red tag and then it was removed when QS started being a lot less sure you were and extortionist and scammer and removed his red tags on you? Hmm. Funny how 2 people so sure for years the other is a super dangerous scammer then both together mutually decide to remove red tags and be pals at the very same instant.

I noted when PN7 said something you didnt like the other day you suddenly said... hmmm starting to sound like QS again. Like a shut up or you get a red tag back on PN7

what about the red tags you gave to whistleblowers who presented evidence of  your scamming?

Very simple answer to all of this:

Detail which parts you dispute and I will bring it all here and go over it all in detail again.

[Lauda]

Detail which parts you dispute and I will bring it all here and go over it all in detail again.

Do you want the crowd to start shouting impeach him, impeach him?