Red Tagged ID remove this forum ?

[BTC_Mouse]

Red Tagged ID not secure this forum, red tagged member already scamming forum so my opinion best solution red trust tagged ID remove this forum and clean forum in future safety

[Mrengage]

Red Tagged ID not secure this forum, red tagged member already scamming forum so my opinion best solution red trust tagged ID remove this forum and clean forum in future safety

When you say scamming I believe it's already made clear that those forum members with a red tag (Red Trust) you stay clear from them. You don't make deals with them, now the ball will be in your court if you know what's wrong and right and you still went ahead to deal.

[Casdinyard]

Red Tagged ID not secure this forum, red tagged member already scamming forum so my opinion best solution red trust tagged ID remove this forum and clean forum in future safety

We don't really get what you are talking about with "Red Tagged ID not secure this forum". Red trust tagging is already making the forum clean and safe, it's just that some users, despite the flags, keeps making transactions and keeps encountering with red tagged users without reading the tag's reference and reasons.

If you are still doubtful with the trust system, here's some thread that talks about it:
A short introduction to the Trust System

While, here's some basic understanding with the Trust System:
LoyceV's Beginners guide to correct use of the Trust system

[eaLiTy]

Red Tagged ID not secure this forum, red tagged member already scamming forum so my opinion best solution red trust tagged ID remove this forum and clean forum in future safety

If you find a member with a red tag then it gives you the warning before you trade with them and there is no point in removing those profiles from the forum as those records should be kept here for future reference.

[Sanitough]

That's still not enough to remove the trust system or red tag ID based on your statement.

Just like any other forum, there's no perfect forum and there's no perfect system so the trust system can also be abuse.
Actually if you find someone abusing the trust system and they are part of the DT Members, you should report it and let the community decide, for sure DT members will distrust a member that are abusing their position.

In the end, we should just follow the forum rules, red tagged members can't be ban, not in the forum rules.

[Peanutswar]

Red Tagged ID not secure this forum, red tagged member already scamming forum so my opinion best solution red trust tagged ID remove this forum and clean forum in future safety

Red tagged gives by the forum to avoid those members, if this tag will remove the scammers are still free to lurking on our forum and scamming other people, especially newbies. The use of the red-tagged is to make more clean the forum and save the members by getting scammed. Still, the last decision is up to you if you still want to continue the transaction to the member who has a red-tagged the forum already warned you so it's your risk now.

[mprep]

When a person is "red tagged", he's only red tagged from your perspective (as well as from perspectives of people with similar Trust lists). The Trust system is relative - someone who's marked as a scammer from one user's perspective may be overflowing in positive Trust feedback from someone else's. In practice, most people just use the default Trust list (represented by having only DefaultTrust in your list), which is what users usually mean when they say they don't deal with anyone that has red trust. However, even then, the list of users in the default list varies month by month so some feedback may disappear or reappear based on who's currently in the list.

As for why there isn't an official this-is-the-truth judgement on (potential) scammers, there are a number of reasons:
1) Workload. Bitcointalk is large and filled with commercial activity. Having enough mods to cover all bases would require immense resources.
2) Potential biases. Following up point no. 1, each of those moderators (or official scam hunters) would have their own biases that'd have to be kept in check. That would not only require even more additional resources but also a complex system that ensures both effective and fair judgement on disputed cases of something or someone being marked as a scam.
3) Lack of legal jurisdiction. Screenshots, videos and most other publicly displayable evidence can be (and in certain cases is being) reliably and convincingly faked and done so by slightly tech-savvy people with an access to a regular computer and free software. The only way we could verify someone's claims with reasonable accuracy is by being able to access data that governmental institutions do when they have a search warrant. Even then, after all that work, all we'd be able to do is ban an anonymous account.
4) Lack of a robust definition for scams. People have different opinions on what counts as fraudulent behavior. There's always blatant cases (e.g. we agreed and I paid for goods, yet didn't get those goods), however, as with all large communities, there's always difficult-to-pin-down cases where either the moderator / scam hunter handling the case would have to decide (potentially making such judgments arbitrary) or there would have to be a comprehensive collection of pseudo-laws defining scammy behavior (which, as it grows, would become more and more similar to actual laws, bringing all the real-world issues alongside them; e.g. a requirement to have a paid "Bitcointalk lawyer" to even have a chance at successfully defending a potentially questionable case).

With these limitations in place, any official scam hunting effort would at best be mostly ineffective and at worst become a witch hunt. An official scam hunting effort would be us trying to replicate a governmental court system without the jurisdiction or the resources of one.

Obviously, there are cases where something is blatantly a scam, however, to both not waste resources and have a consistent policy (one that hinges on caveat emptor) that doesn't create a false sense of security, theymos (the head admin) has decided to let the community decide on what's a scam and what's not. It's far from perfect, but at least you're both informed about potential scams, know the system is community driven (potentially unreliable) and can tweak it to your preference.

Whether the choice of not even trying to moderate blatant scams is the right one is for you to decide, I guess.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

Why do I sense a newbie alt OP posting this on behalf of his main account which has probably recently been given negative trust? The ability to red tag scammers & untrustworthy people is absolutely invaluable. So many people have been scammed out of money here, by established accounts too. DT members being able to tag scammers or untrustworthy people can save people from being scammed. There’s no way theymos will ever remove trust settings/ratings (in some format).

[joniboini]

There’s no way theymos will ever remove trust settings/ratings (in some format).

I think OP is not talking about that, and as the previous reply suggest, he's talking about removing red-tagged members from this forum (not a simple ban). One way or the other, the risk you mention is still there.

[Sanitough]

There’s no way theymos will ever remove trust settings/ratings (in some format).

I think OP is not talking about that, and as the previous reply suggest, he's talking about removing red-tagged members from this forum (not a simple ban). One way or the other, the risk you mention is still there.

Same with LFC_Bitcoin, I thought he was talking about the trust system as whole but when I re read, he wants red trust members to be remove in the forum, which is impossible since forum are for everyone and rating are not moderated so it could be bias, unless bitcointalk will do the rating themselves and put it as an addition to the forum rules.

[sheenshane]

There’s no way theymos will ever remove trust settings/ratings (in some format).

I think OP is not talking about that, and as the previous reply suggest, he's talking about removing red-tagged members from this forum (not a simple ban). One way or the other, the risk you mention is still there.

Same with LFC_Bitcoin, I thought he was talking about the trust system as whole but when I re read, he wants red trust members to be remove in the forum, which is impossible since forum are for everyone and rating are not moderated so it could be bias, unless bitcointalk will do the rating themselves and put it as an addition to the forum rules.

Even banned members cant be removed in the forum, if OP wants to move in the forum those members have red-tagged that is impossible and theymos didn't probably do that. The used of red tagged and active flag in the user's profile is to warn others that they should avoid dealing or trading the users that has a red tagged. They are risky to trade and it's up to you to continue dealing with even you had been noticed negative feedback indicate on the user's profile.

@mprep above was explained it very well.

[sujonali1819]

Asking for removing all red-tagged people indirectly means removing the trust system from this forum. how? when you give a neg trust the user will be removed and nobody can see them or their trust score. then how the trust score colors will help the community? So it trust system name should be changed to''ban'' or something like that. 

BTW what the OP asking to change is never will be done. 

[Asuspawer09]

Red Tagged ID not secure this forum, red tagged member already scamming forum so my opinion best solution red trust tagged ID remove this forum and clean forum in future safety

Do you mean removing the ID of the users who have red-tagged here in the forum?

Seems like you want them to be banned in the forum, for some users I think I would agree there is probably some users you get a log of red tag and probably because of scamming, spamming, etc. and really deserved to be banned in the forum.

But still, at the end of the day, a red tag is just negative feedback(feedback), everyone could leave their feedback if they have a bad experience with the user like losing money etc. so that other members knew what to expect with the user.

[Timelord2067]

I think the OP is actually talking about Nuking the UID in question - there are pros and cons, one being the scammer has a clean slate as there is no record of their scamming while another disadvantage is if the UID was only Nuked to remove their posts, but not their trust feedback, or default trust lists, then their manipulation of either will remain unchecked.

[Stedsm]

I don't think that removing someone would really help but rather encourage these people (who are removed) to create a new account and scam as their old account ID gets removed so it'll be easier for them not to be remembered, which will increase the chances that they will definitely come back to the forum with a new identity (which they can already do) but if they are left with a negative feedback, they will still use their old account (I'm talking about the tagged one) and this will stop them from making a new account, gaining merits to gain higher ranks and scam as it'd be a hassle for them to wait.