Is it trust system abuse to increase Trust Score by Dabs?

[Little Mouse]

This is a discussion topic, not an accusation to Dabs.

I was reading the thread by nullius and checked the profile of Dabs. It shows 5 DT positive feedback according to my trust list but later on when I tried with ;dt, I found it 40 positive feedback. That's why I was checking who were they. No personal issue but I found some DT feedback which was left by people who were only trusted by Dabs.

Here is the detail of some DT members who left feedback to Dabs.

1. Voxterra- 1 feedback left
Voxterra's judgement is Trusted by:
1. Dabs (Trust: +9 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (3) 888 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

2. BitBot.V2- 1 feedback left
BitBot.V2's judgement is Trusted by:
1. Dabs (Trust: +9 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (3) 888 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

3. ma7555- 2 feedback left
ma7555's judgement is Trusted by:
1. Dabs (Trust: +9 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (3) 888 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

4. Frank Lefty Rosenthal- 5 feedback left
Frank Lefty Rosenthal's judgement is Trusted by:
1. Dabs (Trust: +9 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (3) 888 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

5. bittrojan- 2 feedback left
bittrojan's judgement is Trusted by:
1. Dabs (Trust: +9 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (3) 888 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

6. nihilnegativum- 5 feedback left
nihilnegativum's judgement is Trusted by:
1. Dabs (Trust: +9 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (3) 888 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

7. ZypheronBits- 2 feedback left
ZypheronBits's judgement is Trusted by:
1. Dabs (Trust: +9 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (3) 888 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

8. nagysifa- 1 feedback left
nagysifa's judgement is Trusted by:
1. Dabs (Trust: +9 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (3) 888 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

9. guncoin_support- 1 feedback left
guncoin_support's judgement is Trusted by:
1. Dabs (Trust: +9 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (3) 888 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

10. mavrick951- 4 feedback left
mavrick951's judgement is Trusted by:
1. Dabs (Trust: +9 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (3) 888 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

And continues.

Please keep in mind that according to the feedback sent/received, all of them have traded with Dabs as we know Dabs has/had escrow service on the forum.
Also, note that Dabs have this list from long ago. It's not something like he has recently added them. I can see most of them from 25th January 2019 from Loyce.club- https://loyce.club/trust/2019-01-25_Fri_22.33h/54791.html

Most of these people are old members of the forum. Dabs has included most of the members in their trust list who left him positive feedback.

Do you think this is an abuse to increase the trust score?

[1715362664]

1715362664

[1715362664]

1715362664

[1715362664]

1715362664

[1715362664]

1715362664

[LoyceV]

Do you think this is an abuse to increase the trust score?

See Trust Selfscratchers: who scratched his own back the most?
Dabs is the most notable notable user on that list, and he keeps bouncing from about 7 to 40 positive feedbacks depending on whether or not he's on DT1.
There are more users who include almost anyone who left them positive feedback. I don't think that's the best way to use the Trust system.

[Little Mouse]

See Trust Selfscratchers: who scratched his own back the most?

You have the list already  I spent half an hour compiling the list. Next time, I won't forget to PM you.

I don't think that's the best way to use the Trust system.

That's the point. Though he has added most of them, still it doesn't make sense to list people who left them positive feedback. I wouldn't see this as a problem if all of them had actively sent feedback to others as well but look at their feedback sent. Most of them only had one feedback sent and that's to Dabs. This of course doesn't make sense. Dabs as a DT1 member, should know what he is doing.

[crwth]

I don't think it's trust abuse, though. If there is a basis on why they would trust each other, then it's not abuse. I'm worried about the references; upon checking, it seems like it's with these members.

• Voxterra - Upon checking it's within Discord PM.
• mavrick951 - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=208335
• guncoin_support - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=498671.420
• ZypheronBits - https://64blocks.com/
• nihilnegativum - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1546279.0
• bittrojan - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1696889.0

I'm not sure if that's okay or something. It probably depends, but some of it is old, too though.

[Little Mouse]

I don't think it's trust abuse, though. If there is a basis on why they would trust each other, then it's not abuse.

It’s not about feedback. You can check my thread. I have already pointed that their feedback to each other makes sense because Dabs is providing escrow service and they may have a lot of trades. Feedbacks are normal in my opinion too.

But we are talking about the trust list inclusion. You must not include a lot of people sent you positive feedback. It's kind of increasing your own trust score by including anyone who left you positive feedback. Is it abuse? Whatever it is but it's not good.

As pointed by LoyceV above, if Dabs is in no longer a DT1 member, their trust score will significantly drop because most feedbacks in his profile are from DT member who were made DT by Dabs himself.

[DireWolfM14]

See Trust Selfscratchers: who scratched his own back the most?

It's been a while since we've had an update to that list, but with the current monthly fluctuations of DT1, it would probably become more work than it's worth.

Dabs is the most notable notable user on that list, and he keeps bouncing from about 7 to 40 positive feedbacks depending on whether or not he's on DT1.
There are more users who include almost anyone who left them positive feedback. I don't think that's the best way to use the Trust system.

Last time I fell off of DT1 I used the opportunity to clean up my inclusion/exclusion list and for one reason or another I decided to remove Dabs from my exclusions.  Maybe he hadn't been included in DT1 in a while because the number of exclusions?  I don't remember, but I just excluded him again.

I did remove at least one exclusion of a member who was guilty of self-scratching in the past, but he had recently obliterated his trust list so there was no point in keeping him on the list.

Personally, I do see it as an abuse of the trust system, and when I notice a DT member who engages in self-scratching I usually exclude him.   Not because I don't want to see their reviews, but because it strikes me as a lack of critical judgement, or a lack of understanding of how the trust system works.

[icopress]

I don't think it's trust abuse, though. If there is a basis on why they would trust each other, then it's not abuse. I'm worried about the references; upon checking, it seems like it's with these members.

He trusts these people because he did business with them and not because they have an accurate or meaningful feedback history. That's the problem. I added these users to my exclusion list, but they are still on DT (0) anyway. Need 1 more vote.

Code:

~Voxterra
~BitBot.V2
~ma7555
~Frank Lefty Rosenthal
~bittrojan
~nihilnegativum
~ZypheronBits
~nagysifa
~guncoin_support
~mavrick951

[DireWolfM14]

I added these users to my exclusion list, but they are still on DT (0) anyway. Need 1 more vote.

Way too much work.  Besides, Dabs has been informed about this issue before, and he's well aware that most people find his use of the trust system objectionable.  If he's going to keep padding his inclusions just to make his trust score higher, he's the one that should be excluded.  Who knows, one of those account could turn out to be a really good person to have on DT, but without giving them the chance we may never know.  I would rather exclude those who are misusing the system than those who are coincidentally included by a self-scratcher.

[LoyceV]

It's been a while since we've had an update to that list, but with the current monthly fluctuations of DT1, it would probably become more work than it's worth.

Since I made that list, the Trust system was changed and theymos added pagination. That's more than I'm willing to update for something that was only half serious from the start.

The solution to DT-selfscratching: [POLL] DT2 Status; how many net inclusions should it take?

[DireWolfM14]

The solution to DT-selfscratching: [POLL] DT2 Status; how many net inclusions should it take?

That wasn't my reasoning for starting that poll and making that suggestion, but yes, that would indeed make it much harder for trust system self-scratchers to pad their scores.

[Upgrade00]

Not only does this approach boost trust score, it also motivates users to leave more positive feedbacks for a chance to get on DT2. It's an all round attempt to pad trust overview and make themselves more trustworthy, particularly as they are selling a service.

Wrong use of the trust system for me.

[crwth]

It’s not about feedback. You can check my thread. I have already pointed that their feedback to each other makes sense because Dabs is providing escrow service and they may have a lot of trades. Feedbacks are normal in my opinion too.

Sorry that wasn't supposed to be my intention to focus on feedback. I was just wondering about the certain references that it has. There's no reference to others.

But we are talking about the trust list inclusion. You must not include a lot of people sent you positive feedback. It's kind of increasing your own trust score by including anyone who left you positive feedback. Is it abuse? Whatever it is but it's not good.

I think that's the choice of the person right, in this case, Dabs. And if he wants to use it that way, he can. That's just from the way I see it. It's up to others to distrust I guess if they think they are up to no good and could really abuse the trust.

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

Way too much work.  Besides, Dabs has been informed about this issue before, and he's well aware that most people find his use of the trust system objectionable.  If he's going to keep padding his inclusions just to make his trust score higher, he's the one that should be excluded.  Who knows, one of those account could turn out to be a really good person to have on DT, but without giving them the chance we may never know.  I would rather exclude those who are misusing the system than those who are coincidentally included by a self-scratcher.

If anyone is at fault then it's Dabs. Not these users.
Assuming Debs knowingly added this users in his trust setting after seeing their feedback for him. If his intention was higher up his green ratings then this is an abuse. If he thought these users should be in DT because they can provide good contribution to the system then it's not abuse. Problem, we do not know his intention, we will never too.

If anyone is here need a "~" then it will be Debs.

I know Dabs from WO and I would like some statements from him about it.

The solution to DT-selfscratching: [POLL] DT2 Status; how many net inclusions should it take?

That wasn't my reasoning for starting that poll and making that suggestion, but yes, that would indeed make it much harder for trust system self-scratchers to pad their scores.

It does not matter what was your reasoning but this is a very good example of improving the current scoring system.

[LoyceV]

If anyone is at fault then it's Debs.

Dabs

If anyone is here need a "~" then it will be Debs.

Dabs
I'm curious what made you include Dabs last week.

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

If anyone is at fault then it's Debs.

Dabs

If anyone is here need a "~" then it will be Debs.

Dabs
I'm curious what made you include Dabs last week.

Fuck Debs, okay Dabs 🤣
Last week I added and removed (~) some users. It was only usual adding and removing. So nothing I had in mind to explain for Dabs. I am not a regular trust setting checker, I do it very occasionally.

Edit: Upgraded my memory from Debs to Dabs 🤣

[NotATether]

I added these users to my exclusion list, but they are still on DT (0) anyway. Need 1 more vote.

Exactly, this is how you solve the issue if you indeed see it as one (I personally don't as long as none of those accounts get hijacked by scammers).

[icopress]

Exactly, this is how you solve the issue if you indeed see it as one (I personally don't as long as none of those accounts get hijacked by scammers).

I just didn't want to be too radical since I don't know anything about Dabs.

But I do know one thing... an artificially high g'rating can give others a false sense of security.

[Timelord2067]

From recollection, I haven't had anything to do with Dabs in the past.  I saw a previous thread raising this issue of supposed mutual trust back scratching - call it what you like...  This time with the issue again being raised, I thought I'll have a look both at Dabs (via their own signature and the threads they have created in the past) and those who have benefited from mutual trust feedback.


Early threads created by Dabs have a combination of topics - e.g. group buys, loan requests and attempts to start (multiple) casinos are prominent.

Is Dabs still an Escrow?  Their Escrow thread fizzles out in 2018 along with positive trust feedback reviews around the same time.  How active in the forum are these givers of positive trust feedback?  If they are not every active they *may* be unaware their positives are being tut-tutted...  (which in turn lends itself to the premise that Dabs is bosting them to in turn boost himself)

Interesting that SolarisDev announce Dabs as their Escrow for an airdrop, however, on the website for the Solaris Coin Dabs is listed as an "Ambassador" and I can't find a clarification of the roll Dabs has within Solaris Coin's thread/website.


Also interesting that cabalsim13 came to Dabs on the 19th of March 2019 with a proposal to re-invigorate Dab's Charity food program by neco-bumping Dab's already three year stale charity thread.

Six days later the thread Bitcointalk Charity Program - Give Hope To Everyone! was created (and the rest as they say is history  ).

Less than six months after that Dabs is now the one asking for food to feed their family in their own charity food program thread.


Of those who have been inactive for more than 999 days, there are two subsets:

These users are bumped to DT2 solely by Dabs - most of these users only trust feedback is to Dabs.

Dropkickdragout      Registration Date:6/9/2011 3:15:27 AM (Active 2951 days ago)
iguru42         Registration Date:6/17/2011 2:18:02 AM (Active 2370 days ago)
yolo2222      Registration Date:12/15/2012 5:53:06 PM (Active 3243 days ago)
shawshankinmate37927   Registration Date:2/23/2013 12:04:02 AM (Active 2328 days ago)
FullLife      Registration Date:3/4/2013 3:28:46 AM (Active 2315 days ago)
mavrick951      Registration Date:4/15/2013 3:46:40 PM (Active 2330 days ago)
chanberg      Registration Date:4/21/2013 4:44:42 AM (Active 1465 days ago)
Micky25         Registration Date:4/28/2013 9:10:59 AM (Active 1125 days ago)
Bakal          Registration Date:5/17/2013 1:19:14 PM (Active 1504 days ago)
shade13         Registration Date:7/3/2013 2:06:50 AM (Active 2999 days ago)
DyslexicZombei      Registration Date:7/25/2013 8:04:18 PM (Active 1636 days ago)
nagysifa      Registration Date:4/30/2014 6:22:18 PM (Active 1481 days ago)
ZypheronBits      Registration Date:10/31/2014 6:51:42 PM (Active 2385 days ago)
bittrojan      Registration Date:9/4/2015 2:42:49 AM (Active 1570 days ago)
Frank Lefty Rosenthal   Registration Date:12/17/2016 12:03:52 PM (Active 1227 days ago)


These users are either bumped to DT2 by Dabs but they do not give Dabs trust feedback (of any kind)

gudmunsn      Registration Date:4/22/2013 9:33:25 PM (Active 2508 days ago)
gloryninja      Registration Date:9/3/2013 11:19:01 PM (Active 1587 days ago)
bitclever      Registration Date:3/26/2015 6:20:16 AM (Active 2161 days ago)
eldrin         Registration Date:7/15/2017 12:21:16 PM (Active 1142 days ago)
funnychain      Registration Date:9/2/2018 12:52:46 PM (Active 1098 days ago)

(note red denotes banned)

note also - at no point do I consider any of the above to be alts.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

He trusts these people because he did business with them and not because they have an accurate or meaningful feedback history. That's the problem. I added these users to my exclusion list, but they are still on DT (0) anyway. Need 1 more vote.

Yeah, that is where the problem is here.  Members can certainly use the trust system any way they like, but Theymos did give the forum some guidelines a couple of years back.  It's been mentioned already, but inclusions ought to be reserved for members whose feedbacks you think are accurate, not for members you'd trust with your money.  The latter would warrant a green trust--but then there's the obvious problem if you're a DT member; you can't just give out green trust willy-nilly and certainly not for small trades or trades where your money/assets weren't at risk of being stolen.

Dabs is an old-timer here, so I'm inclined to give him some slack except that if he's on DT1 and has created some DT2 members who might not deserve that honor, that's a problem that ought to be discussed here and with him contributing.

[LoyceV]

Members can certainly use the trust system any way they like, but Theymos did give the forum some guidelines a couple of years back.

Note that theymos still has Dabs on his Trust list.