Suggestion abt verifying and quoting stake address

[Crypto-DesignService]

Based on trust settings the description of Neutral is Other comments. So I thought maybe it can also be used this way.

For any users that verify staked bitcoin addresses, it would be great if we can also leave neutral feedback right after verifying the address. So if a scenario occurs that needs signing a message there will be another alternative on how to find the updated staked address by going to the user's feedback.

Reference link will be the quoted message that it was verified.
Comment will be the verified staked address

if the user stake a new btc address and a new user verified it, just add 'updated' on the comment.

[1715214288]

1715214288

[1715214288]

1715214288

[1715214288]

1715214288

[1715214288]

1715214288

[Apocollapse]

I think it's not quite important to leave neutral feedback about verified staked address, but there's no anything wrong too.

Actually the staked address doesn't actually the user only control that's address, most users doesn't stake their address, but if they can sign a message from one of his old address, it's fine. Anyone can easily view any user's address from this site https://ninjastic.space/

[Edwardard]

For any users that verify staked bitcoin addresses, it would be great if we can also leave neutral feedback right after verifying the address.

So basically you're saying everyone on the forum needs to have neutral feedback since most of us got our addresses staked. 😁
I doubt that DT members will start doing this. If so, most of their their trust feedbacks will look like spam. Neutral feedbacks got some value as well.

So if a scenario occurs that needs signing a message there will be another alternative on how to find the updated staked address by going to the user's feedback.

Searching them on ninjastic.space doesnt take much time anyway.

[Crypto-DesignService]

So basically you're saying everyone on the forum needs to have neutral feedback since most of us got our addresses staked. 😁

Got your point, I realized it'll just add extra tasks for a little positive value since there are just a few scenarios that require signing a message using staked address.

[Flexystar]

I think current method is already doing what needs to be done. Since it can be verified multiple times by different users by running the signed message, there is no point adding it in the trust feedback.

Last time I suggested about QR code embedding in the profile where user can insert QR for their btc address for ease of payment. It could have served the purpose of Valid Address associated with that account. However, it seems more of unwanted work rather than something fruitful for the forum.

I realised perspective of “USER” and “developer” always has a different logical point of view. Sometimes it makes sense.