The whole reputation system is pure garbage

[Latviand]

~

Logically, when the police arrest someone, they must be accompanied by strong evidence, not based on wanting to show that authority is in their hands or the rank that is on their shoulders. DT members don't have any arrogance or personal grudges when sticking someone's butt with red paint, they work according to the rules that apply in the forum.

Really? All the police have an evidence first before arresting someone? Wow, so the cases of planted evidence isn't real? That analogy isn't really helpful if you're defending or on the side of the DT members because it implies that they can give someone red trust with impunity.

~

I'm not talking about removing feedbacks left by inactive members, most of it remain to be legit and valid. But there is some cases feedbacks become wrong. Let's say user receive negative trust for not returning loan. And after some time user who left him feedback dies or simply become inactive. User repays loan, but he still can't get rid of red trust. Offcourse, it would be wrong to remove all feedbacks left by inactive member or remove him from DT because all other his feebacks remains legit. For now such issue doesn't happens often, but eventually it will become more frequent.

You literally have the word "removed" in the reply that I've quoted, what do you mean you're not talking about removing feedbacks from inactive members. Loan defaulting is another case though, I think that there's should never be a removal even if they've paid their defaulted loan, maybe just changing it to neutral to indicate that this person has defaulted a loan but have paid it eventually. Even if it's not removed, pretty sure other DT members can step in to leave a neutral trust so as to help them clarify the information about why there's still a red trust.

[GazetaBitcoin]

What baffles me the most from this ridiculous topic is this part:

Its sad to see that my account is filled with red trsust from these scammers and their ass lickers like foxup,suchmoon (which i also consider a big scammer who stole mining equipment)

I highly doubt that either suchmoon or Foxpup ever stole anything from you.

[LTU_btc]

You literally have the word "removed" in the reply that I've quoted, what do you mean you're not talking about removing feedbacks from inactive members. Loan defaulting is another case though, I think that there's should never be a removal even if they've paid their defaulted loan, maybe just changing it to neutral to indicate that this person has defaulted a loan but have paid it eventually. Even if it's not removed, pretty sure other DT members can step in to leave a neutral trust so as to help them clarify the information about why there's still a red trust.

I haven't said anywhere that feedback left by inactive members should be removed. I just said that in some cases such outdated feedbacks  might be bigger or smaller issue.
I agree with your point about defaulted loans which were paid later that at least neutral feedback should remain for future reference.

[chigo]

[]

This repuation system is pure garbage killing honest accounts and supporting scammers gaining trust to scam other people.

friends, what contributions have you made to the forum so that you say that they are frauds while you are an honest person?

if in real life we had a court that punished bad people then the reputation system in this forum is a brilliant idea, it locks you to perform actions that are strictly prohibited in the forum so you no longer earn anything.

[avp2306]

You literally have the word "removed" in the reply that I've quoted, what do you mean you're not talking about removing feedbacks from inactive members. Loan defaulting is another case though, I think that there's should never be a removal even if they've paid their defaulted loan, maybe just changing it to neutral to indicate that this person has defaulted a loan but have paid it eventually. Even if it's not removed, pretty sure other DT members can step in to leave a neutral trust so as to help them clarify the information about why there's still a red trust.

I haven't said anywhere that feedback left by inactive members should be removed. I just said that in some cases such outdated feedbacks  might be bigger or smaller issue.
I agree with your point about defaulted loans which were paid later that at least neutral feedback should remain for future reference.

Not really good to make this happen even if this was been suggested to anyone especially with heavy cased where the person create huge scams. For minor cases maybe its good to look at it but much better to leave those things exist since sometimes other users will look at it as their indicator to do better job so that they avoid to get the same negative feedback to other user. Maybe best for other active user which have negative feedback is to wait. Since provably the DT status of that user might be taken out due to inactivity.

[jokers10]

Not really good to make this happen even if this was been suggested to anyone especially with heavy cased where the person create huge scams. For minor cases maybe its good to look at it but much better to leave those things exist since sometimes other users will look at it as their indicator to do better job so that they avoid to get the same negative feedback to other user. Maybe best for other active user which have negative feedback is to wait. Since provably the DT status of that user might be taken out due to inactivity.

Only DT1 status is not being approved in case of long inactivity, DT2 status is based on trust of DT1 members and will not be taken away just because of inactivity. DT2 tags are visible by default as well. I'm in DT2 and not in DT1 at the moment, but my tags are visible anyway. So to wait until the one is out of DT1 and then all from DT1 who trust him are also out of DT1 could take too much time. It's better to try to solve a problem with DT member when he's still active on a forum and not to wait the problem will resolve itself.

[holydarkness]

Not really good to make this happen even if this was been suggested to anyone especially with heavy cased where the person create huge scams. For minor cases maybe its good to look at it but much better to leave those things exist since sometimes other users will look at it as their indicator to do better job so that they avoid to get the same negative feedback to other user. Maybe best for other active user which have negative feedback is to wait. Since provably the DT status of that user might be taken out due to inactivity.

Only DT1 status is not being approved in case of long inactivity, DT2 status is based on trust of DT1 members and will not be taken away just because of inactivity. DT2 tags are visible by default as well. I'm in DT2 and not in DT1 at the moment, but my tags are visible anyway. So to wait until the one is out of DT1 and then all from DT1 who trust him are also out of DT1 could take too much time. It's better to try to solve a problem with DT member when he's still active on a forum and not to wait the problem will resolve itself.

A bit semantic, but if I may give further explanation to clarify the statement to avoid any member's confusion, currently DT1 status is "revoked" not because they're active or long inactive, the current DT1 system is constantly reshufled once every month to maintain fairness and its decentralism.

What baffles me the most from this ridiculous topic is this part:

Its sad to see that my account is filled with red trsust from these scammers and their ass lickers like foxup,suchmoon (which i also consider a big scammer who stole mining equipment)

I highly doubt that either suchmoon or Foxpup ever stole anything from you.

[Ackk... I didn't realize you're here, almost lose a chance to reply you and derail a nice thread by bringing some color into it.]

One may argue she stole his dignity. Hmm?

[...] Dimwits like Thule will latch on to anything.

[...]

or perhaps IQ? Hmmm???

[suchmoon]

What baffles me the most from this ridiculous topic is this part:

Its sad to see that my account is filled with red trsust from these scammers and their ass lickers like foxup,suchmoon (which i also consider a big scammer who stole mining equipment)

I highly doubt that either suchmoon or Foxpup ever stole anything from you.

There was some really weird accusation against me a couple of years ago, completely made up. Dimwits like Thule will latch on to anything. For all I know he made it up himself, although the accuser seemed to be more literate so maybe not.

The funny thing is that I actually revised my rating to a neutral basically saying that Thule is a bullshit artist. Apparently he's also colorblind.

[jokers10]

Only DT1 status is not being approved in case of long inactivity, DT2 status is based on trust of DT1 members and will not be taken away just because of inactivity. DT2 tags are visible by default as well. I'm in DT2 and not in DT1 at the moment, but my tags are visible anyway. So to wait until the one is out of DT1 and then all from DT1 who trust him are also out of DT1 could take too much time. It's better to try to solve a problem with DT member when he's still active on a forum and not to wait the problem will resolve itself.

A bit semantic, but if I may give further explanation to clarify the statement to avoid any member's confusion, currently DT1 status is "revoked" not because they're active or long inactive, the current DT1 system is constantly reshufled once every month to maintain fairness and its decentralism.

If you'll look through through the first link you mentioned you'll see that if the one hasn't been on the forum for three days and hasn't posted anything for 30 days he will not be eligible to be selected to DT1 list. So it is impossible to stay in DT1 being inactive.

You can be not selected to DT1 for other reasons as well, including that there are usually more than a 100 of eligible for 100 places. But if you are inactive you'll definitely not be selected.

...
I will periodically (maybe every month) be reconstructing the default trust list to include everyone who matches these criteria:
...
 - You must have been online sometime within the last 3 days.
...
 - You must have posted sometime within the last 30 days.
...

[JollyGood]

It looks as though the OP has had his moment of venting his frustration at the demise of his trust list. He has not logged in again after creating this thread.

If he were to at least post here with a valid debate or argument it would be possible to engage with him but as the feedback cites the OP making death threats amongst other things, is it appropriate for him to even question why he received the negative feedback in the first place?

[holydarkness]

Only DT1 status is not being approved in case of long inactivity, DT2 status is based on trust of DT1 members and will not be taken away just because of inactivity. DT2 tags are visible by default as well. I'm in DT2 and not in DT1 at the moment, but my tags are visible anyway. So to wait until the one is out of DT1 and then all from DT1 who trust him are also out of DT1 could take too much time. It's better to try to solve a problem with DT member when he's still active on a forum and not to wait the problem will resolve itself.

A bit semantic, but if I may give further explanation to clarify the statement to avoid any member's confusion, currently DT1 status is "revoked" not because they're active or long inactive, the current DT1 system is constantly reshufled once every month to maintain fairness and its decentralism.

If you'll look through through the first link you mentioned you'll see that if the one hasn't been on the forum for three days and hasn't posted anything for 30 days he will not be eligible to be selected to DT1 list. So it is impossible to stay in DT1 being inactive.

You can be not selected to DT1 for other reasons as well, including that there are usually more than a 100 of eligible for 100 places. But if you are inactive you'll definitely not be selected.

...
I will periodically (maybe every month) be reconstructing the default trust list to include everyone who matches these criteria:
...
 - You must have been online sometime within the last 3 days.
...
 - You must have posted sometime within the last 30 days.
...

Ahh, mea culpa. I read the thread months ago and was too focused on the merit requirement from members who trusted you for voting eligibility that I forgot the part about active-time requirement.

[Aanuoluwatofunmi]

So my account basicly got destroyed by old DT members like Lauda,Yogg,TMAN,VOD etc and many asslickers who wanted to benefit by licking their asses.

You don't have to engage in using weird words so harsh on them because that doesn't change anything on what has already transpired between you and them that led to the tag they lety on you

So after 3 years later majority of them are gone with big scam accusations.

This should mean alot to you in understanding that no one is above the law even Satoshi Nakamoto himself if he's active on the forum he has created, some of these guys you mentioned had one or two different issues that brings about their leaving and not all were banned or scammed people.

 

Its sad to see that my account is filled with red trsust from these scammers and their ass lickers like foxup,suchmoon (which i also consider a big scammer who stole mining equipment) and many others and people who are the biggest scammers had and still have control over bitcointalk.

Have you ever try make a move to present your own accusation on them having cognite evidence to back it up, just don't be envious for being tagged by those who have a clear evidence on you and you have nothing to show as against them.
 

This repuation system is pure garbage killing honest accounts and supporting scammers gaining trust to scam other people.

And you're part of those scammers they are always hunting after to take as prey and feast their teeth with your sauce meal after being caught.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Logically, when the police arrest someone, they must be accompanied by strong evidence, not based on wanting to show that authority is in their hands or the rank that is on their shoulders. DT members don't have any arrogance or personal grudges when sticking someone's butt with red paint, they work according to the rules that apply in the forum.

Really? All the police have an evidence first before arresting someone? Wow, so the cases of planted evidence isn't real? That analogy isn't really helpful if you're defending or on the side of the DT members because it implies that they can give someone red trust with impunity.

Have to agree with you on that one, on both counts; cops often make arrests based on flimsy evidence and then expect the situation to resolve itself in the court system--and that's a huge pain in the ass for the defendant.

And when talking about DT members....they haven't always acted in good faith, although some of the worst examples of that are either gone from the forum or are no longer on DT.  That's one big difference between cops and DT members; the latter will lose their position if they make too many bad judgements, whereas police officers rarely get fired unless they mess up in a very serious and very public way (like wrongful shootings and such).

Anyhow, I've already said my piece here.  I just came across Latviand's post while reviewing his history and wanted to reply.

[Timelord2067]

Have to agree with you on that one, on both counts; cops often make arrests based on flimsy evidence and then expect the situation to resolve itself in the court system--and that's a huge pain in the ass for the defendant.

And when talking about DT members....they haven't always acted in good faith, although some of the worst examples of that are either gone from the forum or are no longer on DT.  That's one big difference between cops and DT members; the latter will lose their position if they make too many bad judgements, whereas police officers rarely get fired unless they mess up in a very serious and very public way (like wrongful shootings and such).

Anyhow, I've already said my piece here.  I just came across Latviand's post while reviewing his history and wanted to reply.

Glass houses:

CaRLoSXXX

2016-02-14

Reference

Abusing trust system. I called him out on his worthless collateral and he did not like it. So here's something else for you not to like.

Ninjahitoko

2016-01-25

Spamming negative trust. I've never dealt with this guy except to call his bullshit on a thread he started where he was trying to disguise his negative trust. Fucking cocksucker.

direct.btc

2015-11-24

Total fucking scammer. PM'ed me some silly method of stealing btc from blockchain.info, but it's likely just a way to get malware onto my (and everyone else's) phone. Never had contact with this user before.

idyu

2016-01-23

Reference

Immature little scam bitch, and there is plenty of evidence for this (see reference link). I suggest using EXTREME caution if you choose to deal with this asshole at all. His posts are also usually garbage and he's one for the ignore list.

Armandoreyna12

2017-06-01

Unsolicited PMs about shit I don't want. Go away.

zxctrecaaa

2016-12-08

Reference

Go scam in Zimbabwe, motherfucker.

sheffters

2016-10-16

I have never had dealings with you, and your feedback is a huge lie that you made up. It makes you look like the scammer, dude.

DrahogErusiel

2016-08-22

I had removed my negative trust, even though this user didn't provide proof of getting hacked. He badgered me to remove my feedback in pm's and in the thread where he claimed he was hacked, then he keeps his neg on my trust page. That is truly untrustworthy.

Justin00

2016-06-07

Hacked sold whatever. Do not deal with.

Quickseller

2016-06-07

Escrow scammer with multiple alts, faulty thinking skills, and a host of other negative attributes. Avoid like the bubonic plague.

Candystripes

2016-06-06

Untrusted user. Do not deal with.

ship66

2018-01-19

Lazy one-line shitposter. Cancer to bitcointalk.

ArdiPrabowo

2018-01-19

No-English shitposter.

peterko

2018-01-14

Zero value shitposter.

There are seemingly dozens if not hundreds without any reference or just name calling with a negative trust feedback.

These are no different - just personal opinions:



Report "shit posts" to the moderators.


While I don't agree with the OP's methods, some of those throwing stones in glass houses might want to read this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5394559.msg62401411#msg62401411

and this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5394559.msg62431105#msg62431105


I challenge you to bring your trust feedback left for others down from it's current 3000+ to something more realistic such as say not more than 500 (preferably less than 400 as I have done) that only include a reference link with explanation because quite frankly your trust feedback fit this description:

And when talking about DT members....they haven't always acted in good faith

[actmyname]

This repuation system is pure garbage killing honest accounts and supporting scammers gaining trust to scam other people.

I hope you manage to get over your past relationships one day. </3

I challenge you to bring your trust feedback left for others down from it's current 3000+ to something more realistic such as say not more than 500 (preferably less than 400 as I have done) that only include a reference link with explanation because quite frankly your trust feedback fit this description:

And when talking about DT members....they haven't always acted in good faith

I'd prefer more feedback than less, especially with cycling DT members. You can choose to provide greater weight to your own feedback but that would only be known to those that either frequent your feedback or know your sentiment thereof.

[Timelord2067]

Rest assured I only culled those that are well and truly covered by others as I outlined in previous posts.

These are my latest two to receive trust feedback (negative) from me:

2 Accounts Connected: (Note: Banned shown in red / Inactive in Blue / Active profile (in ordinary link colour))

P2Pfinder, HedgeFX,

Proof:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5394559.msg62537818#msg62537818

Ban Evasion: HedgeFx u=2221175 is the alt of banned user P2Pfinder u=1047338 through their shared use of the email hedgefx@tuta.io and identical "HedgeFX Trading & Investments" thread to scam others with ponzi like offers.

[Sexylizzy2813]

OP from what you dropped I feel you're angry about something you are not letting us know, I find it hard to believe that high ranked members who are keeping a better reputation in this forum would support something bad in this forum or encourage scammers to go on with their evil act. I mean, is that even happening?
I don't know about you but if you feel the reputation system is deliberately killing good account like you said, why not make a report or give us prove than dropping blank accusations. I really don't know where this is going but OP is better you fight for something than fighting for nothing, if something is not cool with you say it and defend all you saying.

[JollyGood]

The OP created this thread on 12th June 2023 and was last active on 28th June 2023. If he is not interested in posting here with responses why are members continuing to post here? It seems the thread was created to vent frustration at having negative trust on his Thule account therefore it would be a consideration for a moderator to lock the thread as it really does serve zero purpose.

[Timelord2067]

There are numerous other threads by the OP and others of the same ilk - they usually fizzle out fairly quickly with both the OP and their intended targets loosing interest until they find a new shiny topic to berate.

Rinse and repeat.

Sad really.

[Dunamisx]

OP from what you dropped I feel you're angry about something you are not letting us know, I find it hard to believe that high ranked members who are keeping a better reputation in this forum would support something bad in this forum or encourage scammers to go on with their evil act. I mean, is that even happening?

We cannot have people on the same page and to reasons the same way, but the worst that could happen to someone on the forum is not to be able to control their personal characters together with emotions on this forum, at least we should know how to behave when it comes to dealing with the public in an open platform like this, everyone will appear base on how his true identity is in life while on this forum.

I don't know about you but if you feel the reputation system is deliberately killing good account like you said, why not make a report or give us prove than dropping blank accusations. I really don't know where this is going but OP is better you fight for something than fighting for nothing, if something is not cool with you say it and defend all you saying.

The reputation board is open for everyone to express themselves and not meant for some set of people only, you can bring your personal feelings on what is being observed wrong about someone or something, this is to create fair and free justification for all members while on this forum in other to avoid scam, troll, abuse on personal right and for those involved in illegal activities or trying to abuse the power vested on them, the law of karma will soon visit them and vindicate the oppressed.