Shouldn't inactive DT members be removed?

[Mrbluntzy]

To my knowledge, DT members are elected based on trust and reputation they have build on the forum, some of them might not be active again but they have contributed positively to the forum and they have also made fair judgements and left fair tags to some accounts which in deserving, despite not being active again, the way to reward their kind work on the forum is not by removing them from DT, instead of removing, other DTs should be added. It's just my opinion.

[Btcdeybodi]

I understand the DT system to work with trust and reputation of a user in the forum that makes other DT members to include them in their trust list and even though some users earn trust due to the assessment of their past behaviors to their present but i think that an inactive DT member should be removed because if a member can stay out of the forum for over 5 years, what will be the probability that they will come back to the forum someday and still maintain same level of reputation that got them trust from some DT members?

First question i have here why care about the Default Trust System all even you dont have a personal trust list of yourself or have given any Feedback about an User.
Is there maybe some Alt Accounts that negativ effect it from there Feedbacks and stuff ?
It really depends on your one Trust Settings and how are handle the Default Trust Settings , You are your own blacksmith here.
Why you care about that even you dont have some experience with that , maybe if you read some things about it you will understand it , if that Account is not Alt Account.

I do not know much about the trust system but the reason why am not interested in adding any member to my trust list is because i haven't built enough reputation yet, when i do i will add users that i trust.

What actually led me to create this thread was because a saw a staff being given a negative feedback by a member who is no longer active in the forum for about 5 years. I saw that Lauda gave EFS a negative feedback and looking at the profile of Lauda he has many negative feedbacks up to 5 which should have even been enough to remove him as a DT member.

[Asiska02]

I thought that the DT1 members are being elected by the members in the DT (both DT1 and DT2). If the DT1 are being selected by Theymos, what are the criteria?. I have come across cases in the reputation board where a DT member is accused of manipulating the DT elections. So how does the election works?

DT1 members are not elected from members in DT1 and DT2, Theymos does the selection by himself and he periodically changes that and update the list from time to time. You can check this link on the criteria he uses to select DT1 members and also, this link will give you the list of members currently in DT1 list.
 
I don’t know or even think that elections are being conducted to elect a DT1 member but when users abuse the DT system, they can bring up discussion about it in the reputation but I think Theymos still have the final say to what will happen to such user even when found guilty. Hence why updating the DT1 list periodically.

[Joy- maker]

Judging from what reputable members who fully understood how the DT system works have said so far I came to understand that if those inactive DT members are removed from DT automatically the feedbacks they gave to other users both positive and negative will not long be in existing if am not mistaking, so in that case I will say that since the inactive DT members feedbacks are accurate and relevant they shouldn't be removed from DT, they should remain DT members, since their feedbacks both positive and negative will not long be existing if they are been removed from DT. And we should always remember that some of the feedbacks those inactive DT members gave are relevant and accurate wether positive or negative feedbacks, so those feedbacks has to be there, because they're reasons for those feedbacks to be in existence.

[Findingnemo]

I do not know much about the trust system but the reason why am not interested in adding any member to my trust list is because i haven't built enough reputation yet, when i do i will add users that i trust.

That is not how it is supposed to work, as I said you should add users if you trust their judgements are accurate and that's what theymos suggested too. quoting the post here

Also, it's best to make your own custom list, and you must do this if you want to be on DT1.

Also you can learn more about that in detail with LoyceV's Beginners guide to correct use of the Trust system

What actually led me to create this thread was because a saw a staff being given a negative feedback by a member who is no longer active in the forum for about 5 years. I saw that Lauda gave EFS a negative feedback and looking at the profile of Lauda he has many negative feedbacks up to 5 which should have even been enough to remove him as a DT member.

You need to dig a lot deeper to know the legacy of Lauda and (her) contribution to Bitcointalk in many ways. At one point, with the most number of posts, and even now, with probably the most number of feedbacks left, the list goes on. So, don't come to any conclusions without knowing the full story.

DT always comes with a lot of drama and not everyone has to agree with their ratings which is why the solution offered by the system is very simple all you need to do is just use ~ and that's it.

[KingsDen]

...for those who made it clear they won't return to the forum again, what is the essence of still leaving them in the DT? besides, the positive trust feedback from other DT members should be enough.

It's unfortunate that you are seeing it from only one angle, which is the angle of positive trust.
Try to be holistic and rational here; take for a example, a certain scammer is discovered and tagged by a DT member in 2018, and down to 2025, you exclude the DT member that tagged the scammer due to inactive, don't you think the scammer will simply return to the forum to scam?

As others said above, inactivity doesn't render feedback useless whether positive or negative.

[EFS]

Inactive members shouldn't be on DT. Their trust feedback is still visible in the system, which can sometimes be useful. However, ensuring that all members on DT network are active is also a responsibility shared by all DT members. The problem is that only a few people take DT seriously anymore.

What actually led me to create this thread was because a saw a staff being given a negative feedback by a member who is no longer active in the forum for about 5 years.

That banned troll has dozens of fake trust feedbacks and this is just one of them. If you read the reference, you'll see that has nothing to do with me. He was kicked out of DT1 but still remains in DT2. The surprising part is that people still trust him. The fact that someone has given hundreds of correct trust feedbacks doesn't justify them giving dozens of wrong ones either.

Try to be holistic and rational here; take for a example, a certain scammer is discovered and tagged by a DT member in 2018, and down to 2025, you exclude the DT member that tagged the scammer due to inactive, don't you think the scammer will simply return to the forum to scam?

When someone leaves DT their feedback doesn't disappear. It still remains there. To form an opinion about a member, you should look at all trust feedback, not just DT ones. If someone attempts such a scam years later, it will be noticed quickly and other active DT members can also tag that scammer.

[nutildah]

That banned troll has dozens of fake trust feedbacks and this is just one of them. If you read the reference, you'll see that has nothing to do with me. He was kicked out of DT1 but still remains in DT2. The surprising part is that people still trust him. The fact that someone has given hundreds of correct trust feedbacks doesn't justify them giving dozens of wrong ones either.

In general, I don't think Lauda should be on DT2, and yeah I don't agree with their negative feedback on your account. The neutral left by Stunna (another inactive account on DT2), however, seems to suggest you are ban evading as Karartma1 is banned. Also the negative trust on goraset (apparently also your alt account) is warranted. But seeing as how the evidence is 10 years old and off-forum it shouldn't really be the basis for any actions now, IMHO.

[EFS]

In general, I don't think Lauda should be on DT2, and yeah I don't agree with their negative feedback on your account. The neutral left by Stunna (another inactive account on DT2), however, seems to suggest you are ban evading as Karartma1 is banned. Also the negative trust on goraset (apparently also your alt account) is warranted. But seeing as how the evidence is 10 years old and off-forum it shouldn't really be the basis for any actions now, IMHO.

Neither Karartma1 nor goraset are my accounts. As far as I remember, Karartma1 account was banned after a Turkish user sold it to a foreigner. Goraset account belongs to someone else that can also be verified by old Turkish members who know him in real life (such as gospodin, Bthd or Lachrymose who left him trust feedbacks).

As far as I remember, at that time the thread was opened as a result of someone who wanted to be a moderator on the forum giving misleading information to Stunna. If you've read the thread, you've already seen it. While the internet is full of Stake scam accusations, how trustworthy Stunna's word is also debatable. Sorry for off-topic reply but in the end this was another example of why DT members should be active in the forum.

[AB de Royse777]

Inactive doesn't make their feedback inaccurate, so inactive users being in DT is still relevant.

People changes, a DT feedback from 5 years ago can become invalid overtime and it may require to chance. If the user is not active then that invalid feedback stays which does not show the true use of DT.

[SmartGold01]

Why should they be removed from DT?
DT doesn't have anything to do with active or inactive, on norm I could have several trades with many people over here and decided to leave my feedback to them and I happened to be inactive for about 2-3 years, so in this I should be removed from the DT system? Is there any violation for someone who is not active and is using the system correctly why s/he will get removed from DT system because of inactive.

As a matter of fact DT doesn't have any regular activity to work on, unlike mods that are being active moderating the forum and filtering out good and bad post from the entire system. That was why those inactive mods was removed by theymos and assigned new mods just to make forum remain functional, same thing goes to those old MS they were removed and assigned new people who are that active to distribute Merits.

[alani123]

So long as no one is more trusted than them, why?

It's just a digital list. It doesn't guarantee you're trusted. In fact, s DT member could also wrong you.
The recent actions of someone matter much more and any experienced forum member should have enough experience to DYOR around that.

[Pablo-wood]

I understand the DT system to work with trust and reputation of a user in the forum that makes other DT members to include them in their trust list and even though some users earn trust due to the assessment of their past behaviors to their present but i think that an inactive DT member should be removed because if a member can stay out of the forum for over 5 years, what will be the probability that they will come back to the forum someday and still maintain same level of reputation that got them trust from some DT members? Perhaps, for those who made it clear they won't return to the forum again, what is the essence of still leaving them in the DT? besides, the positive trust feedback from other DT members should be enough.

Why don't we wait till their reputation is tarnished before vetting judgement. Besides it wasn't their activeness that earned them the trust from other DT members so being active or inactive doesn't mean anything as long as they maintain their clean reputation whenever they choose to become active again and the nature of their activities and post remains consistent with what it has always been before they left leaving us with no doubt about the identity behind the account.

[Doan9269]

i think that an inactive DT member should be removed because if a member can stay out of the forum for over 5 years, what will be the probability that they will come back to the forum someday and still maintain same level of reputation that got them trust from some DT members?

They cant be removed, just like one day you may also be one of them and have some reasons to be off the forum, either to come back or not, should everything left on you be rendered useless?

Perhaps, for those who made it clear they won't return to the forum again, what is the essence of still leaving them in the DT? besides, the positive trust feedback from other DT members should be enough.

I DT member returns or not should not be our priority, he have his own personal reason for going off the forum and being inactive, if he comes back dine, if he does not, it still change nothing from the ratings or review made by him, once he has a good and clean purpose, then the judgement made will always be relevant whether he is here or not, take for instance Leo, who left and should we say because of this, his reviews are no more valid or accurate?

[The Cryptovator]

I understand the DT system to work with trust and reputation of a user in the forum that makes other DT members to include them in their trust list and even though some users earn trust due to the assessment of their past behaviors to their present but i think that an inactive DT member should be removed because if a member can stay out of the forum for over 5 years, what will be the probability that they will come back to the forum someday and still maintain same level of reputation that got them trust from some DT members? Perhaps, for those who made it clear they won't return to the forum again, what is the essence of still leaving them in the DT? besides, the positive trust feedback from other DT members should be enough.

I don't know why this idea came to your mind, if removed them from DT does there will be any significant change to the forum other than lost the left feedback from them by default? Once upon a time they were active and contributed to the forum, and they gained enough trust; hence, they got into DT. So their feedback has a value; inactive doesn't prove their feedback wrong anyway. I am talking about DT2 since DT1 was selected by the new system, and inactive members won't be longer in DT1.

Positive feedback to the inactive DT members is not worth it when a person is inactive. Because he isn't going to trade with someone unless he becomes active once again. Trust me, I don't get the point of your post; it really doesn't make sense at all.

[Findingnemo]

Inactive doesn't make their feedback inaccurate, so inactive users being in DT is still relevant.

People changes, a DT feedback from 5 years ago can become invalid overtime and it may require to chance. If the user is not active then that invalid feedback stays which does not show the true use of DT.

On rare cases, yes the few feedbacks left on users can be no longer valid that goes for both positive and negative but since the system works on decentralized model the only way is to remove them from the DT which makes all their valid feedback to go away too and it is in the hands of DT1 members and who they chose to add into their trust list. In short, decentralization comes with imperfections, but those imperfections are far better than the risks.

Or else theymos can remove the feedback selectively which is no longer valid but that makes the system centralized and users need to be dependent on the judgment of admin.

[KingsDen]

Try to be holistic and rational here; take for a example, a certain scammer is discovered and tagged by a DT member in 2018, and down to 2025, you exclude the DT member that tagged the scammer due to inactive, don't you think the scammer will simply return to the forum to scam?

When someone leaves DT their feedback doesn't disappear. It still remains there. To form an opinion about a member, you should look at all trust feedback, not just DT ones. If someone attempts such a scam years later, it will be noticed quickly and other active DT members can also tag that scammer.

That is how it is supposed to be, but in reality, it doesn't play out that way. This is because users who are not in DT are always reluctant to leave feedback since their feedback won't be visible for the meantime. The majority of them that tries to do so do it as a form of retaliation which isn't always correct. This is the reason non DT feedbacks are becoming almost irrelevant in the forum.

[SuperBitMan]

If the DT member is inactive for 3 to 5 years it means the DT member is no longer interested in the forum or something has happened to him or her that has made them inactive so for me if a DT member has been inactive for that long he should just remain for more time since removing them won't change anything since there tag to some set of people are still very relevant and since adding more DT is not impossible they can add more DT members that are more active in the forum, however it's left for theymos to decide if removing inactive members is the best option or leaving them and adding more active DT members.
And again let's not forget that chosing a DT member is not like merit source, a DT member most be a reputable member in the forum and someone who's contribution and finding is always correct, so for me those inactive members should remain let them add more active DT members.