Bitcointalk Trusted Feedback and Untrusted Feedback Difference?

[JustBeKause]

Is there a thread, or quotes from reputable members, that already exists with some information about the key differences between trusted feedback and untrusted feedback? I couldn’t find one using the search.

Obviously the major difference between the two is that trusted feedback is from default trust members, or members in your trust list (i think?) and untrusted feedback is from members who are not on default trust, or not in your trust list (i think?).

I get that part.

I'm more interested in discussion/existing posts or quotes that already exist describing:

-which one has more 'merit' or 'weight' and why?
-why a popular forum investigator/scam buster would have loads of red-tags in untrusted feedback?
-when is untrusted feedback 'better' or 'not better' to reference compared to trusted feedback?

Why, you ask? Just because, I'm curious .

Discussion in this thread about the difference and importance distinguishing the two, is also much appreciated.

[TokenTikas]

The main difference between trusted and untrusted feedback, from my own understanding, is this.

Trusted: This is for someone who has built a good reputation on the forum over time, handled deals properly and shown positive activities in different areas of the forum. People can confidently trust such a person because of their good record and behaviour.

Untrusted: This is the opposite of trusted feedback. It usually means the person has a bad reputation, scam records, involvement in shady activities, or was caught doing things like account farming or merit farming. Because of these issues, they received untrusted feedback.

Is there a thread, or quotes from reputable members, that already exists with some information about the key differences between trusted feedback and untrusted feedback? I couldn’t find one using the search.

There are many reliable and well-explained discussions about trusted and untrusted people and I’m sharing some links with you for better understanding. I believe if you check those previous posts, your understanding about trusted and untrusted feedback will become much clearer and stronger.

Read/Follow These Post:
Trust flags
DefaultTrust changes
Marketplace trust
Complete overview of users on DT1 and DT2 and their ratings/Trust list!
[GUIDE] Overview of the trust flags
LoyceV's Beginners guide to correct use of the Trust system

Obviously the major difference between the two is that trusted feedback is from default trust members, or members in your trust list (i think?) and untrusted feedback is from members who are not on default trust, or not in your trust list (i think?).

Let me clear one more thing here. Being on the Default Trust list does not automatically mean someone is trusted, not being on the trust list does not automatically mean someone is untrusted.

A person on the trust list can still be considered untrusted if their username has the (~) mark in front of it on someone’s trust settings. So, both trusted and untrusted people can appear on the trust list, but in different ways.

People who are not on the trust list today may still get there later through their activities, whether good or bad. In simple terms, if someone earns a place on the trust list because of positive actions, it will lead to positive feedback. But if they get noticed for bad activities, then it will result in negative feedback.

-which one has more 'merit' or 'weight' and why?

Of course, positive feedback carries more value because it reflects a person’s good activities and behaviour. When someone has positive feedback, it clearly shows that the person has built a good reputation on the forum and can be trusted by other members.

-why a popular forum investigator/scam buster would have loads of red-tags in untrusted feedback?

An investigator or scam fighter is expected to have good feedback, so I honestly don’t understand why you mentioned red tags here. Normally, a scam buster will not have many red tags in untrusted feedback because their activities are usually focused on exposing scammers and protecting the forum.

-when is untrusted feedback 'better' or 'not better' to reference compared to trusted feedback?

Compared to trusted feedback, accounts with untrusted feedback do not look good at all. I believe you can already understand the reason from the previous detailed discussions, because untrusted feedback usually creates doubt about a person’s reputation and activities on the forum.
At Last:
Maybe other respected and experienced members can explain it better than me, but I shared it based on what I personally understand and what makes sense to me. I hope you will understand my point clearly. Thank you

[Upgrade00]

Obviously the major difference between the two is that trusted feedback is from default trust members, or members in your trust list (i think?) and untrusted feedback is from members who are not on default trust, or not in your trust list (i think?).

You are correct, trusted feedback is from those in DT, or in your trust list or from people trusted by users in your trust list. Untrusted feedback is from anyone else on the forum.
Note that if you have a custom trust list the feedbacks you see is very likely different from how it appears for others.

-which one has more 'merit' or 'weight' and why?
-why a popular forum investigator/scam buster would have loads of red-tags in untrusted feedback?
-when is untrusted feedback 'better' or 'not better' to reference compared to trusted feedback?

• YOUR trusted feedback has more weight to YOU. It's what shows up to you as the trust rating of the user when you view their profile
Why? Cause they are from people whose judgement you trust, so it carries more weight.

Untrusted feedback is not shown to you as much as possible, except you click to view them

• They are mostly retaliatory from those who were hurt their scam got busted and thought they could get revenge. The more you use the trust system and give your opinion on people the more likely you're to get those retaliatory tags.
If they have a reference you should still check some of them out, being a scam buster doesn't automatically make one trustworthy.

• It's never better or not better, it's just what it is, untrusted. If you view them and check the reference to find out the feedback is very valid, you should follow it, and apply it when trading with the user the feedback was left on. You should also keep an eye on the person who left the feedback, you may consider adding them to your trust list at some point if they keep giving accurate feedback.

[hosemary]

Trusted: This is for someone who has built a good reputation on the forum over time, handled deals properly and shown positive activities in different areas of the forum. People can confidently trust such a person because of their good record and behaviour.

This is completely wrong.
Being a reputable member of the forum doesn't necessarily mean the community trust your judgements too. It's possible that someone has many positive trust scores, but their feedback comments are displayed as untrusted by default.

[TokenTikas]

This is completely wrong.
Being a reputable member of the forum doesn't necessarily mean the community trust your judgements too. It's possible that someone has many positive trust scores, but their feedback comments are displayed as untrusted by default.

Understand now. Whether the community trusts it or not, it still points more towards credibility and that’s mainly why I mentioned it. But naturally, you know better than me on this matter. My understanding can also be wrong sometimes. Still, I appreciate the way you pointed it out and tried to correct the issue respectfully.

And maybe you also noticed the last part of my previous post:

At Last:
Maybe other respected and experienced members can explain it better than me, but I shared it based on what I personally understand and what makes sense to me. I hope you will understand my point clearly. Thank you

[JustBeKause]

Untrusted feedback is not shown to you as much as possible, except you click to view them

• They are mostly retaliatory from those who were hurt their scam got busted and thought they could get revenge. The more you use the trust system and give your opinion on people the more likely you're to get those retaliatory tags.
If they have a reference you should still check some of them out, being a scam buster doesn't automatically make one trustworthy.

Thank you, Upgrade. This is kinda what I was getting at. Also, thanks to others that have given insight.

Just one more question. Let's assume we are looking at this scenario from the view of someone who has no custom trust list:

Let's say a forum user (A) is calling out another forum user (B), and they say things along the lines of:
-you can't trust this person for x y z
-this person is likely to scam because of x y z
-this user is a liar because of x y z

Then, other forum members ask (A):
-What evidence do you have for your claims on (B)?

Then, forum member (A) says:
-"Well, look at forum member (B)'s untrusted feedback! It's full of red-tags! Pages of 'em."

If that is something forum member (A) is bringing to the table, and forum member (B)'s untrusted feed back is full of blatantly obvious retaliatory feedback from scammers, disgruntled newbies, etc, then:
-Is forum member (A) utilizing discourse honestly?
-Is forum member (A), knowing that untrusted feedback can be retaliatory, wrong for bringing that to the table?
-Why is forum member (A) a big fat dumb dumb?

________________________________________________

^ the above situation happens more times than most people and newbies think.

Thanks to everyone else who provided insight.

[Upgrade00]

If that is something forum member (A) is bringing to the table, and forum member (B)'s untrusted feed back is full of blatantly obvious retaliatory feedback from scammers, disgruntled newbies, etc, then:
-Is forum member (A) utilizing discourse honestly?
-Is forum member (A), knowing that untrusted feedback can be retaliatory, wrong for bringing that to the table?

Yes, that's dishonest and should be dismissed.
Even if the feedbacks are from trusted networks but have no reference or basis to support the claim, they should be dismissed. If you want to show someone is untrustworthy you should be referencing the situations (scams they did) that led them to have tags and not just the tags themselves.

If the feedbacks are all retaliatory, then yes, it's wrong to being them in as reference in that conversation.

[JustBeKause]

Yes, that's dishonest and should be dismissed.
Even if the feedbacks are from trusted networks but have no reference or basis to support the claim, they should be dismissed. If you want to show someone is untrustworthy you should be referencing the situations (scams they did) that led them to have tags and not just the tags themselves.

If the feedbacks are all retaliatory, then yes, it's wrong to being them in as reference in that conversation.

That's what I thought. Thanks.

If you want to show someone is untrustworthy you should be referencing the situations (scams they did) that led them to have tags and not just the tags themselves.

Speaking of references within a positive/negative tag, I also want the communities take on that. Just because there is a reference in the tag, doesn't make it automatically a legitimate tag or a tag that has any weight to it.

A reference in the tag is better than no reference, but sometimes the reference is garbage, off-topic, or doesn't even support the cllaim being made in the tag, therefore the reference might as well not even be there, or not taken seriously at all.

Correct?

[Mia Chloe]

This is completely wrong.
Being a reputable member of the forum doesn't necessarily mean the community trust your judgements too. It's possible that someone has many positive trust scores, but their feedback comments are displayed as untrusted by default.

I think the whole trust stuff is based on your circle, those who trust you and also distrust you contribute to if your feedback will be seen as either trusted or untrusted. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I recently noticed that most of the feedbacks marked as trusted are often from those that are in DT.

Plus remember to enter DT status you'll need to have a couple trusts from other DT members especially DT1 so I think untrusted feedback probably means not much DT members trust your judgement.

[Upgrade00]

[A reference in the tag is better than no reference, but sometimes the reference is garbage, off-topic, or doesn't even support the cllaim being made in the tag, therefore the reference might as well not even be there, or not taken seriously at all.

Which is why I mentioned referencing the situation and not just the reference that was left. You should not be trusting a feedback simply because ht was sent from DT or has a reference, you should consider the case and reach your own conclusions. Everyone should learn to make their own independent decisions.

[hosemary]

-Why is forum member (A) a big fat dumb dumb?

If you believe the member A doesn't make right judgments, you can exlude them from your trust list. Chances are member A's judgments are distrusted by some DT1 members too and is removed from DT list.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I recently noticed that most of the feedbacks marked as trusted are often from those that are in DT.

That's normal.
A trusted feedback is a feedback that has been posted by someone in your trust network.
If you don't have your custom trust list, trusted feedback comments are those that have been posted by DT members.

so I think untrusted feedback probably means not much DT members trust your judgement.

An untrusted feedback is a feedback that has been posted by someone that is not in your trust network.
If you don't have your custom trust list, untrusted feedback comments are those that have been posted by non-DT members.

[Z_MBFM]

Trusted: This is for someone who has built a good reputation on the forum over time, handled deals properly and shown positive activities in different areas of the forum. People can confidently trust such a person because of their good record and behaviour.

Trust basically means that you have done enough business or work with him and you believe that he is a trustworthy person so you trust him and want to see him in a good position on this forum. And DT is selected based on a user's trust list.So trust and untrust are very important. You can't trust someone without knowing about them.

- Your trust list must include at least 10 users, not including ~distrust entries.
 - You must have at least 10 people directly trusting you each with an earned merit of at least 10, not including merit you yourself sent. These "votes" are limited.
 - You must have at least 2 people directly trusting you with an earned merit of at least 250, not including merit you yourself sent. These "votes" are limited.

Untrusted: This is the opposite of trusted feedback. It usually means the person has a bad reputation, scam records, involvement in shady activities, or was caught doing things like account farming or merit farming. Because of these issues, they received untrusted feedback.

And untrusted means distrust, meaning that if you don't think that user's behavior and activity is trustworthy and you don't want to see that user as DT, then you can put him on your distrust list.

[Mia Chloe]

An untrusted feedback is a feedback that has been posted by someone that is not in your trust network.
If you don't have your custom trust list, untrusted feedback comments are those that have been posted by non-DT members.

Ohhh i see now it all makes sense. I just went and checked my untrusted feedbacks and everyone there are neither in DT nor are they on my trust list. Thanks a lot buddy for the explanation because I've been pretty confused why the number for untrusted fluctuates sometimes.

This pretty much means If I get a feedback from a DT member and he gets dropped from DT his feedback will automatically move from trusted to untrusted.

[hosemary]

Trust basically means that you have done enough business or work with him and you believe that he is a trustworthy person so you trust him and want to see him in a good position on this forum.

No. You should add someone to your trust list, only if you believe the feedback comments they post are accurate and their judgements are good. You shouldn't add someone to your trust list, because you have worked with them.

[rat03gopoh]

Can anyone tell me, do you see any neutral(trusted) feedback on my profile? Because I don't, and it's visible on other members' profiles, while I haven't had any ~members excluded from my trust list.

I remember once getting a potential design client and taking a screenshot of my forum profile here just to confirm on TG (he contacted me there first). I was a bit confused at the time because I had 1 neutral score visible and the only neutral feedback was from a DT2 member. My question is, why did it become untrusted feedback on my end?