Bitcoin Forum
December 14, 2019, 03:46:59 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.19.0.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Poll
Question: Should this system replace DefaultTrust? (Your vote may be published.)  (Voting closed: January 10, 2015, 04:19:13 AM)
Yes, it should. - 38 (47.5%)
No, keep DefaultTrust - 42 (52.5%)
Total Voters: 80

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Replacing DefaultTrust  (Read 15636 times)
Grand_Voyageur
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 322
Merit: 250


https://dadice.com | Click my signature to join!


View Profile WWW
February 05, 2015, 10:54:11 AM
 #301

Theymos, i think this is almost a must if you expect this forum to continue to have any credibility in the future. Regardless of how many alt accounts are used to vote against it. This is about one of the only ways this place will survive with any credibility.

I've said this in another thread, the problem with surveys is people are only willing to accept votes that validate their own opinions as valid - the others are just fakes or shills, right?

I'm not saying that the poll was rigged. But, can you deny that the poll got very short time span to reflect any substantial opinion ? It started on Januray 5, 2015 and ended on January 10, 2015. Only 5 days to take public opinion about whether DefaultTrust is here to stay or not ? Even the YES was leading initially. NO was leading on the last day and the poll was closed !!! I would request theymos to re-open the poll and keep it running for at least a month.

Active people here already expressed their views. If you cannot deal with the fact a majority expressed their preference to keep the actual Trust system instead of expensive and time consuming one which will be no better or at least equal to the actual one, You have no right to cry havoc hinting the admin rigged the pool!

You are putting a word on my mouth which I never stated. Read my post again. If I remember correctly, YES was leading for 4 days. NO led only for a day and the poll was closed. I just wanted time. Never said it was rigged.

Time to grow more sockpuppets to alter poll results and force theymos' hand? You seems to have the most to gain from such an outcome and you seems to already have an habit to create accounts for such purposes.



███████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
█   ⚂⚄⚀⚃⚅⚁    ██  d a d i c e  ██    Next Generation Dice Game
• Low 1% house edge. • Provably Fair.  
███████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
1576338419
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1576338419

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1576338419
Reply with quote  #2

1576338419
Report to moderator
1576338419
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1576338419

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1576338419
Reply with quote  #2

1576338419
Report to moderator
PLAY NOW
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
SpanishSoldier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 434
Merit: 250


View Profile
February 05, 2015, 11:14:23 AM
 #302

Theymos, i think this is almost a must if you expect this forum to continue to have any credibility in the future. Regardless of how many alt accounts are used to vote against it. This is about one of the only ways this place will survive with any credibility.

I've said this in another thread, the problem with surveys is people are only willing to accept votes that validate their own opinions as valid - the others are just fakes or shills, right?

I'm not saying that the poll was rigged. But, can you deny that the poll got very short time span to reflect any substantial opinion ? It started on Januray 5, 2015 and ended on January 10, 2015. Only 5 days to take public opinion about whether DefaultTrust is here to stay or not ? Even the YES was leading initially. NO was leading on the last day and the poll was closed !!! I would request theymos to re-open the poll and keep it running for at least a month.

Active people here already expressed their views. If you cannot deal with the fact a majority expressed their preference to keep the actual Trust system instead of expensive and time consuming one which will be no better or at least equal to the actual one, You have no right to cry havoc hinting the admin rigged the pool!

You are putting a word on my mouth which I never stated. Read my post again. If I remember correctly, YES was leading for 4 days. NO led only for a day and the poll was closed. I just wanted time. Never said it was rigged.

Time to grow more sockpuppets to alter poll results and force theymos' hand? You seems to have the most to gain from such an outcome and you seems to already have an habit to create accounts for such purposes.



Yah... I'm under target of a LOT of people because I got someone removed from DefaulTrust blessing with proper proofs. Read: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=888960.0 ...Moreover, I am not in -ve as you are showing, because the person who left me -ve is not blessed by DefaultTrust. You are seeing it because of your trust settings. You can also create a 100 sock puppet and leave -ve on me... that does not matter unless you have the DefaultTrust blessing. I kicked the hornet's nest and I know there will be some sting. The point here is you could not come up with a logical reply to my point and hence trying make things personal. Shows your depth indeed. Tongue

p.s. Unless you remove your signature, for which you get paid for trolling, do not expect any more reply from me.

  ▃▃▃▂▂▂▂▂▃▃▃▃                                      ▃▃▃▂▂▂▃▃▃                         
   ██████████████████                                        █████████████     ████                 
   ██████████████████                                        █████████████     ████                 
          ████                                               ████                                   
          ████   █████ █████ ████   █████    █████████       ████       ████   ████  ███████████   
          ████   ▀█████████▀ ████   ████    ████   ████      █████████  ████   ████   ████  █████   
          ████    ████▀ ▀▀▀  ████   ████   ████     ████     █████████  ████   ████   ████    ████ 
          ████    ████       ████   ████   █████████████     ████       ████   ████   ████    ████ 
          ████    ████       ███████████▄   ████             ████       ████   ████   ████   █████ 
          ████    ████       █████  ███████  ████  ████      █████      ████   ████   ███████████   
         ▄████▄   ████        ███     ███      ██████        █████      ████   ████   █████████     
                                                                                      ████         
                                                                                      ████         
                                                                             █▀▀   
Blockchain Fair Games
|
Truly one of a kind games:
MAGIC DICE   CHAIN'S CODE   PIRATE BAY
MINING FACTORY      RAPID TO THE MOON
|

400 BTC
★ PRIZE FUND ★
|

WEEKLY GIWEAWAYS
Join our community!
150% BONUS
First-time deposit
VISA  🔴🌕  50+coins

CERTIFIED RNG
100% TRANSPARENT
PROVABLY FAIR
Grand_Voyageur
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 322
Merit: 250


https://dadice.com | Click my signature to join!


View Profile WWW
February 07, 2015, 06:38:36 PM
 #303

Theymos, i think this is almost a must if you expect this forum to continue to have any credibility in the future. Regardless of how many alt accounts are used to vote against it. This is about one of the only ways this place will survive with any credibility.

I've said this in another thread, the problem with surveys is people are only willing to accept votes that validate their own opinions as valid - the others are just fakes or shills, right?

I'm not saying that the poll was rigged. But, can you deny that the poll got very short time span to reflect any substantial opinion ? It started on Januray 5, 2015 and ended on January 10, 2015. Only 5 days to take public opinion about whether DefaultTrust is here to stay or not ? Even the YES was leading initially. NO was leading on the last day and the poll was closed !!! I would request theymos to re-open the poll and keep it running for at least a month.

Active people here already expressed their views. If you cannot deal with the fact a majority expressed their preference to keep the actual Trust system instead of expensive and time consuming one which will be no better or at least equal to the actual one, You have no right to cry havoc hinting the admin rigged the pool!

You are putting a word on my mouth which I never stated. Read my post again. If I remember correctly, YES was leading for 4 days. NO led only for a day and the poll was closed. I just wanted time. Never said it was rigged.

Time to grow more sockpuppets to alter poll results and force theymos' hand? You seems to have the most to gain from such an outcome and you seems to already have an habit to create accounts for such purposes.



Yah... I'm under target of a LOT of people because I got someone removed from DefaulTrust blessing with proper proofs. Read: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=888960.0 ...Moreover, I am not in -ve as you are showing, because the person who left me -ve is not blessed by DefaultTrust. You are seeing it because of your trust settings. You can also create a 100 sock puppet and leave -ve on me... that does not matter unless you have the DefaultTrust blessing. I kicked the hornet's nest and I know there will be some sting. The point here is you could not come up with a logical reply to my point and hence trying make things personal. Shows your depth indeed. Tongue

p.s. Unless you remove your signature, for which you get paid for trolling, do not expect any more reply from me.

I agree with users giving -ve trust feedback to Cloud Mining and Ponzi operators and promoters. I'm also not agreeing with your justification of them being biased because some of them may own shares of one cloud miner. If all (or at least enough) Cloud Mining and Ponzi operators and promoters give -ve trust feedback to rival Cloud Mining and Ponzi operators and promoters, since newbies and other users arewill be made aware they should exercise extreme caution when dealing with ALL them. Moreover, I know my trust setting to be appropriate to me since while I use DefaultTrust I also "modified" it with some addition of people their judgement I trust and also some (more than the addition, of course) exclusion of people their judgement I cannot trust (e.g. known scammers, Ponzi operators, etc.).
My reply to you was not to be personal since I have no interest in discreting you; but, instead it was directed to point out the flaw of your idea since such re-opening of theymos' poll can easily be hijacked by trust abusers' sockpuppet accounts to win their desidered outcome. Moreover, since the Poll was aimed to have active forum members opinion of modifing the Trust system people who were committed to forum were able to say their opinion and even discuss it in this thread. Probably at the time you weren't committed enough to catch the Poll time frame; but this is IMHO not a valid reason to ask for the Poll be reopened. It's like someone who on Election Day not having reached the legal age for voting yet and after him/her being old enough to vote asking to have vote recast since he was not able to take part in it.

P.S. Have you got no better idea to prove me wrong than accusing me of trolling only because I have as scores of people here a paid signature? Poor boy....
P.P.S. Oh shit! You will not reply any more to me? What a pity. However, You don't need being worried about my signature advertising since you're going to be added to my Ignore list soon.

███████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
█   ⚂⚄⚀⚃⚅⚁    ██  d a d i c e  ██    Next Generation Dice Game
• Low 1% house edge. • Provably Fair.  
███████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
Raize
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1417
Merit: 1008


View Profile
February 08, 2015, 07:07:08 AM
 #304

I like the idea of a randomized trust list, but seeing my name is on here makes me worried I'd get random people requesting I remove someone because they just got scammed or because one of the people on my list sold their account or something. I'd feel horrible about that.

Additionally, ngzhang is almost universally-hated on here, but I considered him one of the better contributors to the Bitcoin ecosystem, especially early on with his FPGAs, and it was pretty easy for me to see the problem with Avalon's batch 2 trade-ins lay precisely with BitSyncom and NOT xiangfu or ngzhang.

The first thing I did when I found out about the new Trust system was to remove DefaultTrust and just set up my own. I assumed everyone else did the same. Through my trades it added various layers of the "DefaultTrust" back in, but at least then there were clear indications of why it was added.

I think there's two users of the Trust system, people like me, that just have ratings of actual trades done and scammers they have caught themselves and folks that use it to actually point out and filter potential scammers even though they have never traded with them or verified they are bonifide scammers on their own. Maybe the problem is that I'm using it wrong and what we really need is basically just a scammer-detector system like what the other folks are using it for?

OrganofCorti's Neighbourhood Pool Watch - The most informative website on blockchain health
Grand_Voyageur
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 322
Merit: 250


https://dadice.com | Click my signature to join!


View Profile WWW
February 08, 2015, 07:48:57 AM
 #305

The first thing I did when I found out about the new Trust system was to remove DefaultTrust and just set up my own. I assumed everyone else did the same. Through my trades it added various layers of the "DefaultTrust" back in, but at least then there were clear indications of why it was added.

I suppose that when you started doing so, You were already an established member here or at least knowledgeable enough to be able to not needing decentralized trust networks to assist you when dealing with other forum members. I'm not in DefaultTrust but I've realized when i was a junior member that, while useful in giving me a feedback on someone new, I cannot blindy trust it and so I started adding my own exclusion to it by prefixing known scammers, ponzi operators & other people that i cannot trust with a tilde (~) before their usernames. Sometime I also add a few people i trust to my own trust list. I try to do my best to keep my trust list update but I suppose that until I reach Legendary status I cannot have a trust list complete enough to avoid having DefaultTrust included in it.

I think there's two users of the Trust system, people like me, that just have ratings of actual trades done and scammers they have caught themselves and folks that use it to actually point out and filter potential scammers even though they have never traded with them or verified they are bonifide scammers on their own. Maybe the problem is that I'm using it wrong and what we really need is basically just a scammer-detector system like what the other folks are using it for?

I don't think you are wrong, since the two behaviour can co-exist between the same user. Feedbacks can be given both if you were actually scammed or if you STRONGLY believed that the person is a scammer.

Of course you have to base your feedback on evidence you have link in the reference field. If you follow such rules I think your feedback maybe legit and can be verified allowing other members to independently consider if following such advice or not. I think feedback without a reference link should not be given and if they are they should not trusted due to the impossibility to be independently verified by others. Also if a user give such unverifiable trust feedbacks you could prefix his username with a tilde (~) in your own trust list to exclude his feedbacks.

███████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
█   ⚂⚄⚀⚃⚅⚁    ██  d a d i c e  ██    Next Generation Dice Game
• Low 1% house edge. • Provably Fair.  
███████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
BitCoinDream
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1540
Merit: 1024

The revolution will be digital


View Profile
February 11, 2015, 05:59:19 PM
 #306

Votes:

For the new system   Against the new system
theymos
HostFat
gmaxwell
PsychoticBoy
qwk
$username
alexrossi
Welsh
kcud_dab
matt4054
LaudaM
Blazr
EnJoyThis
sardokan
Beastlymac
alani123
Eal F. Skillz
BitCoinDream
redsn0w
hopenotlate
mitzie
moreia
criptix
takagari
Muhammed Zakir
Shallow
rugrats
onemorebtc
blablaace
Gleb Gamow
Sumerian
Reynaldo
justinetime
geforcelover
abyrnes81
kepo07
hexafraction
Dalyb
OgNasty
Tomatocage
Vod
MrTeal
Foxpup
BitcoinEXpress
MiningBuddy
iCEBREAKER
GIANNAT
KWH
haploid23
dogie
freedomno1
medUSA
bitcoininformation
Blazedout419
forzendiablo
niktitan132
jdany
TheGambler
TookDk
hilariousandco
koshgel
Keyser Soze
cexylikepie
deadley
david123
siameze
coinits
Parazyd
bitbaby
Gyfts
MadZ
bassguitarman
ABitNut
inigthz
Quickseller
twister
Katsou
Superhitech
Grand_Voyageur
Plutonium

The vote is split fairly evenly, so this isn't very helpful. But I've decided to table this particular proposal for now.

Theymos clearly stated that the poll verdict does not mean anything over here as it seems that the votes are split fairly evenly. Hence, I think, there is no point in arguing that the idea is tabled because NO won the poll.

galbros
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1022
Merit: 1000


View Profile
August 27, 2015, 11:35:28 PM
 #307

Sorry to necro this thread. 

However, given the large number of recent posts and complaints about the trust system, default trust, and how people who are trusted sometimes behave I thought it might be useful to remind people that theymos has considered alternatives and it was a pretty evenly split vote on moving to something new. 

For those of you who are unhappy, you may want to outline your alternative and see if you can get some agreement on an alternative as theymos is clearly not determined that the current system continue no matter what.  His proposal here may be a useful starting point for your thinking.

Good Luck!
tspacepilot
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1456
Merit: 1053


I may write code in exchange for bitcoins.


View Profile
August 28, 2015, 12:40:20 AM
 #308

Sorry to necro this thread. 

However, given the large number of recent posts and complaints about the trust system, default trust, and how people who are trusted sometimes behave I thought it might be useful to remind people that theymos has considered alternatives and it was a pretty evenly split vote on moving to something new. 

For those of you who are unhappy, you may want to outline your alternative and see if you can get some agreement on an alternative as theymos is clearly not determined that the current system continue no matter what.  His proposal here may be a useful starting point for your thinking.

Good Luck!

Thanks, galbros, this thread is really relevant to recent issues re the trust system and it's not one that I had seen previously.  One thing this really brings home to me is that it seems like theymos definitely would have preferred a more distributed trust network---one in which people are actively adding and removing people based on their own experiences.  The current system gives us the tools to add and remove people, but because a vast majority of people do not add or remove or modify, they're really little point in doing so yourself.  Default trust has become "standard trust" and like-it-or-not, changing your own settings away from the standard just makes you out of the loop.

It's a little bit of a critical mass problem, in my opinion.  I think something like this proposal would be very valuable, I especally like the part of confronting a user with their own trust setting and forcing them to actively choose something/someone.  Having chosen, they'll be more aware that they can revist those choices.  The part about offering the "top 30" might have been problematic in this proposal, but I really see value in trying to get the wonderful personalization tools of the trust system more active.
zazarb
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848
Merit: 1482


Get loan in just five minutes goo.gl/8WMW6n


View Profile WWW
October 07, 2015, 05:01:37 PM
 #309

Too long topic to read full, I would just find out , or this proposal (to 30 users will be suggested)
already have effect, or just stayed proposal?
regards
-zz
--Encrypted--
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 924
Merit: 1003

hee-ho.


View Profile
October 07, 2015, 05:05:36 PM
 #310

Too long topic to read full, I would just find out , or this proposal (to 30 users will be suggested)
already have effect, or just stayed proposal?
regards
-zz

theymos decided not to replace it (for now). read the colorful quote above.

"You cannot now believe that you will ever feel better. But this is not true. You are sure to be happy again. Knowing this, truly believing it will make you less miserable now."
- Abraham Lincoln #GettingOverIt
Athertle
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252
Merit: 250


Go figure! | I'm nearing 1337 posts...


View Profile WWW
October 07, 2015, 08:43:32 PM
 #311

already have effect, or just stayed proposal?

I'm sure that if the proposal had gone into effect then there would be no DT right now, and you would be voting for the users instead.

tspacepilot
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1456
Merit: 1053


I may write code in exchange for bitcoins.


View Profile
October 08, 2015, 06:12:12 AM
 #312

already have effect, or just stayed proposal?

I'm sure that if the proposal had gone into effect then there would be no DT right now, and you would be voting for the users instead.
That's not right.  This proposal was to force each newbie account to choose someone to trust in order to bootstrap the trust system.  You're right that if it had gone into effect, the notion of "default trust" wouldn't exist, or at least not as we understand it.  But there wasn't going to be a vote for users, the beauty of this proposal was that people wouldn't just have the matching trust lists by default which most people have at the moment.
otrkid70
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 936
Merit: 1014


View Profile
October 10, 2015, 02:41:51 AM
 #313

"Default Trust"    Why?

How about Earned trust?     I have  based all my transactions on established "Earned" feedback from buyers and sellers. I scrutinize all the feedback.

I could care less if a "Default trust" user has posted on a persons trust rating that he or she is credible UNLESS that person has done business with them.

Take Ebay for Example there is no Default trust list.....Your worthiness is based upon your successful transactions not because the creator says these people should be trusted.
I have placed trust in people with 0 Feedback by doing business with them and have also Denied doing business with a so call "Trusted" member.

there are many that have been or on the Default trust list that i would not trust a dime with.

My ratings have been based on transactions with other users.....Not by a user that some claim i should trust.
qwk
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2324
Merit: 2226


Shitcoin Minimalist


View Profile
October 10, 2015, 01:51:54 PM
 #314

Take Ebay for Example there is no Default trust list.....Your worthiness is based upon your successful transactions not because the creator says these people should be trusted.
You're 100% mistaken.
There is a default trust list with Ebay.
It encompasses all users of Ebay.

If it weren't for a default seed of trust, any trust network would be utterly useless.

The reasons why we can't just include all users in the default trust seed of bitcointalk are obvious and have been discussed at length.

All free men, wherever they may live, can use Bitcoin, and, therefore, as a free man, I take pride in the words "Ich bin ein Bitcoiner!"
Cointoli
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 241
Merit: 100


WPP ENERGY - BACKED ASSET GREEN ENERGY TOKEN


View Profile
October 10, 2015, 02:13:21 PM
 #315

This discussion is almost year old and default trust still dominate the forum. Those with default trust are "gods" here... Joke

           ﹏﹏﹋﹌﹌ WPP ENERGY ﹌﹌﹋﹏﹏
☆═══━┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈━═══☆
≈ WORLD POWER PRODUCTION ≈


【 BACKED ASSET GREEN ENERGY TOKEN 】
☆═━┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈┈━═☆
otrkid70
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 936
Merit: 1014


View Profile
October 10, 2015, 03:23:46 PM
 #316

Take Ebay for Example there is no Default trust list.....Your worthiness is based upon your successful transactions not because the creator says these people should be trusted.
You're 100% mistaken.
There is a default trust list with Ebay.
It encompasses all users of Ebay.

If it weren't for a default seed of trust, any trust network would be utterly useless.

The reasons why we can't just include all users in the default trust seed of bitcointalk are obvious and have been discussed at length.
I disagree. Ebay users have earned their trust ratings through selling and buying transactions.  they were not given their ratings by default.
bitcoin revo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1175
Merit: 1049



View Profile
October 10, 2015, 03:33:11 PM
 #317

Take Ebay for Example there is no Default trust list.....Your worthiness is based upon your successful transactions not because the creator says these people should be trusted.
You're 100% mistaken.
There is a default trust list with Ebay.
It encompasses all users of Ebay.

If it weren't for a default seed of trust, any trust network would be utterly useless.

The reasons why we can't just include all users in the default trust seed of bitcointalk are obvious and have been discussed at length.
I disagree. Ebay users have earned their trust ratings through selling and buying transactions.  they were not given their ratings by default.

Of course not. Default trust isn't trust by default; people on the default trust become trusted as they spend time on the community doing trustable things. No one here registers and finds themselves with +4 DT trust ratings.
qwk
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2324
Merit: 2226


Shitcoin Minimalist


View Profile
October 10, 2015, 05:01:11 PM
 #318

Take Ebay for Example there is no Default trust list.....Your worthiness is based upon your successful transactions not because the creator says these people should be trusted.
You're 100% mistaken.
There is a default trust list with Ebay.
It encompasses all users of Ebay.

If it weren't for a default seed of trust, any trust network would be utterly useless.

The reasons why we can't just include all users in the default trust seed of bitcointalk are obvious and have been discussed at length.
I disagree. Ebay users have earned their trust ratings through selling and buying transactions.  they were not given their ratings by default.
You disagree simply because you obviously don't understand the trust system, at all.
People on DefaultTrust have no "rating" whatsoever from being on DefaultTrust.
I.e., if you were on DefaultTrust but had no positive feedback from anyone, your trust rating would be 0. Zero.
You don't profit from being on DefaultTrust yourself. People whom you trust profit from it.

All free men, wherever they may live, can use Bitcoin, and, therefore, as a free man, I take pride in the words "Ich bin ein Bitcoiner!"
Quickseller
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988
Merit: 1771



View Profile WWW
October 10, 2015, 05:04:33 PM
 #319

Take Ebay for Example there is no Default trust list.....Your worthiness is based upon your successful transactions not because the creator says these people should be trusted.
You're 100% mistaken.
There is a default trust list with Ebay.
It encompasses all users of Ebay.

If it weren't for a default seed of trust, any trust network would be utterly useless.

The reasons why we can't just include all users in the default trust seed of bitcointalk are obvious and have been discussed at length.
I disagree. Ebay users have earned their trust ratings through selling and buying transactions.  they were not given their ratings by default.
It is very easy to fake trades here, and many scammers give themselves fake trust feedback. This is somewhat mitigated on eBay because it cost money to engage in a trade (you need to pay the eBay fees), although that is not to say that all eBay trades are legitimate.

Find the fire hydrant in my Avatar for a prize.
Blazr
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 882
Merit: 1001



View Profile
October 12, 2015, 12:20:36 PM
 #320

It is very easy to fake trades here, and many scammers give themselves fake trust feedback. This is somewhat mitigated on eBay because it cost money to engage in a trade (you need to pay the eBay fees), although that is not to say that all eBay trades are legitimate.

Feedback buying and account buying/selling on eBay is actually quite common.  On eBay the feedback number displayed next to your username is a total of your buying/selling feedback, so buying stuff increases it. So many sellers will list ebooks for sale for $0.01. Other sellers then buy $10 worth these ebooks to get 1,000 feedback or so to prop up their reputation. IMO the eBay feedback system does have some advantages over the system here but it wouldn't work here and it still has widespread manipulation and is favorable for sellers (for example eBay lets high trust high volume sellers delete a set number of feedback per year to remove fake feedback) .

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!