Bitcoin Forum
May 11, 2024, 07:23:51 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [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 16196 times)
theymos (OP)
Administrator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 5194
Merit: 12983


View Profile
January 05, 2015, 09:19:31 AM
Last edit: January 05, 2015, 10:46:41 AM by theymos
 #1

I was thinking about replacing DefaultTrust in the following way:

When users first try to view a topic in a Trust-enabled section, they will instead see this page and be forced to select some users to trust before being allowed to continue to the topic. In addition to the empty text box currently on the Trust settings page, up to 30 users will be suggested.

Suggested members must meet the following criteria:
- Full member or above
- At least one post in the last 60 days
- At least 10 people listed in their trust list
- At least 20 points (see below)
Each person gets N points whenever they are trusted by someone, and loses N points whenever they are distrusted by someone, where N = 0 if the rater is less than a full member and N = [rater's activity]/120 if the rater is at least a full member. The 60 people with the highest scores are selected, this list is randomly sorted with a higher weight given to people with higher scores, and the top 30 people in the resulting list are suggested.

When the change is made, everyone who currently has only DefaultTrust in their trust list will be redirected to the Set Initial Trust page.

What do you think of this?

1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
1715412231
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715412231

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715412231
Reply with quote  #2

1715412231
Report to moderator
1715412231
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715412231

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715412231
Reply with quote  #2

1715412231
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1715412231
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715412231

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715412231
Reply with quote  #2

1715412231
Report to moderator
1715412231
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715412231

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715412231
Reply with quote  #2

1715412231
Report to moderator
1715412231
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715412231

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715412231
Reply with quote  #2

1715412231
Report to moderator
TECSHARE
In memoriam
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3318
Merit: 1958


First Exclusion Ever


View Profile WWW
January 05, 2015, 09:25:02 AM
 #2

How is the suggested list selected? At random?

EDIT: to clarify, is this a list of anyone who meets those qualifications selected at random, or do the higher weighted members get displayed more often than the lesser weighted members?
theymos (OP)
Administrator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 5194
Merit: 12983


View Profile
January 05, 2015, 09:26:16 AM
 #3

Here are the 50 users with the most points using the algorithm I described. The top 30 are always the ones suggested, but their order is randomized.

Code:
theymos         |     471.3498 |
Tomatocage      |     192.7250 |
dooglus         |     181.7917 |
BadBear         |     180.2750 |
CanaryInTheMine |     153.0830 |
HostFat         |     144.6331 |
gmaxwell        |     133.5581 |
Akka            |     109.1663 |
BCB             |     104.3748 |
escrow.ms       |     101.2499 |
phantastisch    |      99.6915 |
ghibly79        |      65.8998 |
Michail1        |      65.2249 |
Maidak          |      62.5085 |
Sampey          |      61.8499 |
BigBitz         |      58.6833 |
ziomik          |      58.1333 |
malevolent      |      52.4748 |
sublime5447     |      52.4665 |
Stemby          |      51.0416 |
Dabs            |      48.2251 |
Nightowlace     |      47.6417 |
klintay         |      46.5750 |
Raize           |      44.0998 |
bitpop          |      43.7249 |
fhh             |      40.5083 |
zefir           |      39.2083 |
squall1066      |      38.5001 |
philipma1957    |      38.4251 |
PsychoticBoy    |      35.5750 |
KWH             |      35.5581 |
terrapinflyer   |      34.8666 |
binaryFate      |      33.8332 |
Bicknellski     |      33.5084 |
DebitMe         |      30.1501 |
elasticband     |      29.8501 |
TECSHARE        |      29.3915 |
LouReed         |      28.9249 |
2weiX           |      28.6999 |
ManeBjorn       |      27.5749 |
miaviator       |      27.3333 |
androz          |      26.2500 |
bobsag3         |      25.9415 |
nachius         |      25.2916 |
CoinHoarder     |      23.3749 |
mrbrt           |      23.1249 |
EnJoyThis       |      22.5167 |
WEB slicer      |      20.3749 |
Rub3n           |      20.0251 |
Ente            |      18.9750 |
----------------+--------------+

1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
TECSHARE
In memoriam
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3318
Merit: 1958


First Exclusion Ever


View Profile WWW
January 05, 2015, 09:30:40 AM
 #4

I see TECSHARE is in there.  Maybe he'll stop crying and actually support the forum again.
I never stopped supporting the forum. "The forum" stopped supporting me.
Vod
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3696
Merit: 3073


Licking my boob since 1970


View Profile WWW
January 05, 2015, 09:37:37 AM
 #5

The only problem I see with this system is the top xx people will continue to gain more trust and will pull ahead of the rest of the users.  You're basically replacing the DefaultTrust with those people.

https://nastyscam.com - landing page up     https://vod.fan - advanced image hosting - coming soon!
OGNasty has early onset dementia; keep this in mind when discussing his past actions.
BadBear
v2.0
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652
Merit: 1127



View Profile WWW
January 05, 2015, 09:41:16 AM
 #6

Actually he wouldn't since he isn't in the top 30.

I'd expect the list to change fairly dramatically once people need to make their own lists instead of relying on default trust though.

I like it. Most people aren't going to stop using default until they have to.

The only problem I see with this system is the top xx people will continue to gain more trust and will pull ahead of the rest of the users.  You're basically replacing the DefaultTrust with those people.

Only if they stay on their lists, and if they do stay on it, then they deserve it don't they?

1Kz25jm6pjNTaz8bFezEYUeBYfEtpjuKRG | PGP: B5797C4F

Tired of annoying signature ads? Ad block for signatures
dserrano5
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1974
Merit: 1029



View Profile
January 05, 2015, 09:44:02 AM
 #7

The only problem I see with this system is the top xx people will continue to gain more trust and will pull ahead of the rest of the users.  You're basically replacing the DefaultTrust with those people.

That's my opinion as well, although I concede it's an improvement over the current DefaultTrust as people will have to manually choose who they trust. I'm not sure how randomizing the list helps though, since the page will be displayed only once.

Instead of showing always the 30 best scorers, an alternative would be to show some random 30 among the 50 top, so people blindly ticking all the boxes don't end up trusting the same set of users.
Vod
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3696
Merit: 3073


Licking my boob since 1970


View Profile WWW
January 05, 2015, 09:51:26 AM
 #8

Only if they stay on their lists, and if they do stay on it, then they deserve it don't they?

I don't think most people will actively modify their list.  They will choose it once, when they are forced to, and forget about it.

The top people will eventually pull away from everyone else.

Such an important decision shouldn't be pressed on users right when they join, IMO.

https://nastyscam.com - landing page up     https://vod.fan - advanced image hosting - coming soon!
OGNasty has early onset dementia; keep this in mind when discussing his past actions.
theymos (OP)
Administrator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 5194
Merit: 12983


View Profile
January 05, 2015, 09:56:22 AM
 #9

The only problem I see with this system is the top xx people will continue to gain more trust and will pull ahead of the rest of the users.  You're basically replacing the DefaultTrust with those people.

I can make it so people won't have their vote counted if they've only ever used the checkbox thing for modifying their trust list. The suggested people will still have an advantage, but hopefully it should be surmountable.

1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
adamas
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1014
Merit: 1003


VIS ET LIBERTAS


View Profile WWW
January 05, 2015, 10:04:49 AM
 #10

I don't think most people will actively modify their list.  They will choose it once, when they are forced to, and forget about it.

The top people will eventually pull away from everyone else.

Such an important decision shouldn't be pressed on users right when they join, IMO.
That's what I think.

"Es ist kein Zeichen geistiger Gesundheit, gut angepasst an eine kranke Gesellschaft zu sein."
theymos (OP)
Administrator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 5194
Merit: 12983


View Profile
January 05, 2015, 10:09:38 AM
 #11

BTW: I'll probably keep the default trust depth at 2 after this change, which will cause ratings to travel further than they do now. Trust exclusions will be more important.

For example, if someone trusts CanaryInTheMine, then they'll also trust CanaryInTheMine(0) -> bitpop(1) -> El Cabron(2). But if someone trusts both me and CanaryInTheMine, then they'll get theymos(0) -> El Cabron(1), which will exclude El Cabron because it is at a lower depth. I think that this sort of thing will cause the trust system to function more naturally.

1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
TECSHARE
In memoriam
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3318
Merit: 1958


First Exclusion Ever


View Profile WWW
January 05, 2015, 10:15:57 AM
Last edit: January 05, 2015, 10:28:16 AM by TECSHARE
 #12

The only problem I see with this system is the top xx people will continue to gain more trust and will pull ahead of the rest of the users.  You're basically replacing the DefaultTrust with those people.

That's my opinion as well, although I concede it's an improvement over the current DefaultTrust as people will have to manually choose who they trust. I'm not sure how randomizing the list helps though, since the page will be displayed only once.

Instead of showing always the 30 best scorers, an alternative would be to show some random 30 among the 50 top, so people blindly ticking all the boxes don't end up trusting the same set of users.
Randomizing it within a list of people that meet the basic requirements ensures some users aren't displayed more often than others ensuring that statistically people even picking users at random, those on the displayed list will still get trusted more and therefore more trust points.

Over all I think this is moving in the right direction, but the exclusions almost have the same polar opposite effect as the existing default trust list, only via exclusion instead of inclusion. Having higher ranked users override the trust of others that are trusted pretty much keeps the default trust in effect in that sense. Basically, some one could contribute a lot to the community, but if one person with lots of trust excludes them, then all the lower ranked trusts are overridden, basically negating the decentralized component.
Parazyd
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812
Merit: 587


Space Lord


View Profile WWW
January 05, 2015, 10:16:57 AM
 #13

I agree with Vod, newbies will probably forget about it when it's set. Perhaps writing up a thread about the trust system and forcing newbies to read it? The text on the current suggest page looks good, but it's important and should be made looking more important.
Maybe a sticky in trust-enabled sections too?
dserrano5
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1974
Merit: 1029



View Profile
January 05, 2015, 10:19:07 AM
 #14

Randomizing it within a list of people that meet the basic requirements ensures some users aren't displayed more often than others

But that's not the case right now, the same 30 users are always shown.
TECSHARE
In memoriam
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3318
Merit: 1958


First Exclusion Ever


View Profile WWW
January 05, 2015, 10:20:42 AM
 #15

Randomizing it within a list of people that meet the basic requirements ensures some users aren't displayed more often than others

But that's not the case right now, the same 30 users are always shown.
In that case all this will do is ensure those 30 users will get high trust rankings and everyone else will be left in the dust. This as you describe it is just another form of the default trust list with a small amount of potential randomization.
Parazyd
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812
Merit: 587


Space Lord


View Profile WWW
January 05, 2015, 10:23:40 AM
 #16

Randomizing it within a list of people that meet the basic requirements ensures some users aren't displayed more often than others

But that's not the case right now, the same 30 users are always shown.
In that case all this will do is ensure those 30 users will get high trust rankings and everyone else will be left in the dust.

The trust depth is still set at 2. Those 30 people have other people in their trust lists.
TECSHARE
In memoriam
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3318
Merit: 1958


First Exclusion Ever


View Profile WWW
January 05, 2015, 10:25:32 AM
 #17

Randomizing it within a list of people that meet the basic requirements ensures some users aren't displayed more often than others

But that's not the case right now, the same 30 users are always shown.
In that case all this will do is ensure those 30 users will get high trust rankings and everyone else will be left in the dust.

The trust depth is still set at 2. Those 30 people have other people in their trust lists.
Yes, but my point is that if those are the only 30 displayed they will be the ones getting funneled all of the new user trust (increasing their trust rating) and it will be an endless cycle of more people trusting them producing a huge rift, and basically just reproducing the default trust list in a slightly modified form.
Parazyd
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812
Merit: 587


Space Lord


View Profile WWW
January 05, 2015, 10:27:44 AM
 #18

Randomizing it within a list of people that meet the basic requirements ensures some users aren't displayed more often than others

But that's not the case right now, the same 30 users are always shown.
In that case all this will do is ensure those 30 users will get high trust rankings and everyone else will be left in the dust.

The trust depth is still set at 2. Those 30 people have other people in their trust lists.
Yes, but my point is that if those are the only 30 displayed they will be the ones getting funneled all of the new user trust (increasing their trust rating) and it will be an endless cycle of more people trusting them producing a huge rift, and basically just reproducing the default trust list in a slightly modified form.

That's maybe why it isn't good for newbies to choose this. You can and should add people you trust to your trust list.
And do/should newbies trust anyone?
dserrano5
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1974
Merit: 1029



View Profile
January 05, 2015, 10:30:00 AM
 #19

Yes, but my point is that if those are the only 30 displayed they will be the ones getting funneled all of the new user trust (increasing their trust rating) and it will be an endless cycle of more people trusting them producing a huge rift, and basically just reproducing the default trust list in a slightly modified form.

That's why I suggest to show not the 30 best, but 30 among the X best.


That's maybe why it isn't good for newbies to choose this. You can and should add people you trust to your trust list.

That requires thinking, something a lot of people find so hard that they won't do it.
haploid23
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 812
Merit: 1002



View Profile WWW
January 05, 2015, 10:32:19 AM
 #20

It has been mentioned already, but I see this new system only slightly better than DefaultTrust, but not by much. The trust gap between those 30 people and the rest of the forum members will widen over time.

Newbs can't just arbitrarily trust someone they haven't done transactions with or read enough posts to determine who to trust. If they're being forced to pick someone, they'll just pick these "default" suggested 30 people. In principle, see how this is not much different than the current DefaultTrust list? These 30 people will get free boosts without actually having to do anything, they're just simply riding on their preexisting reputation.

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

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!