Bitcoin Forum
January 24, 2020, 02:38:35 AM *
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 15639 times)
Quickseller
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2030
Merit: 1820



View Profile WWW
January 06, 2015, 05:37:29 AM
 #61

My major concern is that there are very few people who give negative trust to scammers and potential scammers. I would say that tomatocage and Vod are generally the only users that do this on a regular basis (I believe that John K. is also somewhat active in doing this but not as much). Looking at Vod's sent feedback, it looks like most of the users he has given negative trust to have a the 2nd number of -1 (meaning they only have one trusted scam report). The same holds true with Tomatocage's sent feedback (although there did seem to be more users with a -2 for their second score). Especially concerning is that tomatocage has given negative trust to a lot of imposters that have a 2nd trust number of -1. The new system is obviously a work in progress but it does not seem that it would even be a guarantee that either Vod or tomatocage would even be an option to use the checkboxes to add them to your trust list (a user would need to manually do this). I would say this will result in a lot of newer traders potentially only trusting people who are not very active in giving trust (positive or negative) or that no one who works hard in calling out scammers will be in their trust list.

A second concern is that I think this system is going to be slow to be able to react to someone who was previously honest and later turns into a scammer. Under the current system (especially with the addition of the new feature of being able to exclude someone from your trust list), if say TF were to suddenly scam (if you were to look at this as of prior to the inputs 'hack') he could quickly and easily be removed from anyone who uses the default settings' trust network. With the proposed system, each user would need to manually remove TF (in this example) from their trust network which will probably not be updated very often. Users may or may not set a trust network and "forget it" but I don't think they will, as a general rule check places like scam accusations on a regular basis to make sure a new scammer who was previously trusted is removed from their network.

I would say that the people who are trusted by default trust should have a somewhat large trust network and be active in adding (and removing as necessary) users to their trust network. I don't think it is necessary to have people like OgNasty and SaltySpitoon on level 1 default trust because they have a very small trust network, having them there doesn't accomplish very much (although they both should certainly be trusted enough to be on level two default trust aka default trust network). I also think we shouldn't have people like CanaryInTheMine who add everyone and their brother they have ever done business with as this will result in people in default trust network that should realistically not be there.

A last concern is one that was touched on before, but not heavily discussed. This system would not be difficult to manipulate, but it would be much more difficult to detect manipulation. One could quietly buy up a lot of accounts then buy a 2nd set of accounts they want to be trusted. The first set of accounts could all have the 2nd set of accounts added to their trust list which would result in them being often suggested for newer users to add to their trust list. More experienced users may not even notice when this is happening because they are not being asked to add new users to their trust list.

Happy New Year!
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
Quickseller
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2030
Merit: 1820



View Profile WWW
January 06, 2015, 05:50:12 AM
 #62

A last concern is one that was touched on before, but not heavily discussed. This system would not be difficult to manipulate, but it would be much more difficult to detect manipulation. One could quietly buy up a lot of accounts then buy a 2nd set of accounts they want to be trusted. The first set of accounts could all have the 2nd set of accounts added to their trust list which would result in them being often suggested for newer users to add to their trust list. More experienced users may not even notice when this is happening because they are not being asked to add new users to their trust list.
To clarify, under the current system if someone wants to purchase an account on default trust list, they need to invest (and risk) a lot of money they will potentially lose if they are caught scamming. They will get one chance before they are called out as a scammer and likely removed from default trust list. Under the proposed system the initial investment would likely be somewhat higher however you would have many more chances to attempt to pull off a scam as the incremental cost to scam with a 2nd account would be very low.

Additionally it would be easy for the seller to keep track of what a default trust list account is doing under the current system while under the new system this would not be possible.

Happy New Year!
TECSHARE
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3122
Merit: 1618


First Exclusion Ever


View Profile WWW
January 06, 2015, 06:56:33 AM
 #63

It is really amazing to me that with all the ACTUAL ABUSE of the trust system by people like VOD and other "scambusters" going completely ignored, you feel as if my one use of trust that you didn't approve of personally was "blackmail" and and unforgivable attempt to "extort" another user to "shut up". You are taking quite a few liberties with your narrative, in addition to claiming the psychic abilities to know what happens in my mind.

Other instances of abuse doesn't validate yours or invalidate the decision against you. I think vod has over-stepped the mark a few times recently but he will usually do something to remedy it. You didn't. 
Usually? Why is it that "usually" is ok for VOD with stacks of accusations against him while a single accusation against me was grounds for my removal? He CONTINUES to make these "mistakes" and often goes even further by insulting and antagonizing users who make claims against him instead of fixing the situation like he should. Furthermore I have seen MANY complaints against VOD go COMPLETELY IGNORED by staff.


You aren't explaining anything, just making up some bullshit narrative to justify your overreaction, vitriol, and attempt to invalidate any of my valid complaints. It is very clear that you are unable to control your emotional state regarding this issue and this has become a personal mission for you.

The only person here with a bullshit narrative and who is 'unable to control their emotional state' is you and I don't have a personal mission (unlike you) but I'm just responding to your bullshit.  You just can't look at this from any other angle and attempt to pass the blame on to others who may or may not be abusing the system. Regardless of that, you still abused it. Is it unforgivable? No, but you could've sorted this out all by yourself but you acted stubbornly and immaturely and are continuing to do do. 

So I see, me responding is a bullshit narrative, but when you respond it is just responding. You were more than willing to fling accusations against me from the very first moment I objected to this logic. Additionally I see your replies to me filled with insults, exaggerations, slander, and flat out lies against me. I have not treated you in the same manner regardless of how offensive you find me questioning your authority. Furthermore, the entire reason I was in the situation I was in was because of users like VOD being allowed to use the system in the way he does, with no explicit rules posted anywhere. Some how I am just supposed to know this is ok for him, but not ok for anyone else.

This isn't passing the blame, this is pointing out the ambiguity and double standards of policy enforcement around here. I admitted my mistake in placing a value to the trust and CORRECTED IT IMMEDIATELY upon request. No one ASKED me to agree to be on the default trust. I never agreed to represent the community, I was just placed there one day without explanation for conducting myself exceptionally over 3 years. Yet some how I am supposed to know these unwritten rules only apply to people like me and do not apply to people like VOD. I could have sorted this all out, but instead the staff got involved and left myself and Armis in a worse state that than when we started. Nothing was restored for either of us. Instead of restorative justice being worked out between Armis and myself, the staff got involved and metered out punishment leaving us both in a worse position, end of story.


Furthermore you act as if there is no gap between "a noob with three posts" and the trust list level, this is another glaring misrepresentation.

You can add a 3-post newb to your trust list if you want, but I don't think that's the sort of behaviour people on the default trust list should have, especially when it is quite clear that person has only been trusted to boost their own feedback. Stop trying to distract from the point at hand. 
Here you go again with your application of extremist ideas to me that I do not support. I do not want to add 3 post newbs to my trust list, but you act as if there is nothing between new ignorant misguided users and the untouchable infallible royalty making decisions such as yourself. If anyone is misrepresenting things it is you.

If you bothered to actually consider what I said in my posts between your hyperventilating[...]

jaded angry children

No, I've considered it. You're the only hyperventilating jaded, angry child here. One that by the looks of it is never going to stop throwing a temper tantrum all over the place until he gets his own way. 

 What am I jaded from? I don't have to police the forum all day, you do. Any time some one questions your decisions it is always the same accusations of "conspiracy", "paranoia", and claims of ulterior motives. No one is allowed to react to posts except for you, and if anyone else does well it simply is not legitimate. Me vociferously arguing my points is not equivalent to a temper tantrum, but please make some more accusations against me while you insult, slander, and blow everything I say out of proportion, maybe someone will be convinced you do not have trouble controlling yourself, and you aren't jaded from all the bullshit that you are forced to deal with on this forum on a daily basis.

you would see I am asking for people on the "default list" to have LESS POWER to completely destroy people, and along with that there should be a corresponding removal of any officially staff run trust moderation.

I don't see how this system would work. The current one works fine as long as we have rational people who can handle their position responsibly and when they can't they get rightfully removed, but of course people will either love or hate certain staff or people being in control when things do or don't go their way. Armis is probably quite thankful they stepped in for this instance. 
Clearly that is true, because VOD is clearly rational, can handle his position responsibly, and is very clearly checked by the staff when he is out of line /sarc

What does Armis have to be thankful for? Al you did was remove me from the default trust, he still has a negative rating and red on his name. YOU DIDN'T FIX ANYTHING, you just caused more damage. If however you didn't give him the impression you were going to "fix" the feedback for him he wouldn't have tried to hard to slander me to try to get his trust "fixed", and he would have negotiated with me and removed his slander, and I would have removed his negative rating, a solution which I PUBLICLY OFFERED HIM. Why should he even have a discussion with me if he was under the belief you would fix it for him, and he would get his way anyway?

This lessens a single individuals ability to burn a user singlehandedly, and also removes the ability for random trolls to create infighting and extort trusted users simply trying to protect their HARD EARNED trust by making endless false complaints.

This is your biggest mistake. You think you earned the right to abuse your position and it's irrelevant because your trust and trade history has been left untouched only your ability to leave such trusted feedbacks has been revoked, but that was your own wrong doing. 

What you define as abuse I define as a justified use of trust. I never once tried to lie about why I left the trust, and in fact I took several steps to try to deescalate the situation while Armis only escalated from his very first contact with me. He had no desire to do anything but harass me, and the staff helped him rather than asking him to account for his behavior. Of course if he hurts my ability to sell that does not affect you, so why should you care or even respond to my reports against him? It is much easier to just burn down my trust as an example to other to obey the staff dictates or else. Meanwhile people like VOD build whole pages full of complaints against him that go ignored. Sounds like uniform enforcement of policy to me.

You claim you don't want the default trust used as a blackmailing tool, but you only want to stop the abuse from ONE DIRECTION, and it just to happens to be a form of abuse you will never personally suffer from because you have all kinds of fun moderator buttons at your fingertips. The REST OF US have to use the tools we have available. If the default trust can be used by more powerful members to negate a users trust ratings, and if trust is moderated IN ANY WAY, then the default trust can ACTUALLY be used to extort users into compliance by ANYONE making a complaint about a rating. Of course since you are staff that will never be a issue for you because you are in the boys club, so why should anyone else be protected from this form of extortion?  

What fun buttons are those? The ability to move threads? Whoop-de-doo. Moderators can't do much on this forum apart from that and if we abused our power in even the slightest infraction I'm sure we'd have to account for it.  And besides, I have - or you had - the same power as me as does anyone who is on defaultrust and if I abused it in the same fashion as you did I would likely be removed from the list and maybe even as a moderator, that is of course unless I would be willing to see the error of my ways and compromise, which you didn't do. The difference between me and you is I can likely handle the situation maturely without having to resort to feedback abuse in an attempt to get somecone to do what I want (which is what you did by your own admission). Someone wants to troll or harass or state I'm selling something overpriced? Go right ahead. I can rise above it or deal with it without resorting to the feedback system. 

Maybe we should just agree to disagree because this isn't going to ever go anywhere. You think you're right and hard done by and I think you over-reacted and used the system as blackmail and clearly neither of us are going to change our opinion on the subject but I'm getting bored of rephrasing the same old argument to your rehashed points especially over such a petty matter and I'm sure you feel the same. 

As a moderator you have the ear of people with the ability to destroy trust ratings and ban people. Of course they will take your word EVERY TIME over any one else making a complaint. Staff are chosen to police the forum, but when that same police like attitude is applied to the trust system is becomes EXTREMELY DESTRUCTIVE. It is almost an OCD like need to demand perfection in the trust system while you yourself admit you have no time to properly examine these cases, yet you have no problems making conclusions about them with a superficial review. This should be left up to the user base, not staff who can easily rally mobs with little or no effort simply by making a hasty conclusion. All this behavior does is burns precious honest users while scammers, trolls, and extortionists laugh at how easy you have made it for them to rip out the core of the community over unforgivable technical infractions.


██   ██   ██████████
 
  ██   █████████████
 
   ██   ████████████
 
 ██   ██   █████████
 
   ██   ████████████
 
      ██   █████████
██████  ██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██████  ██
.Blockchain.com.do.██  ██████
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
██  ██████
      ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
▀ ▀ ▀▀█   █       █▄
 ▀ ▀▀▀█▄▄▀      ▄█ ▄▀█▄
   ▀ ▀█▄▄       ██ ▄▀██▀▄
  ▀ ▀▀█  ▀▄      ▀▄▄█▀   ▀▄
 ▀▀ ▀ █▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄
 ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄      █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█
 █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
  ▀▄     ▄▄▄       █   █▀▀ ▀ ▀
    ▀▄ ▄█ ▄▄█▄      ▀▄▄█▀▀▀ ▀
      ▀██▄▄ ██       ▄▄█▀ ▀
        ▀▄▄▄▀      ▄▀  █▀▀ ▀
          ▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄█ ▀ ▀▀
██████  ██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██████  ██
.Exchange Bitcoin Quickly.██  ██████
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
██  ██████




██████████   ██   ██
 
█████████████   ██
 
████████████   ██
 
█████████   ██   ██
 
████████████   ██
 
█████████   ██
takagari
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 994
Merit: 1000


View Profile WWW
January 06, 2015, 06:58:45 AM
 #64

Could dipshits like VOD get off the list?

Than I'm all for it.
If your going to be on the default list, you should have SOME sort of responsibilities.
BadBear
v2.0
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652
Merit: 1025



View Profile WWW
January 06, 2015, 07:04:38 AM
Last edit: January 06, 2015, 03:49:24 PM by BadBear
 #65

Sweet a bunch of new posts, there should be lots of good discussion about replacing defaulttru...oh.  Roll Eyes

Good job guys.

1Kz25jm6pjNTaz8bFezEYUeBYfEtpjuKRG | PGP: B5797C4F

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

Activity: 1134
Merit: 1001


View Profile
January 06, 2015, 07:31:13 AM
 #66

The only way to gain trust points is by adding 10 people to your trust list?

What if one of those people trusts someone that you don't?
Vod
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2996
Merit: 2357


Licking my boob since 1970


View Profile
January 06, 2015, 07:31:50 AM
 #67

The only way to gain trust points is by adding 10 people to your trust list?

What if one of those people trusts someone that you don't?

At least 10 people.

Then you have to add the person you don't trust with a ~ in front of their name.

I'm into creating universes, smiting people, writing holy books and listening to Prayer Messages (PMs).
Nastyfans is a proven ponzi! FAMO
"I matter - cause BPIP says so on the front page!"
koshgel
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1134
Merit: 1001


View Profile
January 06, 2015, 07:40:00 AM
 #68

The only way to gain trust points is by adding 10 people to your trust list?

What if one of those people trusts someone that you don't?

Then you have to add the person you don't trust with a ~ in front of their name.

Can't believe I never knew this. Thanks!

Don't really see how the new system would be an advantage over the old one. Prone to the same abuses.

The only change would be forcing people to add users to their trust? Most will probably add Theymos, Badbear etc and they rarely leave negative trust as it is. Not really combating scammers.
Vod
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2996
Merit: 2357


Licking my boob since 1970


View Profile
January 06, 2015, 07:43:38 AM
 #69

Don't really see how the new system would be an advantage over the old one. Prone to the same abuses.


I'm into creating universes, smiting people, writing holy books and listening to Prayer Messages (PMs).
Nastyfans is a proven ponzi! FAMO
"I matter - cause BPIP says so on the front page!"
CanaryInTheMine
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2156
Merit: 1042


between a rock and a block!


View Profile
January 06, 2015, 07:58:27 AM
 #70

has anyone put together a concise pros and cons between current and proposed systems?

expanding the defaulttrust is a very good idea, whether this is achieved by expanding current list or by implementing the proposed system,  the forum will be better off.  More honest folks should get into deftrust.
freedomno1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1624
Merit: 1036


Learning the troll avoidance button :)


View Profile WWW
January 06, 2015, 08:09:59 AM
Last edit: January 06, 2015, 08:24:20 AM by freedomno1
 #71

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?

It seems like an interesting system since people will be able to choose from a list of active users whom they wish to trust
New Users will get a blank slate and people can still view Trust for additional information
Only burden I see is that people are lazy enough to not look at show other comments in the trust pane otherwise I think its worth a shot myself.

As for the intricate details surviving a BFL attack of a lot of trust ratings being sent that are false
Or the case of having a powerful user marking a new user and destroying their reputation prematurely this system still has similar pros and cons to default trust, the main difference being that the main users with weighting remain influential in this one for a while even if they get scammer ratings from other members.

If I read this correctly that would be only occur as long as their points are not pushed down rapidly by others, but if I read it correctly in the worst case if there are 3 people on the trust list, and one of them becomes a scammer then the list is effectively two but the person keeps the scammer in question in their default trust for a long duration of time, even if the point value goes down and the members they trusted doesn't seem like it would be a large issue if those trades were trustworthy up to that point though.

As it is Oldscammer Tag/Default Trust could be users as well, perhaps using an extended trust list + personal selections.

Still on the trust no one by default view
(Except Theymos since it put you in the list by default hehe)
kcud_dab
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652
Merit: 1000


Bitcoin enthusiast!


View Profile WWW
January 06, 2015, 08:20:28 AM
 #72

Suggested members must meet the following criteria:
Why do you want to suggest members that the user will probably not know?
User shouldn't be force to select 3 random people that he never has interaction with!
Trust list should be empty at the beginning without any suggestion...

Vod
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2996
Merit: 2357


Licking my boob since 1970


View Profile
January 06, 2015, 08:26:56 AM
 #73

Interesting that default trust has over twice as many votes so far.

I think the vocal people are the minority.  Most people are happy with the way things are being handled.

I'm into creating universes, smiting people, writing holy books and listening to Prayer Messages (PMs).
Nastyfans is a proven ponzi! FAMO
"I matter - cause BPIP says so on the front page!"
hilariousandco
Chopper Member
Global Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2240
Merit: 1723


https://bitcoin.watfordfc.com


View Profile WWW
January 06, 2015, 08:31:39 AM
 #74

Interesting that default trust has over twice as many votes so far.

How can we view the results or is it just admins?

████████████████████████████
████████▀▀ █▀ █▀ ▀██████████
█████████▄ ▄▄▄▄▄▄███████████
██████████▀     ▀  ▀████████
███████▀ ▀  ▄█▀▀▀█▀▀████████
██████▄      █▄  ▀▀  ▀██████
██████         ▄▄█▄ ▄ ▀█████
█████ ▄         ▀▀ ▄ ▀ █████
██████▌          █▀█▀ ▐█████
███████  ▄▌         ▄ ██████
████████▄█         ▄████████
█████████▀     ▄▄ ▄█████████
████████████████████████████
.JACKMATE'S...........
.
MAJESTIC..
████████████████████████
███████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
.
..WIN 1 BITCOIN ON EVERY PREMIER LEAGUE MATCHDAY..
████████████████████████████████
████████████▀█▀ ▀█▀█▀███████████
███████████▄ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄████████████
███████████▀▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄███████████
█████████▀▄ ██▀▄▄▄ ▀ ▄▀█████████
███████▀ ▀█████▄▄▄█▄▄▄██████████
███████▀▄████████▀  ▀█ █▐███████
███████ ▀█████████▄█▀▀██ ███████
████████ ███▀██████ ▄ ██ ███████
████████▌▐▀▄ ██████████ ▄███████
█████████▄██▌▐█████▀██ █████████
████████████▄▀▀▀▀▀▄ ▀▄██████████
████████████████████████████████
.
.JOIN US - IT'S FREE! .
freedomno1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1624
Merit: 1036


Learning the troll avoidance button :)


View Profile WWW
January 06, 2015, 09:15:27 AM
 #75

Interesting that default trust has over twice as many votes so far.

How can we view the results or is it just admins?

Well I can't see it as well H@C and since your at staff level it must be an admin only poll.
Will just need to trust Badbear on this one.
Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2464
Merit: 2303


Exchange Bitcoin quickly-https://blockchain.com.do


View Profile
January 06, 2015, 09:23:17 AM
 #76

I think that in this case it actually matters who voted for what.
One could easily manipulate the poll with many accounts; is that right?

████████████████████████████
████████▀▀ █▀ █▀ ▀██████████
█████████▄ ▄▄▄▄▄▄███████████
██████████▀     ▀  ▀████████
███████▀ ▀  ▄█▀▀▀█▀▀████████
██████▄      █▄  ▀▀  ▀██████
██████         ▄▄█▄ ▄ ▀█████
█████ ▄         ▀▀ ▄ ▀ █████
██████▌          █▀█▀ ▐█████
███████  ▄▌         ▄ ██████
████████▄█         ▄████████
█████████▀     ▄▄ ▄█████████
████████████████████████████
.JACKMATE'S...........
.
MAJESTIC..
████████████████████████
███████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
.
..WIN 1 BITCOIN ON EVERY PREMIER LEAGUE MATCHDAY..
████████████████████████████████
████████████▀█▀ ▀█▀█▀███████████
███████████▄ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄████████████
███████████▀▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄███████████
█████████▀▄ ██▀▄▄▄ ▀ ▄▀█████████
███████▀ ▀█████▄▄▄█▄▄▄██████████
███████▀▄████████▀  ▀█ █▐███████
███████ ▀█████████▄█▀▀██ ███████
████████ ███▀██████ ▄ ██ ███████
████████▌▐▀▄ ██████████ ▄███████
█████████▄██▌▐█████▀██ █████████
████████████▄▀▀▀▀▀▄ ▀▄██████████
████████████████████████████████
.
.JOIN US - IT'S FREE! .
hilariousandco
Chopper Member
Global Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2240
Merit: 1723


https://bitcoin.watfordfc.com


View Profile WWW
January 06, 2015, 09:28:23 AM
 #77

Interesting that default trust has over twice as many votes so far.

How can we view the results or is it just admins?

Well I can't see it as well H@C and since your at staff level it must be an admin only poll.
Will just need to trust Badbear on this one.

What if BadBear is feeding us false information in an attempt to swing the vote in his favour so he can keep hold of his defaulttrust tyranny?  Cheesy

I think that in this case it actually matters who voted for what.
One could easily manipulate the poll with many accounts; is that right?

They could and I'm sure theymos will take that into consideration and/or look out for abuse.

████████████████████████████
████████▀▀ █▀ █▀ ▀██████████
█████████▄ ▄▄▄▄▄▄███████████
██████████▀     ▀  ▀████████
███████▀ ▀  ▄█▀▀▀█▀▀████████
██████▄      █▄  ▀▀  ▀██████
██████         ▄▄█▄ ▄ ▀█████
█████ ▄         ▀▀ ▄ ▀ █████
██████▌          █▀█▀ ▐█████
███████  ▄▌         ▄ ██████
████████▄█         ▄████████
█████████▀     ▄▄ ▄█████████
████████████████████████████
.JACKMATE'S...........
.
MAJESTIC..
████████████████████████
███████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
.
..WIN 1 BITCOIN ON EVERY PREMIER LEAGUE MATCHDAY..
████████████████████████████████
████████████▀█▀ ▀█▀█▀███████████
███████████▄ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄████████████
███████████▀▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄███████████
█████████▀▄ ██▀▄▄▄ ▀ ▄▀█████████
███████▀ ▀█████▄▄▄█▄▄▄██████████
███████▀▄████████▀  ▀█ █▐███████
███████ ▀█████████▄█▀▀██ ███████
████████ ███▀██████ ▄ ██ ███████
████████▌▐▀▄ ██████████ ▄███████
█████████▄██▌▐█████▀██ █████████
████████████▄▀▀▀▀▀▄ ▀▄██████████
████████████████████████████████
.
.JOIN US - IT'S FREE! .
freedomno1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1624
Merit: 1036


Learning the troll avoidance button :)


View Profile WWW
January 06, 2015, 09:34:40 AM
 #78


What if BadBear is feeding us false information in an attempt to swing the vote in his favour so he can keep hold of his defaulttrust tyranny?  Cheesy

Then it is all moving in accordance with the grand master plan  H@C Wink

I think that in this case it actually matters who voted for what.
One could easily manipulate the poll with many accounts; is that right?

Well I'm sure they will unlock the results later
I guess its possible if your bored enough to modify a meta polls result seems like a pain though, best way around that is a very large sample size.
EFS
Staff
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 2240
Merit: 1204



View Profile
January 06, 2015, 09:35:03 AM
 #79

It's not the best solution but still better than Default Trust. I voted for Yes.
Mitchell
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2380
Merit: 1462


Verified awesomeness ✔


View Profile WWW
January 06, 2015, 09:40:29 AM
 #80

It's not better than Default Trust, so I voted for No. Forcing newbies to pick people to add to their trust list isn't the way to go.

████████████████████████████
████████▀▀ █▀ █▀ ▀██████████
█████████▄ ▄▄▄▄▄▄███████████
██████████▀     ▀  ▀████████
███████▀ ▀  ▄█▀▀▀█▀▀████████
██████▄      █▄  ▀▀  ▀██████
██████         ▄▄█▄ ▄ ▀█████
█████ ▄         ▀▀ ▄ ▀ █████
██████▌          █▀█▀ ▐█████
███████  ▄▌         ▄ ██████
████████▄█         ▄████████
█████████▀     ▄▄ ▄█████████
████████████████████████████
.JACKMATE'S...........
.
MAJESTIC..
████████████████████████
███████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
.
..WIN 1 BITCOIN ON EVERY PREMIER LEAGUE MATCHDAY..
████████████████████████████████
████████████▀█▀ ▀█▀█▀███████████
███████████▄ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄████████████
███████████▀▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄███████████
█████████▀▄ ██▀▄▄▄ ▀ ▄▀█████████
███████▀ ▀█████▄▄▄█▄▄▄██████████
███████▀▄████████▀  ▀█ █▐███████
███████ ▀█████████▄█▀▀██ ███████
████████ ███▀██████ ▄ ██ ███████
████████▌▐▀▄ ██████████ ▄███████
█████████▄██▌▐█████▀██ █████████
████████████▄▀▀▀▀▀▄ ▀▄██████████
████████████████████████████████
.
.JOIN US - IT'S FREE! .
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!