Topic: Are the negative trusts you have given so far really necessary? - page 3. (Read 1146 times)

DT abusers be like yeah you abused the system thats why you have red not knowing they abused it too by giving shit feedbacks to protect their crimes.

Usually those trolls hardly hold any weight, since they're either not in any DT or they don't link any reference(s).

Just because 99% of the humanity can't be trusted to rationally assess other people's behavior, that doesn't mean that nobody can. People who use Facebook & co. are very ignorant and sheep to begin with.

---

Answer to OP: More than necessary, restraint is more often exercised than not.

Exactly, the trust system was solely made with the purpose of giving it to those upon whom we risked or we got risked some coins to/by someone and we trust them/they trust us that we can be used as an exchanger or that we can use them for that very same purpose because one/few of our trades were successful. I don't know how mudding each other for some personal reasons, spam, giving stupid trust feedbacks (see my profile for a few by game-protect) justifies to be sitting there in our profile. I know that spam needs to be reported and I'm completely with the spambusters but those who give red marks for spamming, is it really the best place to land your opinion?

For me, I'm not a fan of the current feedback system since there is a reason why, for example, Facebook, Twitter, etc., don't have a dislike button. So I'm a bit reluctant to give negative feedback. Also, positive feedback is somewhat similar to merit. For me, the feedback system should be used for trading purposes only.

However, even if you have decided to "not participate," there will be a person who just likes to troll you with random negative feedback. I think my negative feedbacks are fair, and I hope I don't have to give more of it in the future.

I think only you've understood me completely.

And I like this sentence, I think it is a summary of my topics;



Thank you a lot for the clarification.


And, if you are completely ok with your feedback, there is no issue. Just I wanted to re-consider again if someone really deserved it or not! So like LoyceV said above, your feedback will be usefull or make this forum better? Just think about it. What I wanted to tell you was not to give negative feedback to anyone! Just give it to the one who truly deserves it!



Again, I think you understand what I'm saying. Thank you for your clarification.

I review my trust ratings roughly twice a year and sometimes remove or revise some of them. I used to advocate others to review their ratings but have largely given up on that. Nobody wants to be told what to do, even in the most polite terms.

Sending red trust for opinions is an unfortunate new habit that has developed here, along with a laundry-list of excuses for it (and no, "lying" is not a valid excuse). Trust list exclusion is a more suitable and a more effective way of dealing with someone's flawed judgement. Neutral rating can be added if you really feel the need to say something about the person. Other than that the trust system should be left out of flame wars.

I strongly believe in this:
And this:
And this:

I invite anyone to review my the feedback I've left, and if there's anything worth discussing, please post in my reputation thread.

Some of my negative feedback is no longer needed, because the accounts have been Nuked, but I leave them as reference anyway.

I have only given negative trust to people who have scammed me and not to those who have scammed others as sometimes those accusations cannot be trusted else they get resolved and it gets troublesome to follow them up.  For personal conflicts, a neutral rating would be fine but not a negative feedback. Trolls and spammers especially have to be given neutral feedback.

Your post gave me pause to go and check on my trust history... I didn't recall giving any "unnecessary" negative feedback, even in the cases of rambotnic and game-protect who both left a false negative on my profile.

Indeed, in the case of rambotnic, I even sent them a PM asking them to reconsider the red trust (it was my first) and they told me that I had to "suffer"... C'est la vie.

In the case of game-protect, they tagged me because I supported a flag (that had overwhelming evidence). Given their history and behaviour, I didn't even bother trying to reason with them.


As far as I can tell, all my negatives are for scammers, shills promoting scams and/or malware or folks with active scam accusations (with what I consider adequate evidence of said scam).

I believe this is the correct usage of trust feedback.

Of course, nothing I mentioned here is about those who use the system correctly. But there are also those given unnecessary as a result of personal fights. Everything I mentioned above is about them. I did not need to say that we do not want anyone who create SCAM and/or SPAM content here.

If you do not abuse forum trust system then you shouldn't get tag. There would be few retaliatory feedback but it's very low. Whoever abuse trust system by false feedback's they have been removing from DT network by other DT members. Trust actually using for prevent abuse/likely scam. Most of DT members leaving feedback's with reference links, so if there is not appropriate reason for tag you might open thread on reputation about it so other DT members would see and they might counter or distrust. But if DT members just ignore likely scam or abuse then forum will full by scammers/abuser. Will you like make a heaven for scammers on this forum?

Personally I have been trying to use negative feedback very carefully. I never left feedback if someone express their opinions against me. Everyone have freedom of speech, so let them speak. Eventually they will get return same as they done for others.

I have not been following the "meta" board for a long time. Because I often think that the purpose of the forum is out of the way and that people are trying to make obvious cold war. Here I see a lot of unnecessary negative trust activities that appear at the end of the correspondence. Are these really necessary? Have you ever reevaluated the negative feedbacks you have made so far?

First of all, I think it is necessary to accept that everyone may have differences of opinion. So I think it's not right to give negative feedback to someone just because one thinks differently from you. Also, there is no logical explanation for going out of the subject and breaking each other. I think the energy spent here would be better for all of us if it really focused on the right points like blockchain tech or something. I think everyone should re-consider this negative feedback thing again.

I think that if we use both the trust system and the merit system correctly, it can be so useful and beneficial for all of us. I'm even very sure. I ask you, please review all the negative feedback you provided. I'm sure you will notice what you need to ignore.

Let me briefly tell you my own story. When the merit system arrived I was just a "member" and had only 10 merits. It took me a long time to come to where I am now. In the early days, I was far from contributing to the forum since I was just trying for bounty. Therefore, I continued as a member for a long time. Moreover, we did not have many merit resources on the local board. And since I usually write on the local board, it took quite a while to become a Full Member. But then I suddenly realized that the contributions made were somehow appreciated. When I came up with something good, I was somehow rewarded. And now I'm here. And now I think of being able to contribute to the forum rather than having merit, and somehow being rewarded.

I am very sorry to see that an account has received negative feedback because I have come this long way. I think those who come to their places by struggling like me will understand me very easily. I think it's best to stay away from personal conflicts and quarrels. Thus, those who manage the forum can deal with more correct issues. If it is not really a big problem, let them go, ignore them. If it is really trouble then you should consider giving trust both negative or positive.

I hope I was able to tell you what I was thinking about correctly.