Topic: Bitcointalk trust system has been destroyed by scammers (Read 645 times)

This is a great post for a 1990s experimental AI.

However, any reasonably intelligent human being having read the details provided kindly by myself in this thread would recognise the undeniable failings and dangers of allowing proven scammers to use the trust system to punish and deter whistle blowing and use it in the multitude of other ways I have mentioned to scam with impunity.

Therefore you not having a problem with it is entirely irrelevant and doesn't  to the distinct points laid out in the OP.

I agree you must not rely on it and do your own investigation but that doesn't mean the current trust system aka DT hasn't been infested and spoiled by scammers and those willing to enable scammers and collude and protect them.

Available criterias? Aka self awarded and cycled merits based on nothing since there is no criteria or definition for giving merits except you think it's good? And since there is no definition or criteria of what good is then it is impossible to know if people even think the post they merit is good.

There is vast chasm between not perfect and completely crap and dangerous.

As much as I know it, the trust system works very well. I only imagine what it would have seemed like without it in place. Your claims at OP is a revelation to me and I'm not quite sure I'll have to worry over it much.
The trust system is simply there as a speculative tool on whom you can do business with as it also apportions importance to a users account using the available criterias the forum has in a simple algorithm. Even at that, it's never forces you to give your trust off just because of the counts on an account. It's very much at your discretion on how you should trust and conduct your affairs with regards to business within the forum. Besides, no system is perfect, there is always flaws and loosed ends at some ends.

Sorry but your low functioning spew is only making a point you could feel is valid.
Of course

1. Anyone can continue to post and show support in a thread they didnt start.
2.  Only someone who eats ass as voraciously ass yourself could conveniently miss the indisputable evidence even nutildah dare not tackle.
3. Your accusation of alt is speculation and is irrelevant
4. You're a moron.
5. What a shock spamming a gambling sig? Lol
6. Claims solid evidence of scamming by DT is " horribles accusations" lol and a waste of time to read.
7. Your lack of comprehension and critical reasoning are nauseating. I can only hope bitsler or whatever your shit sponsor is roasts in eternal hell for paying you to inflict such putrid dirt on this once great forum. Either that or your segment in the sub human centipede
Of DT places you between lauda and vod.

@ nutildah

1. Still no refutation of any one of my points.
2. You're a proven willing scam facilitator for pay who tries to delete the evidence when caught. Then trust abuses those that present the evidence of your shady past.
3. The point of the thread is that DT scammers have used the trust system to abuse others. Which is undeniably true.

Stop trying to make the thread about DT1 using the trust system to implement scams.

However using these
1.punish those presenting the evidence of their wrong doing.
2. Prevent legitimate warnings being given via the trust system aka opposing legitimate flags
3. Coercing and rewarding abuse of the trust system via bestowed trust includes and merits
4. Mutual red tag removals

Is assisting you pull off the scam and getting away with it.

I mean anyone can pull off a scam but for the evidence of scamming to be irrefutable  and transparent but you receive no punishment then DT1 makes that possible.

Of course DT that have scammed previously may have only pulled if off because

1/ people didnt want to speak out for fear of punishment via the trust system
2. People may have perceived that the perp being on DT meant they were trustworthy.
3. Collusion between other corrupt DT members preventing prior warnings on their account.

Even so the purpose of the thread is to demonstrate scammers on DT abusing the trust system have broken it.

It's not about whatever you want to make it so we can say your prior documented willing scam facilitating for pay and trying to delete the evidence is okay. Or that the other proven scammers are okay to be on DT and abuse the trust of other members.

Stop running away from the points I am making.
Also as a prior NEM stake holder ( worth 300 btc at one stage) and an early dash adopter who was recently begging for 0.02 btc loans from your mud hut in some third world mess.... lol there is only one person here that should be crying and butthurt. You're basically a guide on how not to bitcointalk. Nutildah trading tips anyone?

You seem to be taking a leaf out suchmoons scuttling techniques. Ignoring the core points and half quoting something you can try to make some snarky moronic comment that falls apart under mild scrutiny anyway.


Now since you are unable to refute any of the evidence I have provided that undeniably demonstrates what an unsuccessful loser and willing scam facilitator for pay you are that would sneakily delete the evidence if you could and firm pal and supporter of other proven scammers on DT then best to concede and agree. I mean what else can you do except try some diversions or make some more excuses which I will immediately crush and pulverise with the observable and undeniable truth?

Thanks for not running away. I'm enjoying you again. Bring more wannabe human centipede segments to play too. I like them bumping and slobbering their moronic excuses or just blatant lies and misinformation on the thread for me to debunk whilst asking them how much DT ass they want to be forced to publicly consume on their inexorable path to certain evisceration at the hands of the independently verifiable truth.

So apparently, this thread is made by smartcontracts100 yet suddenly KaneVWE keeps supporting a thread that he didn't even started. Seems (or should I say a fact) that both the OP and KaneVWE are by the same person, roasting and trying their best to be 'The Righteous' - making accusations with no further valid evidences. The OP keeps linking threads and just wants us to waste time reading such horrible accusations yet ends up being accusations that were mainly a subjective one, and pretending that they(or just he/she) are those that would set things right.

TBH, I only wanted to say this to all of the other users here that would and might comment after this. Please, we've been through more than this bullsh*t. We're still in a pandemic. May we just stick to what we really are disregarding this kind of person as attention only feeds their ego.

Also, I've seen that most of the connected users with the OP and supports him seems to be receiving VALID FEEDBACKS, while they keep sending distrust with no further solidity nor sense at all.

Right, I know your feelings have been very, very hurt over the years and its obviously been traumatic for you, but if you could move past that for just one minute... You don't have a single observable instance of DT1 using their authority and/or status for purposes of scamming? Not a single one? That's what this thread is about, after all... Just name the member and the scam and we'll look into it.

Past scamming is okay?
You are not a scammer or willing scam facilitator if it happened in the past?

You are not abusing the trust system if you punishing whistleblowers for pointing out you have scammed or been willing to facilitate scams in the past?

You seem to also be cutting out from your quotes that those are the adjectives you are conflating with telling the truth.
Those are your adjectives.

Past scammers aka scammers
Past willing scam facilitators for pay aka willing scam facilitators for pay

Are abusing the trust system and using it to punish whistleblowers for presenting the truth about them.
They are also seeking to palm those truths off as crying whining and butthurt.

Clearly you don't want to tackle the evidence contained in the links. You know you can't tackle the truth don't you?

You don't get to say well DT members who scammed in the past on this forum are not scammers.
You don't get to say well DT members who use the trust system to punish whistle blowers are not abusing the trust system because we scammed in the past.

You don't get to use the trust system in several ways to scam with impunity and punish those that present the truth about your scamming which you can not refute or debunk.

DT contains proven scammers who abuse the trust system in multiple ways.
The op is correct.

Uh oh, now you've taken a step backwards. Yes, we're all aware that these are the adjectives you want the forum to associate you most closely with, but its not very healthy to dwell on this point. We should move on. Let's try to focus on the topic on hand for starters: do you have any observable evidence that DT1 is actually running scams? If so, who and what are they? I don't mean stuff from literally years ago -- I mean now.

Well the link

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/support-flag-for-scammer-lauda-explain-in-meta-if-you-dispute-the-flag-5249969

Here details lying and deceiving others for financial gain
Aka scamming people.
I guess youre protecting your scamming pal

Makes sense

This link details your willingness to facilitate scammers for a fee and then try to delete your post history

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/nutildah-willing-to-facilitate-scammers-for-around-300bucks-deleting-evidence-5190369

I mean we can see you used the trust system to punish the whilst blower there also.

Of course if you need the details of the tman auction scamming you can request those also.

Lets focus on you though first DT1 willing scammer facilitator for pay and trust abuser.
You are a prime example of what the op refers to.

Come back, stop running away.

Telling the truth about scamming DT1 scum = crying, whining, butthurt, I will expand the list as we proceed.

That's OK! Don't worry about it too much! You're quite welcome and don't be bothered as we all have your back, big guy!

I always wonder why cryptohunter never tagged me for my various unending and unforgiveable sins. It must have been out of pure compassion. The infinite size of that guy's heart, huh? Its unreal.

Well, seeing as how nobody ever provided any sort of evidence in the form of observable instances that DT1 is actively scamming users, I'm gonna call it a wrap and chalk this thread up to another observable instance of Butt Hurt.

Love it when scammer facilitators for pay bite. This will be good.

I don't see any rebuttals to my points?
Try again please.

" we all" ? That's other willing scam facilitators for around 300 bucks who try to delete their post histories but get caught and then use the trust system to try to punish those that blew the whistle on you? Or just you?

Anyway just try to make a sensible rebuttal.
Take Your time.

Let's see. Or does it pull the old suchmoon scuttle on me and run and hide.

Nutildah is a clear example of what the OP is correctly pointing out.

Not to mention he was close pals with 2 other proven scammers that are on DT or were.
Both of whom openly used the trust system to punish their whistle blowers. One even stated he gave red tags to a member for presenting facts about his scamming pal.

How much more clear can they make it   

That's OK, apology accepted. We all understand that you're quite fragile both emotionally and mentally and we are all rooting for you to get the help that you need. Just take your time and don't force your re-entry into society, let it come naturally. Also, make sure to attend your anger management courses! Don't want you running afoul of the terms of your probation... Congrats on making this big step forward!  <3

This is a brilliant example of a proven willing scam facilitator for pay who would seek to delete his post history to disguise this fact if he were not busted by a real scam hunter.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/nutildah-willing-to-facilitate-scammers-for-around-300bucks-deleting-evidence-5190369

Notice this proven scammer facilitator for pay red tags the OP and anyone he thinks is related to revealing these inconvenient facts about himself.

So when proven scammers and scammer facilitators for pay can use the trust system to punish their whistleblowers then you know the trust system is broken.

His other points are also bogus.

The trust system is designed by 1 person. The design can only be altered by 1 person.
The trust system can only be policed at the top by 1 person.

So flagging abuse was meant to be policed by 1 person.
There is no such thing as tagging abuse now.

This is a pseudo democracy.

It removes the accountability largely from theymos so really it is less reliable. Although theymos is the only person that can police it.
It does not police itself and never can because the design forces collusion to maintain their grip on the rev streams the position of DT1 and merit source affords them. There is far more incentive to collude than to do what is trustworthy in most cases.

So when theymos picked the DT1 and they were caught scamming there was pressure on him to remove them.
Now when DT1 are shown to be scamming there is no pressure to remove them on theymos.
You can see what happens when irrefutable evidence of scamming is presented relating to one of the DT1 core scumbags?
Well look here
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/support-flag-for-scammer-lauda-explain-in-meta-if-you-dispute-the-flag-5249969

They all collude to support them and prevent warnings.



This crying and whining about it being unfair = undeniable independently verifiable evidence of scammers and willing scam facilitators for pay using the trust system to:

1. Punish those presenting the evidence of their wrong doing.
2. Prevent legitimate warnings being given via the trust system aka opposing legitimate flags
3. Coercing and rewarding abuse of the trust system via bestowed trust includes and merits
4. Mutual red tag removals
5. Crushing free speech and encouraging echo chambers

Aka scamming with impunity, rewarding those that support them and punishing those that whistleblow on them

Sorry for crying and whining.


The trust system was ruined by its design and implementation

Scammers and their pals are simply using it as it allows itself to be used.

The best use of merit and DT1 is a honey pot for the most greedy and untrustworthy.

People have been crying about how broken and unfair the trust system since its earliest incarnation, so nothing has really changed in that regard. What has changed is that it is now more decentralized than ever in that anybody has the potential to become DT1. No longer do you have to be anointed and receive theymos' magical tap on the shoulder. It went from being a monarchy to a democracy -- don't know how people could be upset about that.

I think its working well as a lot of those in it are motivated to do good and basically be helpful to the forum or else risk losing their status. There's a few collectibles people in it that couldn't care less, and that's fine -- after all, people don't really "run for office", they just meet certain criteria and their inclusion is automated.

For the most part DT1 does a good job of regulating itself. It's a diverse mix of several elements, constantly evolving and democratically deciding what constitutes proper use of trust.


I think the point actmyname was making is that if the Trust System was really that bad, more users would be creating custom trust lists as a way to protest the state of things.

In reality, its not that bad. People are gonna cry no matter how its implemented, especially scammers or those whose opinions of themselves are far greater than they are perceived by the general community.

That is because he is undeniably correct. Of course I would support statements that can not be debunked because they are true.

So since you seem to be suggesting that I am the OP why not just ask me the same questions directly?

I will be pleased to give you the definition of scamming and scammer and point you undeniable independently verifiable evidence that clearly meets that definition.

Go ask the OP to make some more threads I can support if they are reporting the truth could you.

Can you tell me, what inside of your mind about the definition of "scammer" here?
It is so funny when you determine "scammer" here, by pointing at certain sections.

But, well from this case, it is sure that you probably have faced a bad reputation or experience with your another/other account(s) here.

Simple to understand:
You won't get negative trust if you don't break the rules that lead you to get it.
You will get positive trust if you deserve it.

You should be able to see, read, and understand why they give negative trust.
Don't just see without understanding

Btw, every time @smartcontracts100 starts a topic about this, you will be also on the list of replies and gives very extreme support to OP. And then, OP is not coming back again.
Well, this is probably only my feeling.
Don't mind of it

Not only is it incorrect is is completely pointless.

The people needing protection the most are the noobs who have no clue who to trust.
How to expect them to create their own reliable trust lists.

So to  attain this pointless goal we should destroy the free speech of the forum and ensure a period of such untrustworthy scum on DT1 that it becomes so horrendous and so many people are negatively impacted that we abandon that and grasp around making our own trust lists.

Give them a bunch of long term traders of significant sums with long histories of exemplary financial conduct and zero instances of financially motivated wrongdoing as a default or forget it.
Defaulting them to trust proven scammers is messed up. Claiming its is fully intentional the corruption and negative impact of a default trust of self elected scamming slime will be very helpful at forcing people to form their own trust list is a possibility but surely just as easy to say no default trust make your own when you start.

Doesn't work, very dangerous in that it allows scamming with impunity from inside DT1 that are forced to collude or risk being booted anyway and repercussions. Kills free speech to a high degree.  Mad for moral and reputation of the forum.

Unfortunately, that's incorrect. Each week, only a fraction of the 91,210 active users creates a new custom Trust list:
Data from Users who Created or Wiped their Trust list - weekly data, "weeks" are as used in my Trust list viewer: week 90 is based on last Saturday's Trust data dump.

I wish theymos would promote buillding a custom Trust list in a similar way as he promoted the April Fools KYC, that would reach a lot more users.

Accelerationism - through the eventual collapse of trust via the DefaultTrust system, we accelerate to a point where people are so skeptical of the system they decide to do what theymos had intended: making their own custom trust lists.

Regardless of thoughts about the OP, it is clear to see the trust network is in shambles.  You'd be foolish to think the mods aren't aware of this.  Everyone is just hoping that the community will grow to the point where active users take notice and are able to weed out the bad eggs, but it's getting worse than better to be honest.  I would have called the new trust system a failure and tried rebooting it already by now, but theymos must see something I don't to continue to allow things to trend in this direction.

This thread was started in Economics and presumably was moved here by a mod. I don't know why they even bothered - should have gone straight to trash. The OP is a few marbles short of a full deck.

Who are you responding to oh unshaven one?

You seem to be in full agreement that accusing people of scamming with zero evidence is wrong
This is a good first step.

Please don't turn Meta in the Reputation board. Here is no place for personal vendettas. The Rep board is already clogged with all that drama and moving it here will do no good at all. Calling everyone scammers without solid proof is just "pissing against the wind".
Lock this one and move it back to the Rep. Go fight your windmills there

Can you explain why lauda specifically is required to leave any feedback on your own account for you to observe there is a group of colluding DT members that may involve or even revolve around lauda?

Are you disputing his claim or that is is not legitmate for him to even make that claim or that is just not provably relevant to his current gripe?

I am often surprised to see you actmyname falling off of the fence on to the wrong side.
I have yet to ever observe you speak out against lauda or support concerns over the worrying amount of both smoke and raging fire that comes from the putrid account of lauda?.


It didnt take gmax more than 2 minutes to conclude what any objective member would conclude when reviewing just one incident involving the scamming piece of dirt that is lauda?

Yet so many of the same " not laudas gang" all immediately concluded they must oppose a warning on the basis of the identical evidence

I want to believe you play devils advocate rather than the devils pawn.

I know you like and appreciate those you believe are smarter than the average apes here.  That however should not influence your opinions on what is clearly fair and equal treatment of all members. Smart people are not always good people sadly as I'm sure you know.

It is easy to say get over something that does not personally effect you.
It is even easier to say get over something when saying that assists you. ( not that I am claiming that is your motivation)

However, one should at least try to be impartial.

You are smarter than the average lauda gang ape, but even the very smartest people can't disguise a pattern of behavior if repeated too frequently. Better to mix up some small condemnation on both sides where it will stand up to scrutiny. Rushing to defend one group and then condemning and lecturing another group for identical behaviors is not really sensible

What is your opinion on the merit and trust system? Entirely free of abuse and collusion ?  The possibility does not even exist such is the brilliant design?  

No disrespect of course. Just clarification and reasoning is always useful when trying to understand fully a post.


Of course mikey still there ignoring that fact that many improvements have been suggested.
Improvements that nobody could debunk or refute.

Mikey still believes his anecdotal experience of benefiting from the status quo is conclusive proof that no improvements are possible.
Well not for him anyway.
Remember mikey played it very smart. No sigs or signs of being here for sigs until boom straight to chipmixer.

It always comes back to the same thing for excusing abuse or actually abusing  aka cheating. .....money or power.

The forum gives you all the ability to decide the source/sources of feedback you want to see, but most members here have only the "default trust" group in their trust list, so all in all, none-DT members (The vast majority of the forum members) are the once who give the default trust list value and importance. If you have a better way of dealing with the trust system go ahead and propose it, I am pretty sure it won't be as effective as the one we have now even though it's far from perfect, it's probably the best we can have, and until members learn how to use a customized trust list - nothing will change.

"Lauda Gang"

Let me see... now where did Lauda leave a negative on your account?

Ah. That's right... nowhere. In fact, I can't find anything related to Lauda in this situation at all except for your claim that they are relevant. Something something obsession, something something get over it sweetie.

1. That doesn't make it a useful system with regard creating credible and valuable scam warnings. It dilutes and devalues them.

2. " you think" = subjective wide open to abuse lazy design

3. Even where there is stipulation like for flags admin does nothing about abuse.

Some people think that if you report DT1 members prior scamming then that makes you high risk to trade with. Lol
Guess who those people are? DT1 you got it.

Again the trust system like the merit system is a cluster fuck because you can not abuse it.

You can give any reason for saying you think the person is high risk to trade with however ridiculous that is.
Just like you can say you think any post is a good post even when it is 100% undeniably a misleading dangerous shit post.

When you provide financial incentive to abuse systems then leave them wide open to abuse to the point it is impossible to prove abuse ....guess what happens.

I mean unless the intention of the merit and trust systems are mimicking the central banking system and ensuring the forum is as corrupt and unfair as possible then it is broken beyond repair.

Scrap it and merit cancer system. Or tighten it up and force retroactive conformity to the tighter rules.

There is no point mentioning merit or tagging abuse. It is designed to be impossible to prove abuse takes place.

" you think " drinking lemon tea makes you unsafe to trade with then you can give red trust.
" you think"  whistleblowing on scammers makes the whistleblower unsafe to trade with you can give red trust.

Just like " you think " posting debunked false and misleading crap is a good post = you give merit to it 

There is really no way to claim it is abuse. You can ask if it is appropriate and useful to give red trust for and then present the details and invite debate. Then they will just post pictures demanding the debate stops.
The mods allow this to take place.  If you report these pictures demanding the debate stops the mods mark the reports bad.
You can call theymos to debate. He will ignore it or tell you you are boring and that scammers are suboptimal but your account can stay red trusted and have a big warning on all of your threads telling everyone "Yes this members posts and threads are that of a scammer"

Best thing to do is simply hound these trust abusing scum bags and bring up inconvenient on topic and relevant truths about them when you get time and have the inclination. I generally enjoy doing so when they are lecturing and punishing others for things they reward themselves and their pals for on DT1.

Negative feedback doesn't necessarily require a trade. Check what its purpose is-
If someone seems to be a scammer (which can be identified by their behavior), there's no problem with tagging them for future reference. Now, if you don't like the system, well, you can still trade here without depending on the feedbacks as there are a lot of trusted escrow services on the forum.

I agree that the trust system is a complete joke and very dangerous.

Look at the excuses from those benefitting nicely from the current mess of merit and trust.

1. You've not been here long enough to possess the knowledge you seem to have so that means you must be an elder member ?

Proof? Who cares alts are allowed? No debunking of any of his points.

This excuse from the sneaky and greedy sock puppet racist sig spammer thepharmacist  aka Hugeblackwoman who got busted jumping from one sig to another to get a tiny bit extra rev

Also has stated he does not know if his pal lauda did scam people during an escrow but will protect them anyway out of loyalty
Certainly part of lauda gang.

He and the others have reviewed conclusive proof of scamming but condone and protect it.


2. Please go to another forum.

Lol okay yeah scammers and scammer protectors say don't like our scamming or scammer protecting or trust abuse just leave.

From UltraElite the known pal of scammers and is a scammer protector.


3. The old argument that red trust and flags don't stop you posting or they may say does not effect your free speech.

Whilst it is true they don't stop you posting they can ruin the credibility of what you post and they can also prevent your account from getting paid to post like they certainly want to be. I mean look at the chipmixer spammers just on the few replies you've had more or less telling you the status quo is great and excusing the blatant abuse.

This ability to abuse the trust system for any reason you like crushes free speech and fair trade and services. You whistle blow on scammer DT1 you get your account tagged, your business starts to compete with theirs or their sponsors don't be shocked they find a reason to tag it.

4. loyceV as always presents the most retarded defense and is another scammer supporter and protector.

A/ doesn't prove that your possibly valid objection to being tagged by those you correctly claim are part of a colluding mass of scammer supporting shit stains is trust abuse. I mean there is clear evidence many of these deliberately try to prevent legitmate scammer warnings put of scammers accounts.

B/ even so if someone unfairly uses the broken tagging system to abuse your account then you are not permitted to tag them back?

That's kind of like saying a random maniac attacks you with a broken bottle in the street for no reason so you pick up another broken bottle and fight back. Now you are the bad guy?

Also that analogy is being generous because I would say that their is strong evidence to corroborate what his tags claim about those people. Evidence I have not seen anyone debunk.


The truth here is that even when a person with many years on this forum for which they could find zero financially motivated wrongdoing,  was the largest scam hunter of all time and most effective (bar perhaps 1 or 2 others) whistle blew on one of the worst scammers here who was telling lies about him who then trust abused that honest and brilliant member ... what happened? Yes DT, mods and even the forum administrator took the side of the proven scammer and trust abused and told lies about the honest and brilliant member.

So you will win no support here because they are all pals and are colluding to cream off the best rev streams from the forum.
I don't say the administrator has this motivation but is either too lazy to do his own investigations and listens to those he thinks he can trust or is just always siding with them because he thinks they provide some kind of useful service to the forum by playing whack a mole with non important inconsequential 2 bit scammers ( or those that provide competition to their own sponsors and other ventures )

They don't provide any net postive service and have crushed free speech here and now use his broken systems to scam with impunity.

Sadly one person that could have changed things for the better on the forum has been removed further from having influence.  He recognized lauda and his cronies for what they were and didnt like the merit or trust systems. Sadly he handed full control to theymos now. So since theymos took some time designing these systems he will allow them to ruin any semblance of free speech and for the DT1 to scam with impunity and no consequences it seems.  The motivation is either to see if the systems will ever self heal in a few decades or just being stubborn or just enjoys some of the resulting drama. Who can really know.

So expect no support here in meta. I mean pointing out we need changes to DT to those in DT who benefit from the status quo of DT is I guess going to yield nothing but excuses and bullshit.

If anyone would like independently verifiable evidence that corroborates what I have said then just feel free to ask.

LoyceV btw is also actively helping protect proven scammers and of course spamming chipmixer.

Anyone wearing a sig has an agenda to maintain that sig. Anyone needing a sig is here for money. The need for money or the ever greedy lust for more money corrupts most people.

loyceV is quick to point out your feedback is irrelevant? That is not true. It is clearly relevant and as yet debunked or refuted. How can any feedback pertaining to trust be irrelevant? Whether it is reliable ( the claims are reliable ) or is seen by the mistaken and mislead members here as having much credibility or truth is a possibility. The fault is with the design and abuser of that design. So the point by loyce is again useful to the case of the OP.


TLDR?  the OP is correct and clearly has some valid points regardless of this specific case which I have not investigated.

Yes i believe it is wrong for DT to give red tags unless there is conclusive proof of scamming or strong corroborating evidence to demonstrate there was clear intention to scam or setting up for a scam.
Even the flagging system is abused so the entire thing is a dangerous misleading cluster fuck.

I know, right? Maybe you can explain your own Trust abuse?


Thin-skinned butthurt? Not enough hugs as a kid? Too many hugs as an adult? The other way around? You tell me!

You know feedback isn't moderated, that's why you can spam all the negative feedback you want without trading.

I'd love to see evidence of a scamming moderator!

---

---

TL;DR your feedback is irrelevant:

The forum was created for discussions, so trust does not affect or impose restrictions on the number of posts you make, and negative trust does not mean that you are a person with bad posts, so if you use the forum for discussion, you will not care about it.

If you are a seller and proved that you are selling real products, the negative trust will not constitute anything. You can use the forum ecsrow and you will not face a problem.

I'm starting to come round to the idea that a mix of trading history and board activity may be a good system, especially for members who have been here fir a few years. The main thing that kills it though is the ability to sell those trusted accounts, and this means you have to approach any trades with caution. One way round this could be a voluntary KYC record for people who want to establish trading trust, but I can't see how that could be monitored.

Negative feedbacks are not limited to when a user actually trades with the other member, it is a (personal) reflection of a member's trustworthiness and could be based on user behavior and general trade history. Trust flags are used for alleged scam violations.

Trust flags and feedbacks are unmoderated, so the mods really do not do anything regarding this.

You are welcome to use other forums you find to be better than bitcointalk.

Nobody is forcing you and your friends to stay here. Feel free to leave and close the door on the way please.

Uh, yeah.  You registered in March of 2020 and have knowledge enough of forum politics to post crap like this (in the wrong section, by the way.  This should be in Meta). 

You're another alt account of an old member who has an old grudge, and you're not putting a new face on any new issues, just rehashing....something.  You linked to an old thread about "Lauda's gang" which really isn't a thing.

Check other forums for what?

What scam?  Please tell me what scam you're talking about exactly, with references if you've got them.

Bitcointalk trust system has been destroyed  by scammers

Read the reputation section : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=129.0

And find more info about the Lauda Gang

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/gangs-of-bitcointalk-5226757

You will see how they leave you negative trust without even trading ... guess the reason ...

And what moderators do ...they take their side ...possible they are part of the scam also .

Check other forums and find more info about people you deal with yourself as the bitcointalk trust system is useless now .