Topic: Clearing my trust list - page 2. (Read 1103 times)

I don’t think people should be clearing their lists in some sort of protest.. If your confident in your choices on your lists I think you should keep them..

It’s what the system needs and the system is not that bad.. Their are just things to be settled now and then and that means “it’s working”..
Working about exactly as theymos intended with retaliations..

Also publicly announcing “I’m going to/did clear my list” or “I want to be blacklisted” just seems like attention seeking behavior..

I didn’t say shit to anyone when I cleared my list, and I didn’t do it in any sort of protest of the system..

I simply became conflicted about what I was doing with my list.. Conflicted about how much compromise I was willing to do to add, remove, or exclude anyone on my list..

Adding anyone at all to my list is a compromise because I don’t agree with anyone 100%, and was and am undecided about how much compromise in that I was and am willing to do..

Take LoyseV for example.. Should be a pretty easy choice to add to your inclusions list right?
Well, I greatly disagree with them including Vod and excluding OG, so there is the compromise..

I can’t think of anyone I 100% agree with and could add with no compromise..
Even my closest friend on here that I would trust with multiple full coins, my dox, and basically anything business related, I disagree with on many other things..
It’s a sign of great trust to me that we can disagree on many things and still trust each other very much..

It wasn’t about any sort of protest and was not attention seeking..

I don’t think that people should be clearing their lists, and I think I should make a list even though I don’t really want to..

Clearing your list or not having a list is like hoarding smerits..
It should be used, and I’ll admit that I am not right in not using mine..

Base on my believe i think he's doing the right thing here and his action does not exprrss any distrust on those he has ttusted before but the major point here is to sanitize all related affairs related to recent abuses on the trust system by some members, probably in doing this , it may attract the attention of theymos for an intervention because it is obvious that things were already going wrong and not as expected, dkbit98 suggested right.

Thinking about it a bit here, I don't think I would ever clear it, but I might remove a lot. There are quite a few people who I have ~ and I would like to leave a lot of them that way.
I really don't think us doing anything will change the way things are done here. People have been abusing and complaining about it for years and nothing was done. I doubt that will change. The other side is, if we don't do anything we KNOW nothing will change.

Have to think about it.

-Dave

You could be right about that, and it might just be a language misunderstanding (on my part), but BitcoinGirl.Club did lump me in with the rest of what I thought they were saying was the group JollyGood considered trolls and/or abusers of the DT system.  Regardless, that's not something that'll eat away at my soul or cause me to lose a minute of sleep.  Spine of steel, don't you know.

You compared JollyGood to a status-seeking politician, which I found interesting, as I'd never considered he came across that way.  I figured he might be trying to gain a reputation by tagging a bunch of members who may or may not be involved with shady stuff, but I've never observed him to curry favor with anyone.  Even after our communication, he continued to do the same old stuff that led me to remove him from my trust list, so it isn't as if he listened to whatever I wrote (which I don't remember and haven't checked to see if I still have our PMs).

I'm still pondering whether I should follow Yahoo62278 and clear my list.  It's not a small decision to make IMO. 

I think you're missing BitcoinGirl.Club's point;  I interpret her post as speculation that JollyGood would accuse those listed as a clique, or trolls.  I don't think anyone has accused JollyGood (or you, for that matter) of trolling.

And, as for the communication about your trust exclusion; of course JollyGood is going to respond to you.  You're one of the older established members, a merit source, and a fixture in DT.  He knows, like any power hungry politician, he needs the help of the powerful to gain more power.  Anyone else who's critical of him gets ignored.  Like me, I'm a nobody so he thinks that maybe just maybe if he ignores my criticism of his trust abuses (like he's done for the last year) that I'll just go away.

I'm not going away.  JollyGood shouldn't take it personally, I would criticize any one who abuses the trust system regardless of who they are.  

I hope I'm not included in JollyGood's list of cliques and trolls, serving my own agenda by manipulating the system.  For one thing, I don't have an agenda with respect to my trust list other than to do what I think is best for the forum.  I've communicated with JollyGood since I excluded him, and if I recall correctly I explained to him why I did it and that there were no hard feelings, just that I thought there were too many questionable feedbacks he'd left for others. 

And I certainly don't think I'm a troll, and hopefully JollyGood doesn't see me that way.  I haven't done any trolling lately, and if I had a list of targets of trolling he wouldn't be on it.

There have always been groups of members who tend to see things (like JollyGood's feedback-giving accuracy) the same way and are pretty vocal about it.  It was that way when Lauda and Vod were active, but it's not like there's any behind-the-scenes collusion AFAIK.  I'm definitely not included if there is.

Trust system is only relevant because of the sig camps anyway. People are obsessed with the red trust ratings they may receive because when they do, the managers won't include them in their campaigns.

It has been the thing for years.

Almost any sig camps #1 rule:

"No red tags allowed"

Some managers manually check the red rating and decide themselves if it is a bullshit rating or not mostly that's not the case. Gaming the system isn't really hard neither. When a person acquires a good position in the system, he will have the power to decide who is going to join the nude parties and who is going to touch himself at night.

Wtf am I talking about?

Or someone is going to start abusing other members, make threats and blackmail other people... oh wait... that is already happening now, and most people are not paying attention at all

May the force be with you.
So does that mean that LoyceV is now on the dark side?  

I seen that when I was checking bpip and you dropped off my list.

Agreed

Which brings up another point. If users shouldn't be on DT1 then why the hell are they even eligible? Kinda makes no sense.

Jollygood and Royse have drama between them, they are not letting it spew out amongst the rest of the community as far as it leading to more silly tags. Having an opinion shouldn't keep you from DT. That's why I think when someone makes a new account to voice an opinion it needs to be ignored. Not because their opinion may be right or wrong, but more because they shouldn't hide. If I wanna call someone a bitch I will. No reason for me to hide, I want a person to know what I think about them.

Some users post an opinion and are unwilling to compromise or see anyone else's point of view. They are right and you cannot change their minds. I think those types( hell I may be that way at times but eventually i calm down and come to my senses lol) need to take a day and think before they react or post on a topic. Posting with a hothead is just gonna cause more drama and maybe tags that are inappropriate. Usually the community steps up and tells someone when they're being dumb and people come to their senses, but like I said above noone should get tagged for their opinion even if it might be a bad opinion.

Just as eddie13 said, your word is more powerful than DT. I would like to think he was referring to every user, not just myself.

People are trying to manipulate DT to gain reputation on this forum and eventually someone gonna do a huge scam because of it. A user can easily manipulate the system and gain IMO false reputation in the community just by hanging out in the collectibles section. Bid on some auctions, buy some shit, sell some shit, and boom gain positive ratings and likely inclusions. All that and never making a post outside of collectibles. Hence why we need 2 systems. A user hanging out buying and selling likely doesn't participate in the rest of the forum and shouldn't be in a position to make decisions about other users. They should be labeled an honest and trustworthy trader, not a community rep.

Welcome to the light!!!

You can already get a preview: wipe your Trust list, remove DefaultTrust, and add only theymos. You'll have theymos on Depth 0, theymos' Trust inclusions on Depth 1, and their Trust inclusions on Depth 2. Considering theymos barely changed his Trust list in the past years, you can expect walk down memory lane

It will be pretty interesting, can't wait to see a 100+ score on accounts like game-protect or bitcoinsv, or Loycevelenzuela or whatever their names were. So, should we turn back to a previous more, how was that, ..centralized trust system? 

Eventually yes but you did delete your own trust list around a year ago (I think you said) and during that time the system is still open to abuse and manipulation. Nothing has changed for the positive.

You are right, there are no highly intelligent philosophers here in the forum but some highly cunning individuals with ulterior motives are here. Mediocre is the key word here. Most of the agenda based inputs are culpable for the general low quality outputs visible in the forum today.

Yes the member base in the forum with all the local language boards (even with own problems) is something to marvel at and the small economies each has generated (from trading and/or avatar and signature campaigns) is at least a success story in itself.

This is true  

Whatever, there is also a nice little blacklisting option, so I could let wannabes, power trippers and witch hunters pretend they are more important in their own mind.
I am 100% sure what members will never erase their trust list

I am not expecting any theymos magic tricks and perfectly working system, that's for sure.
People already made suggestions like I said before, some of them are good for reducing number of DT members, and I am sure you are well aware about them.

I think theymos would make amendments and modifications to the forum structure as long as he thought it was something that was needed. Plenty of members do think it should be fixed because clearly it has been open to abuse by trolls and cliques for far too long.

It is not a good idea having distinctions between "trusting" and "empowering" users. Empower? There will never be full consensus on which members should be appointed with empowerment attached to them and what would they do with power? It would only empower their cliques whilst alienating others.

Several members have bloated egos and are as duplicitous and untrustworthy as they come, but by virtue of being part of a clique (and by subliminally encouraging others to do their trolling and attacking) they could be candidates. I would be unable to vouch for such an outcome and I am sure others will feel the same way and express it if a candidate list was ever drawn up.

In such a scenario the cliques would obviously put forward their candidates and support them with all their keyboard typing power.

Yes, agreed. Many times hunches turn out to be correct though 

Opening a topic in Meta would be a good idea in order for members to put forward ideas and have healthy debate as to how to confront it and fix it in such a manner that it is not open to abuse any longer.

I don’t think it’s so broken..
Things are sorting themselves out as intended are they not?

It’s just mediocre because that’s how democracy with mediocre inputs work.. You get mediocre outputs..
It’s not exactly a group of highly intelligent philosophers of a similar doctrine..

Democracy also slow and has a lot of debate before any decision is made and stuck with.. Not very efficient..

All from such varied cultures/beliefs from strict Islamic societies to atheist anarchists and communists what have you..
Diversity!

Almost a miracle anything gets done at all and it’s not all out war..

Maybe, in a BOFH moment, theymos will reform DT1 by handpicking you back

Seriously though:
But without offering a better system, what do you expect theymos to do?

---

---

If this is to make a point that DT needs fixing, it should be in Meta, not Reputation.

I am thinking of doing the same thing, but I would like if other members could do the same if they think DT system is currently broken.
EDIT: done, I cleaned my trust list also, and I will consider making new one after (possible) DT theymos reform.

I think some people (not exactly sure who) made good suggestions before to reduce number of DT members and make it harder to become DT2 member.
Lot's of talking and nothing changed so theymos probably didn't saw it, or didn't think it was something important.
I don't mind at all if only DT wannabes stay in DT1 for some time.

Guy who is complaining that trolls manipulate the system for their own agenda, has become one of the worst manipulators and witch/ghost hunters in this forum.

This is a valid point and, I don't know, maybe we should not wait for a "divine intervention" to fix this (although maybe a differentiation would be needed between trusting and empowering users).
Because while some fight each other and may have both good intentions (yes, I know that in this context this statement can explode), some real trolls simply get stronger. I won't tell names since I don't have solid proof, so it's just a hunch.
Maybe a new topic in Meta is needed to get ideas how to use better the current trust system. One idea that came into my mind was to select carefully a very short list of users we want to "empower". Or maybe it should be as wide as possible?!

See this topic for the criteria I used (and the ones I ignored).
Some of the users in the list are currently on DT1 already.

It's a game of numbers: if more good users are eligible, less abusers reach DT1. If all good users quit, only the abusers are left.