Topic: DefaultTrust changes - page 129. (Read 84344 times)
legendary
Activity: 2506
Merit: 3235
The Stone the masons rejected was the cornerstone.
List cleaned up. Removed almost everyone with the exception of 11 people
I can only say that I included 18 accounts yesterday and 2 accounts before, but when I look which accounts I included yesterday, 17 have already been part of "old" DT.
Perhaps old "system" was fine and it needed "upgrade" with new members, I don't know, I am thinking out laud.
Perhaps old "system" was fine and it needed "upgrade" with new members, I don't know, I am thinking out laud.
For instance I want to see a post using the dt suffix, and then want to click on the trust ratings of someone in the thread, without having to add the dt suffix each time again.
This would be really nice. I'm already finding myself switching back and forth regularly to see how things are changing - I can see it becoming very tedious in the coming weeks or months to keep doing this. Maybe even a check box somewhere that turns on ";dt" view until you turn it off again?
I really like what you did and what it implies for the trust network.
A whole lot of new users will have something else than an empty trust rating!
At the very least this will increase the awareness of the functionality.
I also like the "see with dt settings" possibility.
About that one, would it be possible to make it stick when clicking on links on a page you loaded with the dt suffix.
For instance I want to see a post using the dt suffix, and then want to click on the trust ratings of someone in the thread, without having to add the dt suffix each time again.
A whole lot of new users will have something else than an empty trust rating!
At the very least this will increase the awareness of the functionality.
I also like the "see with dt settings" possibility.
About that one, would it be possible to make it stick when clicking on links on a page you loaded with the dt suffix.
For instance I want to see a post using the dt suffix, and then want to click on the trust ratings of someone in the thread, without having to add the dt suffix each time again.
People shouldn't be working towards dt. If it's a goal you need to untrust yourself I'll n your list and do us all a favour.
I completely agree with you. My reason for suggesting it was that it would help stop the theoretical case of abuse as outlined by LoyceV here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.49144081. DT1 members would be able to see who is close to reaching DT1 status before they do reach it, and could then pre-emptively decide whether to exclude that person, rather than having to react to it after it has happened and spend a month or so with their inaccurate ratings being part of DT. All these data are already publicly available on the trust.txt.xz file - it would just be a case of reformatting it to make it easier to read.
Having said that, the scenario in question is unlikely enough itself, and theymos would likely step in to prevent an abuser becoming part of DT1 before they did anyway.
I dont know he would. He doesn't seem to like default trust anyway but it's what we have to put up with.
Maybe adding a rogue one or two will give people the incentive to start making up their own lists.
The merit bits aren't currently avaliable also thatd have to be outsourced. I mean it's east to do if someone has all the dumps.
Maybe it'd help work out if akne of the dts have gone rogue also.
People shouldn't be working towards dt. If it's a goal you need to untrust yourself I'll n your list and do us all a favour.
I completely agree with you. My reason for suggesting it was that it would help stop the theoretical case of abuse as outlined by LoyceV here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.49144081. DT1 members would be able to see who is close to reaching DT1 status before they do reach it, and could then pre-emptively decide whether to exclude that person, rather than having to react to it after it has happened and spend a month or so with their inaccurate ratings being part of DT. All these data are already publicly available on the trust.txt.xz file - it would just be a case of reformatting it to make it easier to read.
Having said that, the scenario in question is unlikely enough itself, and theymos would likely step in to prevent an abuser becoming part of DT1 before they did anyway.
I'm not working on this yet. It would certainly help if theymos' trust.txt.xz would have userIDs instead of usernames , those are terrible to process.
It's quite self contained as is. Just pull out the line and do a while loop through it.
I think this is quite a bad idea to do anyway. People shouldn't be working towards dt. If it's a goal you need to untrust yourself I'll n your list and do us all a favour.
Nice to see Lauda back in DT1, long time he/she was on my trust list with his thousands red trust (for alt account most of the time).
How know who are add me on their trust list, I think only admin can check it.
You could parse the trust system dumps or check individual user's trust list (by adding them to your trust list and temporarily removing everything else).I'd say all users engaging in trading will have to look past a persons trust score(now more then ever) and actually go into the persons profile you are trading with and check all the feedbacks. As well as make use of the active escrows
This should have always been the case as there were plenty of bad DT ratings. 
How know who are add me on their trust list, I think only admin can check it.
You could parse the trust system dumps or check individual user's trust list (by adding them to your trust list and temporarily removing everything else).It may be exciting or a position you feel a certain prestige gaining, but unless you have thick skin a lot of users will be posting a shitload of retaliatory feedbacks.
I'd say all users engaging in trading will have to look past a persons trust score(now more then ever) and actually go into the persons profile you are trading with and check all the feedbacks. As well as make use of the active escrows
Does someone have a quick way to find out who's been removed from DT1?
Sounds like a job for LoyceV!Also, I think LoyceV might already be working on this, but a page which shows everyone's votes from users with >10 and >100 merit would be nice.
I'm not working on this yet. It would certainly help if theymos' trust.txt.xz would have userIDs instead of usernames , those are terrible to process. How know who are add me on their trust list, I think only admin can check it.
You could parse the trust system dumps or check individual user's trust list (by adding them to your trust list and temporarily removing everything else). 
Correct me if I am wrong,
If above criteria need become DT1 then I think it's not very easy. How know who are add me on their trust list, I think only admin can check it. However selection methods are not bad.
Let's find 11 people's ( LOL)
You must have at least 10 people directly trusting you each with an earned merit of at least 10,
That means 10 peoples should be add me on their custom list who have earned more then 10 merits.You must have at least 1 person directly trusting you with an earned merit of at least 100
That means 1 person should be add me his custom list who have earned more then 100 merit. If above criteria need become DT1 then I think it's not very easy. How know who are add me on their trust list, I think only admin can check it. However selection methods are not bad.
Let's find 11 people's ( LOL)
I am not sure a banned member is eligible to be a DT member or not. 
Banned user isn't eligible for DT1. But if someone from DT1 put him on their custom list then he will be on DT2. No rules for DT2, because DT2 could be added by any DT1 member.You could parse the trust system dumps or check individual user's trust list (by adding them to your trust list and temporarily removing everything else).
Got it , thanks. But it's not easy task. ChiBitCTy already banned for plagiarism in April 2018 but he was in DT2 list since new trust system implemented,so DT1 members exclude him from your trust list,also please go through your trust list for similar cases if any.
There's nothing wrong with his sent ratings (a ban isn't that relevant) though. Who exactly added him?
ChiBitCTy already banned for plagiarism in April 2018 but he was in DT2 list since new trust system implemented,so DT1 members exclude him from your trust list,also please go through your trust list for similar cases if any.
There's nothing wrong with his sent ratings (a ban isn't that relevant) though. Who exactly added him? That's what I was planning to do but I wanted to collect proofs during the next days otherwise it's just an accusation
PM'd.ChiBitCTy already banned for plagiarism in April 2018 but he was in DT2 list since new trust system implemented,so DT1 members exclude him from your trust list,also please go through your trust list for similar cases if any.
There's nothing wrong with his sent ratings (a ban isn't that relevant) though. Who exactly added him?
ChiBitCTy already banned for plagiarism in April 2018 but he was in DT2 list since new trust system implemented,so DT1 members exclude him from your trust list,also please go through your trust list for similar cases if any.
That's what I was planning to do but I wanted to collect proofs during the next days otherwise it's just an accusation
There are several users now in the dt1 and dt2 who use multiple alt accounts (bought or created themselves)
I would not call them trusted that"s why I was saying the old system was better
There are cases in which an alt account is acceptable (e.g. a collectible store/product account). How about you list who these people are and which accounts are allegedly theirs? I would not call them trusted that"s why I was saying the old system was better
There are several users now in the dt1 and dt2 who use multiple alt accounts (bought or created themselves)
I would not call them trusted that"s why I was saying the old system was better
I would not call them trusted that"s why I was saying the old system was better
Jump to: