Topic: DefaultTrust changes - page 132. (Read 85606 times)

these are pretty sweeping changes. what do people expect the net effect to be?

it seems like getting default trust feedback (green or red) will become a lot more likely, since many more people will become eligible for DT1 vs now. it'll be interesting to see how retaliation/feedback countering plays out.

Not really stupid because the forum worth cleaning along with the scammers.  I can understand why you hate Lauda  LOL but I can also understand why Lauda tagged some.

Why are you worrying about it so much if it isn't worth a damn?

The whole stupid DT system should be scrapped,

It was never worth a damn and still won't be.


 

If anything, with these changes with monthly rotations and all, this will be the best solution moving forward. The previous DT system was outdated and although the system as a whole wasn't abused but perhaps a few people within it abused their power there'll always be bad apples. At least now it'll be more of a community vote which is great in moving towards decentralization.

Either way, the whole point of this seems to be for people to create their own trust lists while also forming their own opinions. Which may in time make the DT system obsolete.

Do you think it will be abused more now because anyone now can create a team of 10 and add each other on their trust list?

Same bud, if I’m still on it next week then cool, if not then still cool. All I can do is make sure I am more impartial, fair and open to criticism than others who were previously on DT..

It’s down to the community now and that’s what we all wanted

probably... not my choice/decision to be here!

Muchos butthurtious gonna be knocking about then

yes, as far I understood theymos' post the user is untrusted by default on all levels..

Am I correct in thinking that if someone is excluded from DT-1 they will also become ineligible for DT-2 ?

Probably unpopular opinion but with these DT changes and quite a few of the new DT1 and 2 members being Escrow Agents, there needs to be more neutrals handed out than positives. An Escrow Agent handing out a negative would in part be losing them possible service fees as they'll just get picked over for someone that hands out positive trust for <$50 deals. (Which is also somewhat of a problem)

Don't mean to pick on krogothmanhattan but it's an easy example as his list was so large. He didn't ask for DT1 and it was just out of the blue forced on him.. takes a bit of time for him to revamp it now but we just saw what sort of temporary havoc it stirred up.

To be clear I like and trust most of these guys but when you're vying for people to choose your escrow service over someone elses I think negative ratings kind of taint your image.. which DT shouldn't be gamed to turn a blind eye and not call people out on their shadyness to further your chances of being selected as everyones top 1 2 or 3 escrow choice.

What, was it not random?  

Just pointing out that while my private responses to trolls always seem to make it in screenshots, they somehow always forget to include the parts where they're insulting or threatening me or my family.

I'd say let's get back on topic, but who am I kidding.  This line of rhetoric can't end with me being the victim.



Drunk off of power?  You just admitted to insulting me saying my wife left me and I didn't even leave you negative trust.  That seems to demonstrate the opposite.  However, there shouldn't be a place of trust for people like you who insult and harass others outside of this forum in an attempt to get a selective damaging screenshot to discredit someone's reputation.

I deny randomly messaging you on your slack and calling you names while also making comments about your wife. I do however recall that I at one point wrote "I understand why your wife left you", out of context obviously.

---

Where did I say that you added defcon23 to DT? You gave me shit for having left trust for people I've dealt with that you considered to be scammers and I replied back with that you left positive to defcon after my negative due to him attempting to extort me. You justified it with "having made several trades without issues". Just as I had with the users you mentioned, but it's different for you somehow, even though your trust ratings (at the time) held a lot more weight than mine did.

---

Edit; The reason I'm bringing it up is because I think it's real rich that you are saying what and what we don't want to see here at bitcointalk. It feels like you've been more disconnected from what's been going on than most other users and you've been here for so long that it baffles me. They do say that you can get drunk off of power and if one were to look at your history that seems to be the case.

Edit2; Now that I look back at that conversation I remember exactly how it started. I was going to make a physical DiY coin and I messaged you asking you what mint you were using for your coins, in which you replied saying that you wouldn't tell and then you went on the rant. Why that part didn't make it in the screenshots I couldn't tell you, perhaps because of how horrible you made me feel which resulted in me not thinking clearly, oh well.

Are you denying it?  I want to be perfectly clear.

So you are saying that I randomly messaged you and started namecalling and making comments about your wife? And your response to that would be the images I posted?

Just want it all to be perfectly clear.

Why did you cut out the part of the conversation before that?  You know, when you messaged me unsolicited calling me names and making comments about my wife?  This is actually a good read.  You can see that you didn't understand how the DT network worked thinking I added defcon23 to DT with my feedback, removed your trust rating for me for retaliatory reasons, didn't give Blazed the same treatment, and lied about paying TMAN for his signature, or does he just pretend to wear a paid signature?  Furthermore, I didn't leave you negative trust after this encounter, so how can you say I bullied you?

I'm not obsessed with being on DT1.  I never asked for that privilege.  It's something I have taken seriously because I care about the forum.  If the community feels this would be a better place without me on DT1, I'm good with it.  

Can we get back on topic now?  I think these changes are ultimately a good thing, and once the manipulators and scammers are worked out of the system it will hopefully resume being the best trust rating system in the Bitcoin community.



I haven't gotten one single report of being impersonated on Telegram since that thread was started.  This was after years of constant reports.  I also didn't do whatever I was accused of.

LOL as ever suchscamoon appears to be generous and reasonable.... whilst enabling scammers.

You are pointing out at best (which probably are not even true anyway) abuse of power which is what most of you DT try anyway

You are supporting scammers FAR WORSE AND MORE DANGEROUS TO THE BOARD  and you think we need to listen to you? lol

Poisonous little gimp.

You're allowed to do whatever your want and people are allowed to form opinions about it. You had a good run, you should be proud of it. You have a chance now to fix some things but you might be too stubborn to take it.

Again, the reason I can't trust your judgement is that you gradually ramped up a trust rating from a bump of a thread into a 5-item list but now months later you're presenting yet another ultimate cause as to why that rating can't be removed.


I might not. Reasonable is one of the least likely adjectives I'd apply to you.

And there is more, like accusing other users behind their backs without proof: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.32677479

I wouldn't call it reasonable at all.

Shut up lauda , everyone knows owlcatz is one of your sock puppets.

Shouldn't you be sucking off theymos now as payment.