Topic: DefaultTrust changes - page 66. (Read 85615 times)

This has always been the case for the default trust. At first people pretended this was not the case and the staff tried to cover for them, but eventually the environment of having no rules meant it just continually devolved into this ball washing circle jerk we have today where the most manipulative control freaks sit atop the default trust. These people care more about getting their dopamine hit from making little red marks and controlling people than serving this community equitably.



Another great example of how having no official rules turns some one who simply didn't absorb the unwritten rules via osmosis into a victim of the dopamine click addicted control freaks that think it is something to be proud of that they are an assembly line of uncountable accusations to the detriment of the user base.


Spoken like a true control freak with no regard for others. You pretend what you are doing is for the community using this as a shield for your destructive behavior, really it is only to serve your own obsessive desire to control others.

I dislike treating anyone with humility, that's more for Loyce and actmyname also known as the Switzerland's of BTCT. I'm a witch after all, and a tyrant apparently.

Then he can contact the people that added him and get them to remove him. Simple.

Oh come on, I did not ask for special treatment.
I did ask that we treat people with some humility, maybe we should even ask them if they really want to be in DT1.
In this example he was not even aware of the issue, we are humans not robots.

That's probably true, though I think being on DT probably makes it much easier to do trades.  I don't trade much, but when I either buy or sell bitcoin for PayPal I think it's likely easier to at least get the deals done being on DT--and the only "favorable terms" I ever look for are to buy/sell at the prevailing preev rate.  And then there are members like Magnavox who couldn't care less that I'm on DT and won't send funds first.  I respect that immensely, too.  People shouldn't be looking at someone's trust or DT status when doing deals, even if it's way more convenient.  It's safer not to do that.

Me neither, with the exception that my PM box is about 90 pages long, filled with messages from members seeking to get red trust removed.  That didn't happen prior to me being on DT.  Being on the list is more of a status thing than a power trip.  You can't really flex that 'power', because if you do you likely won't be on DT very long.  Yes, there are going to be people who think that's exactly what DT members are doing, but they're generally not on DT themselves--and they want to be.

Excellent point, and I expect it's only going to become more diluted as time passes.  It's already not the same massive status symbol it once was, and that's probably a good thing.  Hopefully there will be less bitching about DT abuse as dilution increases--I think we can police ourselves pretty well, and it might even be easier to do so the more members who are on it.

He's not a special snowflake, he's a random. If I changed my list today adding every single user that gave me positive rating i.e. started trust farming/abusing my position, I'd be swiftly removed as well.

Does anybody else think DefaultTrust is slowly turning into a popularity contest where you have to abide by rules from the established members or else you are shunned?
Even if I get the intention of forcing a member to "clean"(maintain aka evict some undesirables,... ) his trust list to stay in DT1, this feels kinda wrong.

Trust is sometimes a fickle bitch, but while i have lauda distrusted i respect everybody elses decision to trust lauda and don't go into a frenzy distrusting people.

The reaction with willi9974 was in my opinion a bit overboard, a notice like "hey you are in DT1, can you please look at what does this mean and update your list accordingly?" should have sufficed.

I must be naive

Obviously I can't speak for anyone else, but personally my experience around the forum hasn't changed since entering DT outside of the fact that I've had some interesting exclusions and conversations about them. I find that trade-history, for example, is a much stronger indicator of someone's ability to get favorable trade-terms. Post-history for signature deals, etc.

This might be a bad comparison, but laws aren't normally created for the sake of introducing a new idea; they are regularly created to articulate and enforce an idea that is already present within the group. Similarly to how someone that conducts themselves in a manner that is more likely to bring the "benefits" you mention into fruition is a more likely candidate for DT.

That old "Correlation does not imply causation" saying, did I explain that terribly? 

I’m on DT1 & I also don’t feel that it’s any different to not being included in DT. I was in the same sig campaign before. It’s nice to be trusted by some respectable members here but I certainly don’t feel that there are any benefits.

All I’ve done is tag people that I feel are untrustworthy, simply trying to do my bit for the community.

You benefit from filling your compulsive need to control and dictate to others. For some people that is better than money.

Sure, not trying to benefit from DT is what's dishonest here

Quicksy in top shape.

I'll just point out I've been on DT for years, don't wear a sig, don't wear an avatar, never do forum trades or the like.  My identity is also known.

It seems everyone just complains about DT till they get on it.  Hypocrites - probably Quicksy alts.

You forget to quote the part in which I said it is ridiculous to imply that I was saying you would get any of the above *given* to you.

Considering that you don’t participate in any of the above, perhaps it would be more accurate to say your post was outright dishonest.

Edit:
Perhaps the benefit of being on DT has been diminished somewhat as a result of there being more DT members. However the benefit still exists. It doesn’t look like you have traded very much but have a decent amount of trust (strange/unusual), but I can assure you one thing that will be looked at when someone is deciding if they will trade with you is if you are on DT — it is a gage of how much others trust you (although the current criteria is currently very bad and inferior to what it previously was). 

Nah, he's just making stuff up like usual.

    Well perhaps in the past being on DT made you more notable. However, it is so diluted now, it does little to distinguish me from any other random user around these parts. 

You also do almost no trading here, so your opinion here is not exactly an informed one.

Question @theymos:
Is "DefaultTrust" counted as 1 of 10 users on someone's Trust list? I'm asking because Veleor was added to DT1, even though he included only 9 users last week , and he still includes only 9 this week, so I don't think he changed it in between.
If DefaultTrust is counted, can you add it to the trust data dump?

---

---

As promised, here's your updated Trust list:

---

---

I posted your old Trust list here.

In the years of me being in DT it hasn't resulted in any of these things, or any other benefits. Though it doesn't surprise me that scammers like you see it that way. It's probably hard for you to imagine not being driven by "profit" or "power" or whatever else you ascribe to those forum badges.

Do you mind if I quote your post and tell Hhampuz to pay me above the usual payout?

I am not sure how my post implies OgN is a "saint and...beyond reproach"

You have to either be naive, dishonest, or both to claim that being on DT does not result on better terms for signature deals, does not allow you to trade on better terms, doesn't provide better/more business opportunities.

It is ridiculous to imply my post was saying you would be *given* money in exchange for nothing by being on DT.