Topic: delete - page 3. (Read 7287 times)

A high % in accuracy mean, that as you become a mod, most of your decisions would be correct.
Quickseller seems to be doing just fine with his default trust and his reporting. The reporting gets confirmed 95% of the time, and default trust leaves a big red mark, making it very hard for the scammer to trade with that big red trust mark.

Why does a high % in report accuracy make you a candidate to be a mod?
I just checked mine & it's 87% accuracy yet I have no interest in ever becoming a mod of this or any other forum.
I think we should just let theymos decide if any other mods are needed. It's not a reality tv show where people phone in to vote for their favourite person. This thread is a little embarrassing. Let Quickseller get on with what he does & let the mods moderate.

... but it is necessary to know some languages.

I vouch for Quickseller too, though most of the time I just read and read how he bust and uncover those potential scams that could probably affect the community, especially the newbies. I think his reports (1600+ reports with 95% accuracy) is over-qualified for a position of a mod and he's always active as far as I can see. But still, it is for theymos to decide whether he'll accept a new moderator or not. The local languages boards seemed to be not that moderated appropriately, a Global Mod maybe could help fix things in there?

You can't compare that. I'm pretty sure that some moderators were invited with even a lower percentage. As stated in the rules, moderators are allowed to interpret rules as they wish (to some degree).
He might have been wrong less than 5% of the reports if someone else was handling his reports. I assume that he made mistakes when he joined the forums, as did I. I'm also now at 95%, it is just really hard to get it much higher.

I think that theymos has stated somewhere that 90% (or even less?) was enough.

The scammers,
but the 5% would also create the controversy as well.
If you are given the power of a mod, and you are 5% wrong, that is bad. Also with all this previous stuff you are tied into, I don't think that would make for a very impartial judge.

Well, if a position opens up, why not then?

Though it would probably be controversial...but then again, who are the people who would create that controversy?

He stated that on the first page:

This thread is literally a dank Bitcointalk meme.

Anyway, kek aside, QS shouldn't be a mod unless he reports a lot (maybe he does? I don't know) but he should be on DefaultTrust. He ain't that bad, damn.

I just checked my report count actually...326 @ 96% accuracy, pretty low count but that accuracy

I got 61% (thanks to updownbot.bz). Glad I didn't want to be a mod.

They're usually chosen by report accuracy.

So you're saying QS is a "him"...interesting, verrrry interesting. The details are all falling in place now...

Are staff/moderator positions granted purely through nomination or invite? Seems appropriate to do it that way, just curious. And am in no way implying that I'd want to eye such a position...let's just get that out there.

Looks like Tomatocage added Quickseller back onto his trust list.

what? who will I offend with that little comment?


huh. guess I was wrong then.


====================================
then who put QS back?

No I'm not Quickseller, obviously. The people who say things like that are usually after information, either about me or the other person. They want me or someone else who knows me to say "Well no I/he couldn't be Quickseller because..."
It's an obvious ploy, and not one I fall for.


I never excluded him.

I love how you make new account just for this. Trust issue is really sensitive here

Badbear did, technically. he deleted QS from his exclusion list.
previously Tomatocage has QS on his trust list and BadBear excluded him, that's why he got knocked off. CMIIW

I think Quickseller is too precipitated when he gives feedbacks. See for example this thread:


I don't think QS deserves to be either in the default trust settings list or be a mod.

Quickseller gave negative trust rating without verifying by himself if his assumptions are true, then confessed that his rating was wrong according to his own criteria and changed it to neutral. If enough buzz is created QS gives negative trust without checking by himself the facts, so some of their ratings are wrong, even if he does a good job in some situations, or if the accused person, by coincidence, really did what QS thinks he did.

Mod power is even more dangerous than trust power, because a perma banned user won't be able to return to the forum forever, while reputation can be rebuild and the neg reped user still can use the forum.

And we all know that QS is an account seller, so it is of his interest damage as much accounts he can, under any pretext. As patroller he would be able to ban and nuke all newbies, and I don't think the admins would spend time judging if a ban of a newbie user was really fair or not. Plus he would get access to some informations not available to normal users, what will probably be dangerous, because we don't know what other identities he has.

(btw, who put QS back in the level 2 trust?)

Being a mod requires a sound knowledge of the rules, and obviously a lot of time to spend on the forum. QS fits both the criteria. For all those worried about QS going overboard, initially he would be a patroller and would hardly have any power.

Having said that, BadBear doesn't seem to be too matey with QS these days so I won't be holding my breath. Or weren't BB and QS supposed to be the same guy? It's confusing