Topic: Diverenge RE: anon trust verses anon moderation - page 2. (Read 2007 times)

I don't get you as one time you say DT members can track scammers and next time you say it's not realistic to moderate a scam? So just the way DT members can track scams, moderators can't or they don't want to? I don't believe to have certain members of this forum to go about policing when it's the job of the forum moderator. It may make their work difficult but it should be their work and if they don't want to do it, then it's fine. By saying that catching a scam is not realistic or it can't happen then sorry to say as having a DT list also is not realistic to make some members capable enough to track scammers. I am not asking to ban the scammers, but give them warnings at least.

I am on another forum too and there moderators easily track scammers and ban them if they continue to scam even after 2 warnings.

@bold: What does that mean? I am definitely not uneducated on how to trade here and if I was, I would not manage to sell so many gift cards as I have done till date.

@blue: Avoid detection? How do scammers get tracked by DT members then? If legitimate users want to leave the forum, their wish. No legitimate user would get scared unless they wanted to scam and couldn't do so.

You contradict your own statements that what job DT members are doing, the forum admin/mods cannot do it when the case is that the forum mods/admins don't want to do it.

There are indeed a lot of different options but the moderators and admins always seem to use the same excuse that its hard to moderate scams, i mean thats a super silly excuse. Imagine if that happened in real life, everyone could be stealing anything and they would never go to jail because it is not 100% sure if they did it or not -.-

I always said scammers should be moderated, why are spammers moderated then? How do the mods and admins know when a spammer is really a spammer? Doesnt that create problems? Yes it does, every 5 posts here 1 is about a ban so i dont see why that cant happen with scammers, are spammers more important and harmful than spammers?

I am not concerned about the number of people on the DefaultTrust list. I am concerned about the lack of people on DefaultTrust list being unwilling to leave negative trust when it should be left.

It is not realistic for moderators to moderate scams because it is impossible to tell when something is a scam or not with 100% certainty, and attempting to do so would cause many people being prevented from trading who are simply uneducated as to how to trade on here, and if my research of you is correct, this would apply to you prior to you accepting escrow services. This would be the bad of all worlds because scammers would learn how to avoid detection of moderators and slightly change their practices, and legitimate users would simply abondon bitcoin when they make small mistakes in how they try to trade with others.

---

---

---

I may propose some kind of system where members of the DefaultTrust list can vote, anon, if someone deserves an anon negative rating, and if so then the person should be awareded an anon negative rating that can only be removed with the vote of even more members of the DefaultTrust list. Maybe someone can receive such a "super rating" if three people vote for such a rating, and such a rating can only be removed if 130% of the number of people who voted for such a rating voted to have it removed.

Moderating scams will just give a false sense just like ebay trust system and there are many legit reasons for using alts. Besides, al most all of the scammers hides under VPN or Tor.

We don't need members to be added or removed from the default trust list and instead we need scams to be moderated else we members should be alert of any user trying to scam other users. By adding a negative to an account, it doesn't stop users to come back with their alts (some of which get detected while others don't get detected). Rather than this, why shouldn't there be an end to the ability to create a new alt account? It does help scammers and makes it tough for the DT members to detect alts. That's not a thing they should do all day waiting to search for alt accounts of scammers but it should be a rule to stop alt accounts on this forum.

Three people have bothered, Quickseller, Vod and Tomatocage. One of them no longer has the influence to have his ratings displayed by default, one has left the community (close to perminently), and one has become much too conservative in handing out negative ratings (in order).

I don't think it is entirely a thankless job, I have seen many people say they appreciate the work that all three of them do individually. I have also seen many people post that each of them should be consulted to check if something is a scam or not, so there is reason to believe they do earn a level of respect for tagging scammers.

I think you are right that scammers (and spammers) are going to put a lot of effort into smearing the likes of the above examples I provided. Just look at the "I hate Quickseller", and "I hate Vod" threads, they quickly agree with eachother, potentially agreeing with themselves via sockpuppet accounts - but then again, I am pretty sure you for some reason have a lot of experience with that - at least a lot of experience of being on the receiving end of that.

Have you considered that it is a thankless job because it doesn't fix anything and often causes far more harm than good? Does "scambusting" really stop scammers or are they in reality back in minutes under a new name at it all over again? Have none of you learned from history what happens when people continue to fight endless & unwinnable wars? We should be focusing on educating users how to protect themselves, not supporting wannabe forum rentacops shotgunning randomly at the user base hoping they hit a scammer.

You've stated a problem and its cause in the same post, so I'm not sure what we're meant to do here. Scammers and spammers are some of the worst people to deal with, and fighting scams attracts swarms of them to attack. Its not fun and its a thankless job, so who would bother?

I will delete my post in the thread this was originally posted in and repost here since my original post was techincally off topic. My post was originally in this thread, and is quoted below:

---

---

---

I think that our community does not have enough people on DefaultTrust that are active in marking scammers. I can say that very few (if any) scammers were marked with the account that I wanted to sell when I created this account, primarily to keep away the trolling that is associated with such marking.

I think that many people on DefaultTrust wish to maintain a very positive image of themselves to others so they do not tag scammers when they find them. Some people are so afraid of getting trolled that they quickly remove any negative ratings they leave scammers when their inbox gets spammed with enough PM's. Even Tomatocage was spammed with 10+ PM's in his inbox about the above scammer and downgraded his negative rating to a neutral despite solid evidence, a few people even said that the evidence was solid who are on DefaultTrust.