Topic: Do you think we need a guideline for DT members from theymos? - page 2. (Read 1116 times)

Yes, I am sure it is quite shameful. Last I checked this is a public discussion. Perhaps you should move to private messages if you don't wish it to be a public discussion? Or maybe you just want to quietly signal to him to shut his mouth because he is making you all look bad?



Anyone who questions the decrees of the forum police overlords*



Oh I see it. That is exactly my point. This whole Barney Fife act isn't even putting a tiny dent in the fraud, yet there are plenty of negative results of this assembly line style of negative rating you are so fond of. In all the disagreement real con artists slip in and out.

A contract is simply an agreement that is an exchange of value. Your rambling about being no contract is a meaningless misinterpretation of the definition of the word. Either an agreement is honored or it is not. Courts and jurisdictional squabbling need not be involved. If there is evidence... there is evidence... I am not sure what you are arguing about there we agree.

Human beings seek and abuse power. We have rules and laws to make sure the damage of this is limited. I think you and your friends have made a better case for requirement for some system of restraint and standard of evidence than I ever could have.

I’m not embarrassed about not being on DT1. I’ve been on it for a long time. I’d be a hypocrite to not stand up and voice my opinion for what is best for the forum, so that’s what I will continue to do. I admittedly place an over-importance on this forum in the Bitcoin economy, which is likely why it seems scary to me that serious investors could join here and see how some of these “trusted” members behave publicly. Maybe you don’t care, but I was a financial analyst working with multi-billion dollar acquisitions for a decade and I know how detrimental something seemingly insignificant can become. You really want government officials judging ETF approvals to see DT members belittling newbies or claiming to make deals with the Russian community? I’d be embarrassed. You should be too. What would satoshi think of his baby being represented by these folks who don’t even use the blockchain for transparent escrows or run any sort of projects involving the blockchain? Anyway, I hope that helps you see my position.

I want to create proof of concepts and help change the world, so if DT1 is only about harassing newbies in 3rd world countries out of fear they might steal a signature ad spot from you, count me out.

If anyone without a reputation was dismissed as a scammer (your claim), it would be very hard for them to end up on DT1.  They would have been tagged and would have little chance of achieving that.  Out of those members I listed, do you think any of them are scammers?  I'd like you to answer that question if you wouldn't mind.

If you don't see all the scamming that's going on here on the forum, you need glasses.  And you've been here long enough to know that there's no contracts when someone pulls off a loan scam, PayPal chargebacks, offers 100% ROI within a week, or any of the other typical BCT scams, nor does anyone mention law.  Why would we?  Nobody is going to the police for any of the typical scammers that DT members tag. 

As far as evidence goes, what do you call the information that gets presented in the scam accusation forms that members fill out when they get scammed?  How about the alt accounts abusing bounties?  The evidence is all there.

The forum polices itself against scams, and DT goes out of its way to help with that.  The DT list is certainly not perfect, but it's nowhere near the cabal of power-hungry little Hitlers that you make it out to be.

Nobody that knows your history here should waste their time discussing your bullshit. FYI snowflake, this isn't any of the above but rather friendly advice for The Pharmacist, i.e. none of your butthurt business. Go whine somewhere else, you ain't coming back into DT.

Obvious reasons... such as calling out a long history of abusive behavior? Again, notice the complete reliance on personal attacks, accusation, and inquisition. Zero discussion of the arguments presented. This is all these people know how to do, mob, bully, and intimidate. This is the type of person that seeks positions of power. These type of people need to be leashed by a simple protocol to keep their hunger for control over anyone who questions them in check.

You're wasting your time here TBH. It is clear that certain users are butthurt that the majority consensus has voted to avoid having anything to do with them (because of obvious reasons). Also, JusticeForYou is almost undoubtedly a compromised account pushing this false narrative.

Actually the way I see it I honored my principles and only left you a neutral rating, for much of the same behavior you are demonstrating right now I might add. How many negative ratings do you shotgun out in a day? I am sure each of them was dutifully researched first right?

"None of these members were dismissed as scammers." 

What are you even arguing? Because some people are not scammers no people gaining reputation this way are scammers? That makes sense how?

"What I see is members like them tagging actual scammers."

What you see is subjective. If they are such scammers you shouldn't have much trouble documenting evidence of a crime, violation of a contractual agreement, or violation of a law. Anything else just allows for arbitrary power tripping which you and others have just demonstrated you are quite fond of.

And rather than be on the losing end of the argument, you resort to blaming me for presenting facts and start playing the victim.  Let's face it, when someone disagrees with you, you go on the attack.  This is why I had to block your PMs, because you wanted to keep arguing with me about something I don't even recall, and after that you left the feedback I quoted--which was clearly the kind of personal attack that you're criticizing DT members of engaging in. 

Your own words back up my claims, and if anyone reading this wants further proof they ought to check out the link in my previous post. 

Do you think the DT list would be better with you on it? 

Neither of these statements are true.  There are plenty of members who've earned positive reputations starting from having no rep in the time I've been here.  Jet Cash, Coolcryptovator, marlboroza, Hhampuz, ICOEthics, xtraelv, coinlocket$, and Lafu are among the new batch of DT1 members and they all registered after me.  None of these members were dismissed as scammers.  What I see is members like them tagging actual scammers.

As to the second part, what larger frauds have been hidden behind "the chaos of all the conflict"?  Seems to me that DT has done a pretty decent job tagging the scammers who need tagging.  On our own time, without pay, and with much criticism I might add.

100% agree with you. Everytime when we see an tag related argumental thread easily we can find there newbies are just putting blame on DT members. Where without valid rules its not fair to post anythng like this. Even some users don't know a single rules of the forum.

As a member of bitcointalk i beleive there should be rules if anyone put blame on any member without having proper evidence should be ban. Otherwise those guys want to make this forum a piece of garbage by spamming,trolling & inspiring others to scam.

Again, rather than even attempt to engage in a discussion about the topic you jump right into grand inquisitor mode. Thanks for proving my point. We don't need people like this lording over the whole fucking forum on a whim.

I did go back and find the reason you were booted from DT back in 2014, and it's interesting reading for anyone who might want to compare that whole drama to the argument you're making about DT members leaving arbitrary feedbacks (which are nothing of the kind, BTW). 

And speaking of personal attacks and hostility, this is the neutral feedback you left for me on 3/6/2016:


If this isn't being completely hypocritical, I don't know what is.

Yes, I probably don't roll out much in the altcoin announcement and bounties section and I guess you are relating your views to those section only. I agree they are worst to surf and I personally tend to avoid it due to ever increasing spam there. But some other sections on the forum like Bitcoin Technical Support,  Development & Technical Discussion even meta have much of the newbies contributing in effective way. This proves that also majority of them come here to learn crypto or trade crypto.

Some of there feedbacks could be accurate and worthy. But I just want to let you know trust should mostly be used to related the trustworthiness and to let other know if the person is legit to put funds with or not. Catching spammers and shit posters or highly annoying trollers are not the once to be tagged or handled by DT and it later is pointed to an abuse of power its better to be handled by mod or staff itself and you know they are paid for that work.

Again note the regular use of personal attacks and hostility from the types of people who fancy themselves as forum police. They only know how to speak the language of threats, accusations, mobbing and inquisition. A lot more people share that opinion than you think, they just don't care to get wrapped up in all the harassment that follows bringing this information to light. Anyone without a reputation is simply dismissed as a scammer and anyone with a reputation has something you can leverage over them to force compliance.

There is no reason you and others still can't continue doing what you are doing to help the forum just because you won't be able to leave negative ratings like handing out candy. None of the things you listed require this in order to be done. Furthermore it ends up being little more than noise actual larger frauds can hide behind in the chaos of all the conflict. You just will not be able to lord arbitrary negative ratings over people in order to force compliance with every pet issue you have. The constant refrain from the wanna be forum cops is the sky will fall. It is getting old. You won't restrain yourselves so some restraint should be imposed upon you.

May I ask what you're referring to here?  What are newbies getting harassed for doing?  Hopefully you realize that a lot of the newcomers to this forum are only here to make money from bounties and sig campaigns, and judging by the amount of ban appeals in Meta they don't seem to be reading the rules before they break them. 

If we want to have a forum that isn't clogged by nonsense posts, members like the aforementioned ones shouldn't be welcomed with open arms, because they're the ones responsible for how bad bitcointalk has gotten in terms of readability.  And that small "group" on DT that people keep referring to tend to be members fighting against the useless spammers, account farmers, account sellers, and assorted scammers.  They've also left a lot of accurate feedback in that fight, which IMO is a good use of DT "power". 

It's embarrassing for you because you got knocked off DT.  I don't think the majority of bitcointalk members share your opinion that the current DT1 list is some sort of terrible injustice.  In any case, I never lobbied to be on DT2, much less DT1.  Lauda wasn't even on DT anymore when he/she was added to the DT1 list.  It was Theymos's algorithm which was responsible for all of these changes happening, not some conspiratorial power grab by a select group of members.

Yes, centralization of power has made it more worst as most of the people who reach DT tend to joining this "small group" and supporting there thought and I feel its the fear for them getting removed from DT if they don't follow the cliques rules or harm anyone's reputation from the clique. It pretty simple to judge and we can see it happening around many times. I personally use theymos trust list dropped by LoyceV here and can see much of the red-trusted members too are on the DT which seems very odd too me.

I hope this will be sorted out quickly and spotted by the new arising DT's here to put the scammer and other clique out of this and make the environment here pretty healthy and motivating (I see it's totally demotivating from newbies point of view). We should better work on helping people to adapt to this crypto community rather than trying to harass or frighting them about the rules as soon as they post something. It is not just about being compassionate you should rather act upon it.

It’s very clearly being manipulated by a small group of users which makes it worse than the previous system. This was likely expected and theymos already reserved the right to blacklist people. I urge people to use their best judgement with their trust network and don’t be intimidated by this group of users playing games with the trust system. Have faith that this will be sorted out by the community eventually. I mean, DT has confirmed extortionists, doxxers, and scammers on it right now. I don’t think that will last forever. It’s embarassing.

Just putting a system in place is not enough because the system is able to be abused. I don't expect or even want Theymos to be the arbiter of everything around here, and he has made it pretty clear he doesn't want that either. That doesn't mean he can't simply set up a standard protocol for using the rating system that he expects the users to follow, such as requiring a standard of evidence for negative ratings.

This doesn't mean Theymos needs to be involved in every dispute, it just means it solves a large amount of disputes before they even happen and also gives the trust system a boost in actual credibility by increasing its accuracy by reducing noise. We all want more decentralization, but the reality is this forum is very centralized, bringing us full circle back to Theymos.

It's a "yes" or "no" question. The only way you answer that without being one-sided is if you avoid answering it at all; "maybe".

If we're going to have theymos police DT or create the rules for being part of it then why not just allow theymos to pick DT entirely and centralize the system further? Theymos is providing guidelines by providing a system for us to work with and then explaining how it's intended to work. It's really shocking to me that half of us believe theymos should take more personal control over DT, unless I understand the question incorrectly.

Everyone do not have to work from the sane list but at least there should be a guide for leaving trust feedbacks by the community.  When I picked interest I thought leaving a negative feedback for ban evasion was correct but after I asked suchmoon he corrected me, asking me not to tag users for such but instead report them to moderator. I was mislead my other users feedbacks and I'm sure others are too.

On the board where this infograhic was posted there's currently an argument on leaving negative feedback for accepting or giving BTT account  as collateral. This type of issue who had been avoided if we have guidelines users can turn to.

It isn't, but it should be. He was warned about all this when the trust system began but he ignored it in favor of more additions to the system further obfuscating the symptoms but not addressing the cause. I know he views himself as some kind of Anarcho-capitalist... but this is childish. You can't run a place like this, this big without some BASIC rules like the rest of the forum has.

I know he doesn't have the time or care to enforce every little thing, and nor should he and his staff have to. However since the beginning the trust system has had nothing but continual high level conflict resulting from it. Honestly I am not sure if he really wants decentralization or just the image of it based on the series of events revolving around the trust.

A standard of evidence, a violation of a contractual agreement, or a law being violated, should be the determining factors for judging a negative rating valid. I don't think we can rightly expect the staff to constantly be the ones to enforce this, but at the same time unless this rule is top down universal, none of these issues will ever be fixed. This is not just a logistical conflict, it is an ideological one. We all want more decentralization, but the reality is this is an inherently centralized place, and as a result nearly all of the authority originates from one place, Theymos.