Topic: Do you think we need a guideline for DT members from theymos? - page 3. (Read 1116 times)

I think theymos purposely doesn't give official guidelines because he wants it to be a more community oriented decision.  If he was willing to give official guidelines, the old DT system would have worked fine.  I don't believe everyone working off the same list of rules is the goal.

Having an official guidelines from theymos will be great but until then that doesn't mean we shouldn't make use of the trust system. We already have general accepted offends that are worth leaving negative feedback and positive feedbacks by DT and others. How about we stick to what we already have (which is working fine)  and when theymos finial decide to create those guidelines we adjust to them and change some of our feedbacks to neutral or maybe delete those that aren't a offends by his guidelines.

I did a infograph on possible reasons to leave or not leave a negative /postive feedback. Go check it out and leave your feedbacks via reply

I also like this approach.  Having it public allows users to see his trust settings so those looking to him for guidance still have a place to find it.  I formatted your post for trust settings and moved those who he has distrusted to the bottom, so users can easily assess and assimilate users they want to add into their own lists.

theymos' trust list (last Saturday):

HostFat
dooglus
Raize
Meni Rosenfeld
Maged
Raoul Duke
gmaxwell
OgNasty
zvs
-ck
malevolent
John (John K.)
Tomatocage
SaltySpitoon
ineededausername
DeaDTerra
BadBear
Blazr
vgo
BCB
Dabs
Benson Samuel
shiftybugger
Cyrus
ibminer
Wardrick
dwdoc
Adriano
Taras
EFS
dbshck
hilariousandco
MadZ
shorena
mitzie
franckuestein
sapta
OmegaStarScream
xandry
rickbig41
Barcode_
Anon11073
Halab
Xal0lex
chimk
~actmyname
~CanaryInTheMine
~Spodermen
~LYCAN
~Jaaawsh
~artw1982
~Boelens
~Rub3n
~TMAN
~TomUnderSea
~TheNewAnon135246
~blackarrow
~MarkAz
~nachius
~marcotheminer
~nubbins
~FullLife
~Matthew N. Wright
~TradeFortress 🏕
~uhnonamiss
~El Cabron
~Xian01
~lophie
~johnny5

Some, DT think its because last time theymos applied a forum update about the merit system there were large number of appels by demoted accounts and same will happen again if forum applies some set of rules but I personally think merit requirements is totally different from trust as if a person does not gets merits he can still handle his account in normal way but when it comes to trust on the account the view totally changes and people start abusing the DT.

But if a proper set of rules are applied it would just put down the number of trust abuse threads or atleast someone could just point them to the official rules and why they were red-tagged. So there is not further argument left and the thread is locked.
On the other hand now both the parties have different definition to the abuse and the discussion just continues to an infinite extent.

 Not just insomnia it could cause too many more mental health problems.

Why do you think people of this forum will not follow rules & regulations? If we get an exact guideline from of theymos than we may deserve much rules followers here. I think theymos should discuss about this too urgently.

If anyone just investigate the Meta section only he/she will find multiple thread which are nothing but tag related argumental gossip. If this situation continue, i wish in future it will be difficult to find productive posts. Just look at those threads conversations.

I wish very soon our DTs have to take sleep killer medicine to make tons of reply to those taging related threads whole night. There can be the chances of Insomnia too

The kicker is the "from theymos" part. Not the "guideline" bit. I'll leave you to think about why that is.

hence why transparent polls are required. You know it is the corrupt scum on DT that are voting they should have no limits imposed on their free reign to red trust for any reason they like.

I'm still waiting for your reply to my question:

---

If you identify these users then I would be glad to counter the rating. I just hope that you're not making false statements.

They will follow them or they will get blacklisted from dt and merit source

We need people in positions of trust that are squeaky clean and no prior evidence of scams, lying, greed, double standards.... they should be blacklisted by default.

Imagine known convicted felons applying for police positions and getting it. Then telling others they don't want any rules as to how they act.

LOL

HA HA funny how the poll went from 9:1 we need a guideline after the whole night now so quickly to 9:10 .
Would love to see the names who voted so quickly at the same time.


To the honest DT members now you see the gang at its work trying to protect the sick status quo

Not bad idea but I don't think theymos will do it. There are few post from old DT and some others about guidelines. But it's not officially approved. If any guidelines by theymos means its official guidelines. It would be better for new DT. But problem is peopels even don't bother to follow forum rules so we can't expect that peopels will follow the guidelines. And argument will never end even there is guidelines. People's never bother about DT system before get tag. After getting tag they start war with DT system. If any DT make mistake it should bring front before tag you. If I have made mistake then make sound now but after get tag making sound which is equal to war with DT. I don't think it will never end ....

Jetcash is a proven liar here or at best pure double standards that are disgraceful.  Why?

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.17808231

If he really hates shit posting greedy sig spammers then why on DT does he support a PROVEN sock puppet racist trolling sig spammer the pharmacist aka huge black woman - I mean read the greed of that individual. He got busted complaining he  wanted more money from his sig on his second account that is just a trolling racist sig spammer for extra btc dust.

So why is he supporting him on DT?
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;dtview

This is proven FACT - observable by any person here.

His obvious double standards are there to clearly observe for all.

These DT members are clearly and observably acting in untrustworthy ways. Double standards where it suits them are the thin end of this wedge.

This is justs presentation of FACTS and observable events. They blast out red trust for anything that suits them including daring to speak out about their PROVEN lying and trust abuse.  

The entire thing is a joke. Let's face it though most are quite obviously low functioning. Try to have a debate with any of them bar perhaps 1 or 2 and you soon realise these are either complete imbeciles or worse.

I suggest this poll is made transparent by starting again and people have to post which way they vote and why.

You will soon see it is the system controllers themselves voting for maintaining their position of being able to red trust for their own personal reason and not for the good of the board at all.

Merit is the main issue here it needs to have criteria just like the trust system and earned merit should be reset to zero or some filter that cuts out the cycled merit to a sensible % - decoupled from rank after snr

A transparent poll is required here. No point asking people in power if they should have rules as how to wield it. The very notion is ludicrous.

Who are these users? If it's based purely on the method of transaction, then that doesn't seem like it deserves a tag to me.

Thats why you look away of known scammers and allow false tagging.Seems plausible



I agree the DT members over exceeded their actions acting like babysitters making taking members will to decide themself all in the name of protection.
I even saw 2 people being red tagged for making a deal both agreed on just because it was a paypal exchange deal.
I mean why are you punks to decide for me if i'm allowed to make with somebody an exchange or not ?Its none of your business what kind of risk i take.

You are acting worse than any plan business.

The problem is there are a lot of other cases where trust effects users other than just shit posting sig campaigners. Bitcoin is after all is (or is supposed to be) a method of exchange. This community will ALWAYS have a core of traders by its nature. What some users here call "pajeet" traders (an annoying and kinda racist stereotype IMO) are really just people trying to build a trust network from the bottom up with smaller trades. The problem is a lot of these forum cops are in nice cushy industrialized nations judging people who survive on 20% of the income they do, for doing smaller trades.

From a forum cop perspective it is just a hassle and an inconvenience to deal with, and I agree. Perhaps instead of beheading nickle and dime traders all day, and then screaming from the mountain tops about the bear they killed with their bare hands, maybe find something better to do with the time.

Unless the trust system has rules set around it restricting negatives to trade, where a loss of some kind can be documented, that is in violation of the agreement between the users, or is in violation of the law it will become meaningless. Everything else should not be anyone's business really, and certainly should not be grounds for a negative rating. Ratings do matter, because this is a forum centered around a method of exchange. The question is will the trust system be a gauge of who jerks each other off around here or who is able to be trusted in trade?

This is the online forum,so there is no need to respect others because of they are in the DT list,they are not your superior officers,they also one like you as community member.

You also can be one of DT members so just improve yourself and don't look for other to help you.

I think you haven't got my point. Respecting one DT member means respecting every single person who are in the DT list.

When your teacher teach you to show respect to your elder person is that  mean to just show respects to your elder brother only lol. I think in this forum i got no relatives who can have my personal special respect.I respect them
who got the ability to have it. Maybe you can be on my respect list too.

This is why facts and observable events are the only things that should be considered.

Also misplace admiration is quite revolting try not to fawn over people who if are the targets of some emotion accompanied by facts and observable events demonstrating their wrongdoing  are not worthy of such adoration.

Facts and observable events demonstrating wrong doing are not to be ignored regardless of the persons anger at being the victim of such abuse.

Is there a part of that you do not understand?

Please tell me clearly who are these respected members you admire so much. Perhaps a newbie like yourself needs to first do some homework. Let me help you.

There needs to be clear criteria so that everyone can be treated fairly and the same.

Yeah got the point.I already mentioned here on the thread that theymos can discuss with our respectful DT members what can be included or not. I think thats the way how we can pick the best solution. Its really a matter of shame when a newbie user see some post including bad languages which is nothing but to blame on DTs.

As a newbie i also faced same and feel so bad when i respect someone  for his work of excellency. It doesn't matter he is on the DT list or not but it matters when someone use ugly words and blame on someone who achieved a lot of merits and fame not just in one night. Anyone can trace how much time we wasted just for those Tagged argumental issues. Tons of comments to handle those guys thread where most of the thread got nothing but personal emotions.  I think its meaningless.

On the other hand if any DT tag some one without any valid reason that is nothing but a disaster for that convicted person. Every single member of the forum bear same weight and respects.

Just a guideline from theymos can solve it nicely. 

It is more centralised that ever now. How would this even centralise it all at.

Yes we should have criteria and it should be strict and enforceable if you want the trust system to mean anything. Anyone abusing it should be immediately removed and blacklisted.

This way all rules will be applied to everyone fairly.

Also any DT refusing to review evidence of wrong doing and untrustworthy behaviour should be removed and blacklisted.

I would not pay heed to jetcash at all. He has proven himself untrustworthy by refusing to review facts I presented him on his thread that some DT were proven liars.  

DT need to be kept to a strict set of criteria for red trusting so the red tag has some kind of meaning and you dont have to search through pages of petty bickering and other nonsense.

Jetcash are you saying that you hate people that are racist trolls under puppet accounts clearly to just grab more btc dust from sig spamming. Is that what  you are saying or not?  Just to be clear.

This is another time I wish we had a transparent poll here. All abusers of this system will be without doubt hitting the no criteria for red trust because the subjectivity given to them is where their abuse and power to push their own agenda resides.