Topic: Do you think we need a guideline for DT members from theymos? - page 4. (Read 1116 times)

No - I love the community, but I hate those who try to destroy it because of their limitations or greed.

The community can't be trusted.Sounds like the community is your enemy.

Are you sure you are not on a battlefield ?
Seems like you have some real life issues.

Bouncer on the door......keep posting the opinions are very interresting for a decentralised community.

It won't be centralised if enough members participate. At the moment, my trust list is highly centralised. ie. Only I decided who should be on it.

We can see from the noise and off topic rubbish in the current threads, that the community as a whole can't be trusted to take part in these discussions. I agree that this is unfortunate, but where you have considerable disruptive behaviour, you need to have a bouncer on the door.

Oh so the commuity is not welcome to voice their opinion ?Sound very centralised for me

I think that a private chat room for DT1s and merit sources would be a great idea. We could then work out policies, and resolve difficulties in private. I created one, but it wasn't really used, so I have deleted it. Perhaps it would be a good idea to have a private board here in Bitcoin Talk. Then we could get away fro the bitching and criticism, and work on some positive solutions.

Lauda and the group will never participate in it.
You wanna know why ?
Because they would lose their random bs explantion to tagg people when wanting to defame somebody.
It would limit their power on this forum.

You can ask yourself why people who blame these DT members of abuse always only get tagged by this group and by no other DT member ?

There is a discussion about guidelines already here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.49306851

There are quite a few situations where the outcome is clear but some of the subjective situations require some discussion.

I think it could work well as a charter - where DTs agree to the values that they believe in.

A bit like with the UN where a country agrees to be a signatory to articles but may not be a signatory to all of them.

I think there are plenty of situations where everyone agrees on the outcome. The subjective situations are also able to be discussed so there is understanding.

All the posts are one sided.
You say its not fair to blame  DT members who always gets blamed.
You know when members are getting accused with no real reason as being a scammer where do you got any function to secure that innocent people won't get false tagged ?
There is none and what is even worse even Mods openly posted that they KNOW thats some members have been falsely tagged.
What did he do to reverse it ?
The answer is NOTHING !!!! He just accepted that inocent people have been tagged as scammers.As long as its not effecting him or his friends its ok for him.


Thats the big scandal on this forum which is causing a cancer.DT members have double standards on this forum.If you accuse them they demand full evidence to the smallest point to tagg a DT mate.If they accuse someone its enough for them to simply have an assumption.

The best example is Lauda's gang which is always demanding the highest possible proof against their members but when tagging people they claim its enough to have a feeling in their gut and that the trust feedback is not counting as a scam feedback.
The question is how is the majority taking the trust system and thats clearly as scam feedback.

I think some clear guidelines would be good, but I don't think theymos will make them.
From what I've seen, theymos offers the framework, and it's it up to the users to decide how they use it.

Slightly taken out of context:

For a while now, theymos has been excluding users from his trust list. I kinda like that approach: he doesn't go full Admin on them, but uses his vote like any other user would do.

Theymos' trust list (last Saturday):

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

Posting should be self-moderated. If you treat the forum as a good place for social interaction and information exchange, then the trust system shouldn't be relevant for you. If you are a low ability signature campaign spammers, or a scammer, then of course it will affect you. The best thing to do is to look into yourself, and try to work out how to strengthen your weaknesses. The forum can be a great resource for self-improvement.

Having a basic set of rules for using the trust system is not the same thing as completely centralizing it. All it will do is create a base standard to operate within. All the other aspects regarding the majority of enforcement will be community based. There need to be rules for this or else this forum is going to end up a complete cesspool of cons, infighting, and continually pissed off and ripped off users. I suggest something simple like a base standard of some kind of documentation of a theft/fraud for a negative rating to be valid. Also some kind of system of escalation of dispute resolution would be useful, for example starting with a public post with relevant information, community review, DT member review, and ultimately staff if need be as last resort.

Honestly i am not suggesting to make the system centralize again. I have already mention that there could be a possible way to discuss about this with all our DT members and taking suggestion from them. There could be the system where guidelines can be updated in every month if most of the DT hold their opinion.

Not unless you want to centralize the system again. There are a few old guidelines which are mostly sufficient.

Hello Everyone,

Its a matter of concern that recently in bitcointalk we are experiencing a common arguments about Tagging.Its already been a common matter that when someone get tagged by one of our DT members most of the time convicted members are making arguments continuously.

There's been a reason behind those arguments about tagging. I think it will be hard to find anyone who will say that DT tagged me for valid reason. Everytime tagged person put all the blame on our DT members.These guys always want to prove that DT tagged him/her wrongly. I think its not fair to put all blame on DT or tagging a member without valid reason.

In bitcointalk there's been a lot of DT members who got enough experience to handle any kind of situation and take immidiate actions.But its a matter of sorrow that there is no guideline here for DT by forum authority. I think theymos should publish a guideline for DT members.

In recent times many of our experienced members post several thread including advices and guidelines of a DT. Such as when a DT need to Tag someone, where to give someone warning, where its not fair to Tag someone. I think theymos can choose some guidelines from those thread which are really helpful. Maybe Theymos can discuss with our experienced DT members and take their thoughts and advices to develop a complete guideline.

After recent DT selection voting system we are glad to see many new Faces on our DT1 & DT2 list. Its true that new active DT member will put all their effort to keep the forum safe for the whole community but on the other side they are completely new on this service. For the lack of experience they can make mistakes on tagging. On this situation if they get a complete guideline from theymos it will be much easier for them to work fluently.

A complete guideline for DT members will not only solving the issue of rising arguments in tagging but also our newbies can be benifited. From the guidelines they will be able to learn which thing are legal to do and which are not.

I beleive a complete guidelne for DT members will drastically decrease prohibited activities in bitcointalk. We will be able to get salvation from those tagging related arguments.Thanks everyone.

I wish theymos will discuss the matter with our experienced DT members to develop a effective guideline.