Topic: DT1 users may be artificially increasing their own trust (Updated March 26th) - page 7. (Read 2114 times)
March 20, 2018, 05:56:35 PM
There’s going to be fireworks in here.....
March 20, 2018, 05:52:51 PM
It's understandable users will add to their trust list several people they've traded with. It's likely trust may have been exchanged with several of them
However for DT1 members there's a conflict of interests because adding those users will increase their own trust. They should avoid doing that more so than regular users
This is especially unacceptable if a considerable percentage of those users were added only by that DT1 user
I've checked all DT1 members for this behaviour and all of them (except Maged) increased their own trust score
It's acceptable to increase it by a few points, 15% or even 20%. I would consider that normal
However using this trick to increase their own score by 10+ unique trusts (eventually 100+ trust points) or by 35% or more shows it was intentional
There are 2 DT1 members who have manipulated their trust list to increase their own trust by 10 and even 22 unique trusts (100 or 220 points) totalling 40% and 440%!
They should immediately remove those users from their trust lists (and thus from DT2) or they should be removed themselves from DT1
DT1 members should not use their special powers to manipulate the system and appear more trusted than they really are
Here's the complete data for every DT1 user. This is obtained by checking their trust with default settings (only DefaultTrust) and compare it when explicitly excluding that specific user from the trust list (i.e. DefaultTrust and ~DT1user). The difference shows the artificial increase in trust due to them adding users to DT2.
The following information is included:
DT1 username
Trust with default settings
Trust ~excluding the DT1 user (i.e. without counting DT2 additions made by that DT1 user)
Trust artificially increased (percentage of increase)
* philipma1957's trust without counting his own trust list has greatly increased (from 45 to 105) during the last week because OgNasty added several users who were initially added only by philipma1957. Besides this change out of philipma1957's control, he made a huge change in his list which produced his trust with default settings to drop from 260 to 105 (and it would be even less without the mentioned change made by OgNasty)
I've marked them with these colours:
Ideal, no artificial trust increase
Acceptable, normal
Barely acceptable
Mostly unacceptable but could have been a mistake which must be fixed immediately
Absolutely unacceptable, clear trust manipulation
However for DT1 members there's a conflict of interests because adding those users will increase their own trust. They should avoid doing that more so than regular users
This is especially unacceptable if a considerable percentage of those users were added only by that DT1 user
I've checked all DT1 members for this behaviour and all of them (except Maged) increased their own trust score
It's acceptable to increase it by a few points, 15% or even 20%. I would consider that normal
However using this trick to increase their own score by 10+ unique trusts (eventually 100+ trust points) or by 35% or more shows it was intentional
There are 2 DT1 members who have manipulated their trust list to increase their own trust by 10 and even 22 unique trusts (100 or 220 points) totalling 40% and 440%!
They should immediately remove those users from their trust lists (and thus from DT2) or they should be removed themselves from DT1
DT1 members should not use their special powers to manipulate the system and appear more trusted than they really are
Here's the complete data for every DT1 user. This is obtained by checking their trust with default settings (only DefaultTrust) and compare it when explicitly excluding that specific user from the trust list (i.e. DefaultTrust and ~DT1user). The difference shows the artificial increase in trust due to them adding users to DT2.
The following information is included:
DT1 username
Trust with default settings
Trust ~excluding the DT1 user (i.e. without counting DT2 additions made by that DT1 user)
Trust artificially increased (percentage of increase)
| MARCH 26th | MARCH 20th |
| hilariousandco 58: -0 / +8 50: -0 / +7 +8: +1 (14.3%) | hilariousandco 57: -0 / +7 50: -0 / +6 +7: +1 (16.7%) |
| dooglus 134: -0 / +14 114: -0 / +12 +20: +2 (16.7%) | dooglus 134: -0 / +14 114: -0 / +12 +20: +2 (16.7%) |
| Maged 30: -0 / +3 30: -0 / +3 +0: +0 (0%) | Maged 30: -0 / +3 30: -0 / +3 +0: +0 (0%) |
| dserrano5 10: -0 / +1 0: -0 / +0 +10: +1 (inf%) | dserrano5 10: -0 / +1 0: -0 / +0 +10: +1 (inf%) (Huge percentage, but only one unique trust) |
| Tomatocage 210: -0 / +21 150: -0 / +15 +60: +6 (40%) | Tomatocage 220: -0 / +22 160: -0 / +16 +60: +6 (37.5%) |
| SaltySpitoon 140: -0 / +14 120: -0 / +12 +20: +2 (16.7%) | SaltySpitoon 140: -0 / +14 120: -0 / +12 +20: +2 (16.7%) |
| philipma1957* 105: -0 / +11 105: -0 / +11 +0: +0 (0%) | philipma1957 260: -0 / +27 45: -0 / +5 +215: +22 (440%) |
| Cyrus 62: -0 / +7 42: -0 / +5 +20: +2 (40%) | Cyrus 62: -0 / +7 42: -0 / +5 +20: +2 (40%) |
| Blazed 304: -0 / +31 255: -0 / +26 +49: +5 (19.2%) | Blazed 334: -0 / +34 285: -0 / +29 +49: +5 (17.2%) |
| theymos 161: -0 / +17 141: -0 / +15 +20: +2 (13.3%) | theymos 160: -0 / +17 140: -0 / +15 +20: +2 (13.3%) |
| HostFat 40: -0 / +4 0: -0 / +0 +40: +4 (inf%) | HostFat 40: -0 / +4 0: -0 / +0 +40: +4 (inf%) (Huge percentage, but only 4 unique trust) |
| OgNasty 298: -0 / +31 194: -0 / +20 +104: +11 (55%) | OgNasty 338: -0 / +35 244: -0 / +25 +94: +10 (40%) |
* philipma1957's trust without counting his own trust list has greatly increased (from 45 to 105) during the last week because OgNasty added several users who were initially added only by philipma1957. Besides this change out of philipma1957's control, he made a huge change in his list which produced his trust with default settings to drop from 260 to 105 (and it would be even less without the mentioned change made by OgNasty)
I've marked them with these colours:
Ideal, no artificial trust increase
Acceptable, normal
Barely acceptable
Mostly unacceptable but could have been a mistake which must be fixed immediately
Absolutely unacceptable, clear trust manipulation
Jump to: