Topic: DT1 with zero or neutral trust (Read 1042 times)

So what? You are a pajeet who the admin doesn’t even know exists...

TMAN you are lauda's bitch,you arent trusted by the admin end of story.

You keep dreaming about me, tough guy.   

I'll happily show you my taxes in person.  How about that?  If you are unwilling to meet me in person to review my taxes, then you are just wildly speculating and refusing to see the truth when offered.  Basically, you're a lying little bitch, but everyone already knows that.

It's not a bad idea at all and would be kind of like eBay's feedback system, except there eBay has a record of each sale and there's no question as to whether a transaction has taken place.  On bitcointalk I think it would be difficult, if not impossible, for a "trade feedback" system to be accurate and free from abuse.  It's not as though the forum facilitates trades itself.

And Jet Cash, I'm not really keeping track of who's on DT anymore.  I did not see mentioned in this thread who's on it without any positive trust.  Perhaps I missed it, but is it a case of a DT member giving positive trust to an alt account or something?  I would certainly think that anyone on DT1 should have a record of their trustworthiness--if not from trades then for good works on the forum.  The latter usually result in positive trust from other DT members.

Thank you for the explanation. I suppose having theymos or selected admin as a mechanism to intervene manually does help though I still think a better solution needs to be found.

But you respect me too much to prove even one lie?

You are a proveable scammer, and instead of providing any evidence you are not, all you do is call me a liar.

Strong leadership is a potential weak link if they have a change of heart, get hit by a bus, move on to other things, etc., the Trust system is supposed to be largely self-regulating.


Enough people trusting/distrusting them will result in DT1 members being added/removed from DT1. For dealing with the worst Trust abusers theymos can still intervene manually.


If that's case I think you may bring this matter to theymos and he can be removed from DT1 manually. For now theymos has just distrusted him.

Thank you for the post.

I read what you wrote and agree with you. It is an impossible task to assess or calculate the value of a particular user based on their input or quality of input in their posts.

Right now I cannot see a way that will be universally accepted but the current system does not work as there are politics and egos at play which can distort the manner in which facts are portrayed and presented.

That's a question only Theymos can answer.

Sounding more and more like cryptocunts obsession with Lauda...

you really should wank more

cunt

Vod’s trust ratings on me are 100% provable lies, yet he sits in DT1 even after theymos told him he would be removed for posting such lying trust ratings about me. How is this justified? Why is this allowed?

Indeed Trust should be accurate, though its difficult off-course.... But for me many of the Collectible members and there trust ratings are very accurate and I will trust them more easily as I do many others, I do respect a lot of them have met some IRL and this have build some some good trust in my books, as I did met with a few other forum members as LFC and planned with a few others.... Of the once I met with i'm confident they are legit and to be trusted with some kind of stuff and I know they take there businesses on and out the forum very serious .....

Also many of the collectible members have a good kind of work relation going on and I don't think any of them would wanna see those networking going to waste.... Trust is very difficult to gain in this online world and everybody should be careful at any time, but those that earned some good trust are a + point in the value of DT imo .... and the members with very positive trust should be respected a bit more cause they are doing only good.

Posts really have very little to do with DT status. If someone is eligible for DT then it becomes dependent on how many DT1 trust them and how many distrust them.

Some of it will be forum politics, perception or opinion that determines whether someone is trusted or distrusted. This is why the voting system is good. If a member has more trust than distrust then they still are a valid DT.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;dtview

Some former DT1 and 2 have deliberately removed themselves from being eligible for DT selection because they disagree with the current system or are just sick of the bickering and negativity that tends to happen when you are on DT.

It is very hard to determining someones "value" to the community. For instance there are a lot of members that post very little but help out with investigations, report spammers and report rule breakers or post on sections of the forum that you might not visit.  When the merit system was introduced I noticed some people were merited a lot that I had never heard of before. They tended to post in sections of the forum that I never visit.

OG Nasty is a proven liar who does not pay his loans in full. He also changes multiple posts in his scamclub thread to deceive people.

Vod on the otherhand has seen through OG's lies and narcissistic behavior and that has lead to this feud.

Trust VOD - invite everyone else to a gangbang at OG's

This is an excellent way of summing up the paradox.

My words are not directed at any individuals in particular but are a general statement.

I have seen some very informative posts from highly intelligent individuals that are articulate, polite and come across as valued members of this community but they are not DT1.

On the other side, I have seen far more users that have been around for years and are DT1 but they bring literally nothing of substance to the community.

With regards to the heading title of this thread: "DT1 with zero or neutral trust", I think a better solution is needed to ensure some degree of accountability on part of those that are DT1 and also a different mechanism in place for others to be able to achieve DT1 level.

Yes, yes, most scammers I expose feel this way.  You are no different.

I'm sure we'd all appreciate if you could chose a street corner to droll your opinions - maybe even get a loudspeaker.  Interjecting your repeated grievances everywhere you feel like is just annoying everyone - if you even care.  :/

As always thank you for the explanation. I understand now.

Yes that link shows the 4 DT1 users that trust and 8 DT1 users that distrust him. A very handy tool to have just as is your Loyce Club.

You forgot the "-4": HostFat is trusted by 4 and distrusted by 8 DT1 members. So his "DT1 strength" is -4. See https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;dtview

Some users have been on and off DT1.

Thank you Loyce but what does the strike-through DT1 mean?

Is it something that can be like having a yo-yo effect where you can be DT1 one week and DT1 the next or is simply that was once DT1 but will never be DT1 again?

Theymos picks Staff members, and theymos trusts HostFat:

Agreed Vod is LIAR,everyone who supports this idiot is either part of lauda's gang or just stupid.I believe on theymo's decision.

Vod, even the admin admitted your behavior is disgusting. Then you leave me a trust rating trying to make it seem like the comment was about me. I’ll happily discuss this in person with you if you’d like it to remain off the forum.

Vod is a lying piece of shit that belongs nowhere near DT1. Anyone that supports him either has their head buried in the sand, or they aren’t motivated by an honest accurate trust network. There is no excuse that could justify trusting someone who acts like he does.

Without a shadow of doubt, user Hostfat (shows as Staff Legendary) has a questionable objective when it comes to supporting forum users (and known scammers) eliale and paci  - and anything related to protecting the Rock Trading scam exchange

Forum moderator Hostfat shows DT1 with strike through (as can be seen here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.52211678) yet somehow he is still 'Staff Legendary'. What is all that about? Can anybody shed light on it please as I do not understand?

This link explains the issues that triggered the concerns surrounding Hostfat behaving in an aggressive manner to a victim of a scam and instead he protected those that provide his affiliate related source of income via Rock Trading scam exchange thus he has lost the opportunity to be called unbiased and neutral: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/unacceptable-behaviour-by-forum-moderator-hostfat-rock-trading-owner-eliale-5126027

Actually I didn't purchase it (I've got it for free) and I didn't use it (it didn't work at first attempt and your feedback made me stop).
But I agree, the intention was there.
That's why I considered it only partly correct.

However, thanks for removing it. (I clearly didn't do that again.)


That would be the opposite of what you've done until now.
(And if you would start removing such ratings in such cases, sooner or later you'd clearly end up distrusted by everybody.)

Vod has never misbehaved.  Scammers try and call me a liar to reduce my trust impact, but time shows I am usually correct.


I have been removing a lot of old negative trust recently.   For example, yours was purchasing a hacked Microsoft key three years ago.  Such things can be forgiven if the actors do not do it again.  Someone also PMed me to remove a negative rating for leaving trust for payment.  Such acts show a foundational opposite of what I stand for and I won't remove those.

How about their activities on the forum especially their policing activities, have you considered that aspect?. Having spent majority of my time for the past few weeks on the scam accusation board, i recently updated my trust list and those would made the list were mostly those showing some policing contributions to the forum.

For my criteria, I combined, post quality, merit earned plus policing contributions. Dropped few old forum members, (no offense) then added new members who have proven themselves worthy, those I feel have hunger to search for scam like project to expose. Was kind of self-centered with my selections though since I'm an altcoin enthusiast and i need protection to some extent via the scam relate projects. Speaking of plagiarized whitepaper, fake teams etc. I don't have the right tools to spot this red flags so it's fair to have the guys who do on my CTL to alert me when I encounter such projects.

Heh, I have the same problem. It's a surprise for me (but not too big) to see them distrusted by theymos. Vod and TMAN are on my trust list because I've seen them clearly spotting and tagging accounts that deserved to be tagged.

Vod is controversial because of his way of handling the problems and because many of the tagged people are now holding a grudge.
I've got from him a neutral tag which is only partly correct. I guess that some got negative tags which were only partly correct. But I think that is intentions are good and a tag can be appealed in PM (even though with too small chance of success).

I think that one way to evaluate people is to see their tags. If those seem to be made incorrectly, for example for some interest, then they should clearly not be on your list.
Then you can see their posts. If their views contradict yours, there's a good chance that you may not agree with all their tags. This doesn't mean you should necessarily distrust them, but at least not trust them.
Of course, the theory looks better than what's to be actually done.

This topic is a discussion about people in DT1 with zero or neutral trust. This topic isn't about Vod or Vod's behaviour. They can fight all they want but there is no need to derail multiple topics with their childish arguements. Derailing topics, while there is an open topic about the subject, is actually considered as off-topic posting.


I have no idea how my post makes you think that I am supporting 'Vod's lies'. Understanding basic English is obviously hard for you so it might be too difficult for you to follow.

I try to keep away from the petty forum bitching, and I have no knowledge of any alleged mendacious behaviour by Vod.

Whats the point of supporting Vod's lies? theymos himself has distrust this idiot,isnt that enough ?you wanna join the distrusted list of the forum owner? you're not helping fag let them fight if they want ! its none of your business freak.

I've only just noticed that there seems to be a move against Vod. He is the first entry in my trust list, and I made the entry because I think he is an interesting character ( not sure about the avatar though ), and I felt that he had the interests of the forum at heart. It seems that others disagree with me, but my entry is based on my ( limited ) interaction with him. There seems to be a similar problem with TMAN, my instinct is that I could trust him with a £10,000 deal, but I haven't traded with him to base that on experience. It's this diversity of opinion that makes it difficult to make productive use of the trust system. It seems that active and outspoken members can attract negative opinions, and this is probably understandable, but in my opinion, the forum needs such members to maintain healthy discussions about Bitcoin and world affairs.

I'd like to give the system more support, but I'm still having difficulty in deciding how I should evaluate people. Obviously members who support or promote scam projects, or who defraud other members, should receive negative ratings. I don't approve of account trading, or the meriting of your own alts, but some members seem to think this is acceptable. However, all of those are negatives, so how do you evaluate the positive morality of members? Posting behaviour isn't really relevant, although post content can be an indication of low moral fibre.

What's the point of bringing up your opinion about Vod in every topic related to DT1? Your own topic is a perfect place to ventilate your frustration towards him. Derailing other topics is kinda getting old at this point.

OG, out of all the scammers I have busted, you seem to think the length of your scam entitles it to be forgotten.
  Not going to happen idiot - your only defense is been to call me a liar, when people can see I haven't.

To everyone else:  I am helping to build the strong leadership bitcoin needs.  Through transparency we will know who cheats on taxes, and who is just in it for themselves, like OG. 

Anyone who opposes the gang have been trolls,are you a troll now OgNasty? because i am being called a troll by telling the abuses of these police wannabe buttholes.

There was never supposed to be a forum policeman ranking...  Especially when people like Vod who are straight up liars are included in DT1.  I hope this forum can find it's way back to being more than a trollbox at some point.  It won't happen without strong leadership from honest people.

I am not getting any point why DT1 or DT2 should have positive feedback's in order to become part of DT network. If so then it will be like previous DT system. The  current voting system is almost fine and positive feedback's isn't required. If someone have 50 positive feedback's it doesn't mean he is more powerful DT. Even I am not enough trustworthy but my judgment could trustworthy. At this point anyone could be on DT network even they have no any positive feedback's. So feedback's just prove how a person trusted, it doesn't prove his judgment.

DT1 members select DT2 members, just like DT2 members select DT3 members.

All users can leave feedback, just not all of them are shown by default.

No. This is theymos' Trust list:
The users on DT1 are highlighted.

Correct. You should probably read DefaultTrust changes.

I saw some people with one or two positive trust mostly got them from loan activities.
Can I ask that which are differences between DT1, DT2 members? I ask because I saw both DT1 and DT2 members can leave negative feedbacks on users, so what's the difference between them, especially the net-effects of trust feedbacks eliminated with Trust Flag ?

I saw theymos' updated trust list every month, does it mean that DT1 members are users added in Trust list of theymos?
While DT2 members are users added in Trust list of at least one DT1 member?

In that case, the requirement shouldn't bee based on positive trust from other DT-members, but from members with a certain amount of Merit or Activity, kinda like the current DT1-voting.
Ideally it should be based on feedback from DT-members, but those are too volatile. That's why Merit or Activity could work. However, if you're basing DT-status on feedback earned, negative feedback should get a vote too. And that makes DT vulnerable for manipulation. So it's probably best not to change anything. It's up to the users to trust/include users without feedback and put them on DT1.

Ehh, I think sometimes it's better to have no trust ratings at all, than low-value trust ratings such as for small transactions or whatever.
Don't think I've ever actively asked anyone to ever give me a trust rating, but I've done quite a few trades here on the forum.

I'd actually see myself as somewhat trustworthy for a DT position, just if you take all underlying factors into account. (long-time member, haven't scammed, vested interest in staying a member here, etc.)
For the record, I would not actually want that responsibility, I don't give that much trust ratings out myself, so it would be completely wasted on me

On the one hand, positive trust ratings can mean a lot, but they're really not the holy grail of proving trustworthiness.

Still, I do understand where you're coming from, seems pretty logical at first glance to require DT1 members to have positive trust.

I agree that it would just encourage trust rating abuse. People are already reluctant to give trading ratings due to perceived and actual abuse.
Trading is not monitored like on ebay so there is no real record of it other than what is posted.

None of the trades I have completed on the forum resulted in feedback - trading feedback has all come from trades on other platforms.

DefaultTrust membership should mean your Trust ratings are accurate, that's it. Someone can be a trustworthy person but their judgement may still be subpar. Or they might not trade much with other forum members but they may be good at spotting scammers.

Sorry, I can't do that without scraping all posts in those sections, and that's too much to quickly do.

I posted about something similar:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/do-we-need-1-more-datapoint-for-trust-in-trades-and-only-trades-5154576

Trust for trades and nothing but trades.

Keep the other data points, just add one more for trading. Did not seem to gain much traction.

@LoyceV with all the data you have scraped, can you do a venn diagram with people who are active in meta with the people who are active in the marketplace (and the sub forums)?
Just wondering how many of us are active in both places.

If you are here but not there you don't care as much, and if you are there but not here, you never saw the thread.

-Dave

Some Trust Selfscratchers create their own positive trust once they're on DT1.
It's far from perfect, but the volatility of DT makes that Trust ratings can change any moment. That makes it a bad criterion to use.

I do not disagree with you but the reality here is that the forum policeman ranking gets most of the advantage^* I think.

*Being in the DT network. Both DT1 and DT2

I didn't realise the 3 day activity requirement, that kills my point in another post - I'd better editit.

I still think it would be handy to have a trading trust ranking, rather than a forum policeman ranking.

Is it really necessary to have a trust feedback to be in DT1?

Here everything explained to be in the DT1 however here are all the criteria to be in DT1:

So, if you notice carefully then you will see there are no such criteria that someone has to have any feedback to be in DT1. And personally I do not think a feedback is necessary to be a DT. A DT should be the one who has good sense of judgement of the forum affairs.

I've not been keeping up with the latest changes to the trust system, but I'm having difficulty in understanding the justification for including a member without a positive trust entry in the DT1 rankings.