After carefully considering the response above I have decided to remove the risked BTC and updated my feedback for OG. I would not bother to remove the risked BTC since it has no use (which I learnt today) but I have done it so that Vod removes his counter feedback. EcuaMobi and me talked about it earlier but I had to post it to get rid of my hesitations and to hear the community.
Thanks everyone especially EcuaMobi to bring this into my attention and I totally agree with theymos that the Risked BTC field should be removed.
Topic: Feedback needed on risked amount (Read 442 times)
I will probably remove "risked BTC" entirely in the future.
That's probably a good idea, since it's basically a value that can be made to be whatever members want it to be. It's not eBay, where the value of a transaction is known, and most feedback left on bitcointalk is probably not from doing deals anyway. Eliminating that field isn't going to do any harm, and it'll probably do some good. And frankly I don't think anybody cares about it if they even see the value when looking at someone's trust.
Personally I absolutely disregard someone's feedback as soon as I find a single incorrect detail. If you want to leave someone a positive feedback that says 0 risked BTC, but the comment says, "Held 500 BTC for the forum" thats fine. As soon as you fill in that 500 BTC as risked, you've lost all credibility in my opinion, and the same is true for countering feedback with false risked BTC.
The "increase risked BTC to increase the strength" thing only applied for a brief period of time. It didn't work well, so I removed it. It has no effect on anything, and I will probably remove "risked BTC" entirely in the future.
I don't think that it's a big deal to put ridiculous values in that field, though probably you shouldn't. For reporting something second-hand, there's never been a standard, and as far as I'm concerned you can do whatever you want. Since it doesn't actually affect anything, it's basically the same to have riskedBTC=1 with a comment of "he stole BTC" as to just say in the comment "he stole 1 BTC".
Thanks for your input. I really think you should update the Marketplace trust to avoid further confusion, as requested. I don't think that it's a big deal to put ridiculous values in that field, though probably you shouldn't. For reporting something second-hand, there's never been a standard, and as far as I'm concerned you can do whatever you want. Since it doesn't actually affect anything, it's basically the same to have riskedBTC=1 with a comment of "he stole BTC" as to just say in the comment "he stole 1 BTC".
The "increase risked BTC to increase the strength" thing only applied for a brief period of time. It didn't work well, so I removed it. It has no effect on anything, and I will probably remove "risked BTC" entirely in the future.
I don't think that it's a big deal to put ridiculous values in that field, though probably you shouldn't. For reporting something second-hand, there's never been a standard, and as far as I'm concerned you can do whatever you want. Since it doesn't actually affect anything, it's basically the same to have riskedBTC=1 with a comment of "he stole BTC" as to just say in the comment "he stole 1 BTC".
I don't think that it's a big deal to put ridiculous values in that field, though probably you shouldn't. For reporting something second-hand, there's never been a standard, and as far as I'm concerned you can do whatever you want. Since it doesn't actually affect anything, it's basically the same to have riskedBTC=1 with a comment of "he stole BTC" as to just say in the comment "he stole 1 BTC".
I'm going to take a slightly different approach, as this feels like a discussion on mere semantics.
On top of the feedback page, the forum shows this:
Based on the above, I'd say the amount of 500 BTC shown by both Pamoldar and Vod is correct (archived).
However, I'd say the color of the feedback boils down to this:
On top of the feedback page, the forum shows this:
Quote
Risked BTC amount is money that the person could have stolen or did steal.
I've left red feedback based on this a few times (example), even though I didn't lose anything myself.Based on the above, I'd say the amount of 500 BTC shown by both Pamoldar and Vod is correct (archived).
However, I'd say the color of the feedback boils down to this:
Quote
Positive - You trust this person or had a successful trade.
Neutral - Comments. Your rating will not affect this person's trust score.
Negative - You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer.
I don't think returning 500 BTC justifies negative feedback. Neutral - Comments. Your rating will not affect this person's trust score.
Negative - You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer.
What rule is that?
Made a mistake. I did think it was a rule, but I looked at my reference link and saw it mentions guideline. Sorry - I edited my post.
EcuaMobi, dbshck and me left feedback for OgNasty where we put 500 in the risked BTC field. I noticed Vod's friendly counter negative rating for that. I received a PM from EcuaMobi this morning and requested to update my feedback if I can. He explained the logic is that we did not risked anything personally so we should enter 0 as risked amount.
That's correct; you should definitely update it to 0 BTC since it was not your BTC being risked.
Just noticed a bunch of other people chimed in with similar opinions.
You can interpret my words however you want as well. As long as you know you're breaking a forum rule, I don't care what you do. 
What rule is that?
2) interpret Theymos' words however you want.
So I was not wrong in my interpretation?You can interpret my words however you want as well. As long as you know you're breaking a forum rule, I don't care what you do.
The person who should have left the risked amount in the feedback could have been Theymos but on his feedback he also just left there Zero.
That is incorrect. Theymos correctly left the 500 BTC as amount risked.
I think using zero risked BTC would be more than OK for your feedback since you personally didn't not directly or indirectly entrust Ognasty to keep the BTC.
The person who should have left the risked amount in the feedback could have been Theymos but on his feedback he also just left there Zero.
The person who should have left the risked amount in the feedback could have been Theymos but on his feedback he also just left there Zero.
2) interpret Theymos' words however you want.
So I was not wrong in my interpretation?You can interpret my words however you want as well. As long as you know you're breaking a forum guideline, I don't care what you do.
Edit to replace rule with guideline.
Quote
- If you want to make a rating stronger, increase "Risked BTC". 50 extra risked BTC is equivalent to an additional rating.
^ This doesn't apply any more and has not for quite some time. Just change your trust rating to zero risked and be done with it as it won't make a difference.
When theymos made the statement, it was true, however he later changed how trust ratings are calculated, and his statement is no longer true. The current algorithm can be found here, and is posted below:
Code:
if there are no negative ratings
score = 0
for each rating, oldest to newest
if this rater has already been counted
continue
score += min(10, round_up(months since rating))
else
score = unique_positive - 2^(unique_negative)
if score >= 0
start_time = time of first negative
score = unique_positive since start_time - unique_negative since start_time
if(score < 0)
return ??? (orange)
move score to range [-9999,9999]
return score
[/quote]
2) interpret Theymos' words however you want.
It really comes down to a choice:
1) trust Theymos wrote what he did for a reason
2) interpret Theymos' words however you want.
1) trust Theymos wrote what he did for a reason
2) interpret Theymos' words however you want.
Quote
- If you want to make a rating stronger, increase "Risked BTC". 50 extra risked BTC is equivalent to an additional rating.
^ This doesn't apply any more and has not for quite some time. Just change your trust rating to zero risked and be done with it as it won't make a difference.
EcuaMobi, dbshck and me left feedback for OgNasty where we put 500 in the risked BTC field. I noticed Vod's friendly counter negative rating for that. I received a PM from EcuaMobi this morning and requested to update my feedback if I can. He explained the logic is that we did not risked anything personally so we should enter 0 as risked amount.
And, I see now EcuaMobi, dbshck updated their feedback and Vod updated his feedback with this,
b) Or, should I keep the feedback as it is because theymos said,
Please help me with your view in the comment with a choice of a or b.
Thanks everyone in advance.
And, I see now EcuaMobi, dbshck updated their feedback and Vod updated his feedback with this,
"Risked BTC" is how much money you could have lost if the person you're rating had turned out to be a scammer.
b) Or, should I keep the feedback as it is because theymos said,
Quote
- If you want to make a rating stronger, increase "Risked BTC". 50 extra risked BTC is equivalent to an additional rating.
The interpretation of my trust rating is that, the value of this trust rating is 500BTC which makes the rating stronger. I could put 1000BTC but I have witnesses 500 BTC so this is the highest I have gone.Please help me with your view in the comment with a choice of a or b.
Thanks everyone in advance.
Jump to: