Topic: Filter criteria recommendation for DT1 selection algorithm (Read 396 times)

I don't know, I didn't make the system
But I understand the desire not to restrict DT1 to only very old members.

What's wrong with a limited form of stability in randomness?   How about changing DT1 every three months, or put a sitting limit on (no more than six months inclusions).  New Legionaries will be born and the list can change, but new DT members do not half to fear immediate retaliation if they oust a scammer that has attracted up a larger member base...

Edit:  Maybe Theymos will add a "reporter" filter in too.... give the DT1 to the people that take the time to maintain the forum.

Making changes requires that there is a problem that requires changing the old system to be addressed. What are the disadvantages of the current trust system that need to include legendary accounts?  
Generally putting too many restrictions would be a problem, as there was no apparent abuse of the current system.

If there is an addition, DT2 should be restricted to those who are Members and above.

You don't need a new account for that. To view any page as DT, just add ;dt to the url: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;dt

Several DT1-members are excluded by other DT1-members. That means they don't really count as DT1-members anymore. Details: see https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;dtview

If anything other than random is used, it'll end up with the same set of DT1-members each month. Theymos want it to be more dynamic, and also give newer users a chance to reach DT1.

There are much more account farmers and spammers with old high-ranking accounts, than valuable users. But if you see old valuable posts, please use Report unmerited good posts to Merit Source.

I am pretty sure that is not the case.

Please create a Brand New profile and go to https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust, so that you can see forum's DT, not your customized one. You'll find the following list under DT1...

theymos (1)
HostFat (-1)
dooglus (1)
TECSHARE (-1)
OgNasty (1)
CanaryInTheMine (-1)
malevolent (1)
qwk (1)
Vod (1)
Anduck (1)
mprep (1)
Foxpup (1)
philipma1957 (1)
babo (1)
Cyrus (1)
Flying Hellfish (1)
Welsh (1)
ibminer (1)
TMAN (1)
TookDk (1)
Mitchell (1)
Micio (1)
vizique (1)
Ticked (1)
yogg (1)
by rallier (1)
dbshck (1)
TheNewAnon135246 (1)
hybridsole (1)
greenplastic (1)
hilariousandco (1)
arulbero (1)
Avirunes (1)
mindrust (1)
buckrogers (1)
Lesbian Cow (1)
redsn0w (1)
willi9974 (-1)
cryptodevil (1)
suchmoon (1)
JayJuanGee (1)
Rmcdermott927 (-1)
achow101 (1)
teeGUMES (1)
owlcatz (1)
nutildah (1)
dazedfool (1)
sapta (1)
tmfp (1)
BitcoinPenny (1)
yahoo62278 (1)
zazarb (-1)
LFC_Bitcoin (1)
mhanbostanci (1)
bones261 (1)
LoyceV (1)
actmyname (1)
WhiteManWhite (1)
Kalemder (1)
The Pharmacist (1)
LeGaulois (1)
DarkStar_ (1)
asu (1)
kzv (1)
TheFuzzStone (1)
Jet Cash (1)
bL4nkcode (1)
Lafu (1)
Gunthar (1)
finaleshot2016 (1)
xtraelv (1)
crwth (1)
Ale88 (1)
Kryptowerk (1)
bobita (1)
krogothmanhattan (1)
Matthias9515 (1)
roycilik (1)
micgoossens (1)
Silent26 (1)
Veleor (1)
o_e_l_e_o (1)
chimk (1)
pandukelana2712 (1)
coinlocket$ (1)
witcher_sense (1)
asche (1)
DdmrDdmr (1)
anonymousminer (1)
Alex_Sr (1)
morvillz7z (1)
fillippone (1)
taikuri13 (1)
abhiseshakana (1)
madnessteat (1)
Coolcryptovator (1)
lovesmayfamilis (1)
DireWolfM14 (1)
1miau (1)
DIKUL (1)

There are 100 members in the above list.

In the post https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.51424908, theymos clearly said...


My point was Why a random subset, while you can filter through Forum Position? May be Legendary is not required now, but minimum level can be set as Full Member.

Merit system is in place since January 24, 2018. A lot of people contributed before, but did not earn any merit for that. Those threads have gone down in the history of BitcoinTalk. Only a handful of those get merit today. IMHO, the only way to recognize the contribution made before January 24, 2018, is to consider Forum Position as a selection criteria of DT.

DT1 = giving valuable and accurate feedback, that's also possible if an user isn't very long member here but active in exposing scams.  
And even if account age is also a factor to be on DT1, 2 years for getting a Legendary account when the old ranking system was in place wasn't a big deal and doesn't mean that the user is also a good choice for DT. There are numerous "Legendary" accounts just posting nonsense to earn a few shittokens per week and it was pretty easy for them to rank up before Merit was in place. The only thing they needed to do was posting 1 shitpost per day, for 2 years.
The problem are old, farmed accounts before Merit was introduced.

bob123 gave already a very good answer: the time spent on the forum for exposing scams is a better indicator than the age of an account. In Scam Accusations are a few Sr. / Hero Members doing a very good job and their posts prove that they have a good knowledge.


Yes, there is always an incentive to buy accounts. So, why should we strengthen such an incentive if we can achieve it otherwise?


+1

Nope, they are users in trust list of theymos, and not all of them are DT1 members.
To get list of DT1 members, please get it here: Complete overview of users on DT1 and DT2 and their ratings
There are 94 DT1 members, as I saw.

Let's assume all DT1 members were legendary users, can you just imagine the level of drama the forum will be recording on a daily base. No offense to the active (net positive legendary users of the forum) but from my observation, if there isn't a controversial accusation ongoing resulting to drama, hardly before you see any legendary users showing interest.

The lower ranked users (Hero below) are actually the ones doing a great job in trying to police the forum. You would observe that, if you spend some time on the scam accusation board. These guys spend timeless amount of hours researching on different projects, pointing out red flags like Plagiarism whitepaper, fake team etc then report with detailed info and evidence. They're also engaged in combatting other countless type of scams.

Most legendary users are feeling too relax and showing less concern towards the forum. Being a DT (most especially DT1) member should have everything to do with your level of commitment to the safety of the forum and not your rank status. We have some net positive legendary users but they're very few.

Of course RANK should be the PRIME weighting of getting into DT1 along with TRADE HISTORY. Impossible to gain in a few months via some ass kissing or generous alt donations/cycling.

Lol at making merit alone = trust. Merit is not even correlated to "good post" is is subjective garbage for the most part. Most of the observably untrustworthy and dangerous scum bags with observable instances of wrong doing have buckets of it (all from each other LOL)

DT1 should rely upon


Activity Legend at a bare minimum hero. ( not replaced in 5 mins and have some history to examine)
merit 100 + (if you must have it) can be gamed
Trade history ( 50k USD total and 25 successful transactions from at least 5 different high ranking accounts) can be gamed but let's make it a bit harder. Can be examined and debated.
NO OBSERVABLE INSTANCES OF FINANCIALLY MOTIVATED WRONG DOING AT ALL IN THEIR HISTORIES.
ANY NEGATIVE TRUST GIVEN FOR NON FINANCIALLY MOTIVATED WRONG DOING = immediate removal.

You don't need 100's of people in DT1. You don't need an algorithm ALONE to auto select based on gamed and abused subjective data.

Some sensible human intervention by theymos or which ever admin will accept responsibility to scan new applicants, human intervention to remove and ban them if needed.

Make it a position of TRUST that if you fuck it up you can't just splatter some merits via your circle to power new alts. You will need years to build up the rank again.

Who cares if NOOBS can be in DT1. Do you trust people who you met yesterday who seem nice or your life long pals who have never done you down over the years?

Fucking common sense people. You EARN TRUST and TIME is certainly a prime factor in that.  Also legend accounts will be valuable if you make the merit system actually mean MERIT not politically contrived mess so risking it being destroyed is something to consider.

Only those that want to power they new alts and acolytes they control would oppose such a system.

You can not you auto do this you will need some small human intervention now and then. Sorry that is the only way. The only AI we have here is better suited to sucking dirt from floors right now. You can code out reliable systems that are fed subjective meaningless garbage and expect reliable results. The very notion is ludicrous.

Nowadays it is not enough to accumulate enough activity to get legendary.

If a user is very helpful in exposing scams and doesn't post much helpful stuff, he won't get his merits needed for legendary fast enough.
But such a user is still worth being included into a trust list, which basically means that you trust this users judgement and feedback.

I don't think it is necessary to be legendary to be able to get into DT1. Good judgement and trust is.

Do we really want someone, who has not given at least two years to this forum, at DT1? I dont know...

This appears to be a very lame excuse. In a free market, if something is valuable, there will always be an attempt to achieve that through money power in black market. This is no secret. Even the current model of selection encourages merit & account sales.

What? Check the first reference I provided in OP!

There are less than 100 DT1 members, so I don't think new voted DT1 members will not catch attention of old ones. Bought accounts are very easily to know from the forum (email changed recently, password changed recently in Trust profile page) or from BPIP site.
Consequently, if new voted DT1 members have fake votes from 2 hacked accounts, it is very clearly that they are highly potential abused DT1 members, and sooner or later they will be excluded from Trust list of other old DT1 members, as well as negative tags.

Yes, but that won't affect the new rule (requirement: Account has to be Legendary to get on DT1). It's not required that someone's account which he wants to place in DT1 has to have earned Merits. The only thing you need is to have 2 other users with 250 earned Merit (as it was before) trusting the bought Legendary account (before: no special rank required). 

What does it mean?
DT update log (on September 4, 2019) ?

I know.
This is reasons why I suggest to restrict at Full member rank or Senior member rank and above. I don't think good users will have to spend two years to become Full members. 6 months or one year is long enough to see quality of those users from their posts, threads, and merit history.
I don't think such restrictions will trigger account sales just to become DT members or to abuse trust system. They can buy accounts, but they can not buy merits (significant amounts) without side-effects on bought-accounts.
In Default Trust change, theymos wrote:
It means earned merits, not airdropped merits, so buying accounts with airdropped merits is pointless.

Actually, being added to a trust list means that your given trust feedback to other users is accurate and valuable for the community much more than being actually a trustworthy user. It's quite possible to be on DT while you haven't done a single trade but exposed tons of scams instead and the left feedback by you is valuable for other users to prevent them from being scammed. 


About the suggestion: it's an interesting idea to take the rank into consideration but I'm not sure if it helps. I can see 2 disadvantages by doing so:

- New users registering after Merit introduction will have a disadvantage compared to users ranked up before (possibly with low effort posts). Theymos is known for disliking too much restrictions for new users and obtaining a Legendary rank would take almost 2 years.
- Such a change could encourage account sales of high-ranked accounts when scammers are trying to abuse trust.

That didn't happen: http://loyce.club/trust/2019-08-31_Sat_06.04h/35.html

IMO, to be added in Trust list of others, users should have either trustworthy or contributions over their time in the forum. There are some components that build up trustworthy and reputation of one user:
- Contributions: Good post history is a plus point; good threads is another plus point, and merit history with regularly received merits is another significant plus point.
- Trustworthy: Through tradings with others, through scam fightings (scam accusation threads or posts).
If you suggest using rank as one of restriction to be added into Trust list of DT1 members, it is unfair, and un-logically if the applied rank is Legendary. I think that if there is a higher restriction on rank for DT1 voting, it should be the Senior Member rank. Nowadays, with the merit system, users need to earn 250 merits to become Senior members, from which I do think that we can see how they contribute to the forum (or abuse to get those merits). It is enough.
If one user seriously works to become a Senior Member when began as new-era newbie, s/he does understand the value of that account and don't take risks by abusing Trust system.

If I was right, last two months, theymos even added Full Member rank to his Trust list, @DIKUL.

To sum up, I think the forum should restrict acceptable ranks to be voted in DT1 at Full Member and above ranks; or Senior member and above rank.

As we have seen, since June 11, 2019, more than 100 users are being selected for DT1. Hence, a random subset is being selected as eligible for DT1.

Reference: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.51424908

The current selection criteria for DT1 is as follows...


I am hereby suggesting to add an extra filter instead of random subset selection, which is...

- You must be of Legendary rank.

Rationality: How much time someone has spent on BitcoinTalk, which is signified by Rank, will also have a value along with his/her quality of post, which is signified by Merit.

@theymos Over to you.