Topic: Have the rules of the DT system and Forum rules amended ? ? theymos - page 2. (Read 915 times)

The DT system was already centralized a few years ago, theymos acknowledged this in his post here:


Theymos can moderate the DT system even now. If you think someone is abusing the DT system, you can PM him. I don't know how he will react to such a message or if he will react at all, but you, as well as any other forum user, have this option.

I think at this point purging the default trust list for a few months to "see" how things would play out is not a bad idea.

Why was the trust system initially implemented? Its primary purpose was to enhance the safety of trading on the forum. Now, let's consider the percentage of forum members utilizing the platform for trading – around 5%?. In essence, we are subjecting the remaining 95% to potential harassment by some DT members merely to safeguard this small fraction of the forum population. Keep in mind that a significant portion of this 5% (myself included) may not trust the default trust list and often opt for escrow in their trades. When factoring in these considerations, the conclusion is apparent – we are safeguarding a very small group at the expense of many other innocent users, not to mention the forum database inundated with redundant feedback and numerous topics discussing a single feedback.

Theymos probably wanted everyone to participate in the trust system, but that obviously didn't happen and will never happen, we literally have some DT members who blackmail other users for the removal of certain feedback.

Common sense dictates that if you wish to engage in trading, you should put in effort in selecting members whose judgment aligns with your own. If trading isn't your focus, the entire trust system becomes irrelevant. Therefore, providing the community with the option to use or not use the trust system would be a good experiment IMO. This way, nobody would have the right to complain about any feedback since each individual's feedback would hold precisely the value assigned by that particular person.


That is indeed a fantastic idea, and it would certainly be effective if Theymos had a superhuman ability with a 100% success rate. Unfortunately, he does not possess such capabilities, so the idea won't work.


You don't understand what decentralization means. Imagine a scenario where your household spending is centralized—in other words, your father receives all the money and then distributes it among all the family members as they see fit (centralized). Now, contrast that with a decentralized system where the person who receives the most votes manages the family spending, and it so happens that your little brother wins (because he is good at persuading and managed to persuade your other siblings). Do you think he'd be fairer to you than your centralized father?

It's like people confusing democracy with fairness. Fairness would involve allowing your broke ass to run for president with the same chances and exposure as the current president. Democracy means your broke ass decides to vote for this powerful person or the next one. It's very easy to confuse reality with terms.

The DT system is indeed decentralized, but decentralization has nothing to do with fairness. What you want is a fair system, whether it's centralized or decentralized makes no difference.

You guys are lucky I could take a snapshot from admin after hearing the suggestion, I just saw him moving very fast! 😂😂

That's like... moving backward in evolution. And if we amuse this idea for a second, let's assume theymos revert to the old DT system, and then one of the DT tagged you for this same situation or whatever reason you or someone else think is not justified, I can already hear them screaming, "decentralize the DT system, let the community choose who they trust to be in DT. Why should it be decided by a limited group of moderators?"

Can I laugh at your idea? The DT system has long been decentralized and not moderated, there are indeed some things that are not right but everything is still fine. Is it because you got a red tag that trust system suddenly needs to change? I think the admin is already busy enough with reports of spam, plagiarism and AI content. As far as I know, there are not many admins either

Centralize the system and let the admin moderate it. It's obvious we're not ready for Decentralization just yet.

I think there's quite a few who use the DT system incorrectly, likely including myself at times. Some use feedback as a notepad, some use it as a weapon, some use it to control, and some use it only for trades. A decent number of the people on DT have no idea how to use it and there's also a few that look to join ranks(DT gang) and use the system in a corrupt way(I have no proof per say, just my feeling on a few members).

I think we give too much respect to scam busters and people who find alts in the past. Most of the time they did a good job, but over time the quality of their tags went downhill. I'm talking overall, not just any one specific user.

Without a reputation system many started tagging scammers, spammers, and account sellers making lines become blurred. Honestly, if users are engaging in what some consider "shady" activities, they prob aren't really to be trusted in a trade. Is the system perfect, no but it's what we have.

If you have a suggestion of how to make the system better, by all means share it with us.

If you steal a chicken and the owner doesn't complain or cops don't catch you, that doesn't make you not a criminal. Anyone can see the type of "content" you're pooping out here, regardless of what moderators do or don't do. And shockingly that still matters to some people on this forum.

I'm not sure I ever agreed with his decision; I remember fighting against JollyGood in 2021 for the inappropriate red he left on two accounts - a scenario in which he had no choice but to fix it. This is a revenge tag, it's starting to make sense.

I've advised him not to use the DT system to fight his battle; he's creating a huge mess of things. I realized it was a revenge tag the day he informed me it would take him 12 months to revisit my trust page (Jan 2023), and Jan 2024 was exactly 12 months. He added red with the smallest piece of information he had on me that I used AI in one of my posts, which was a lie.

Edited dates

The moderators see it the other way. This is what matters.

You don't know Jolly Good very well. He knows how to observe, and that is why he leaves such long notes. Remember, weren’t you the one who appeared on the forum after a three-year hibernation to help another account remove the negative tag left by JollyGood? You have been very fiercely protective and even brash, saying that you don't like people or even hate people.




Today you do not agree with his decision?

But the account you are protecting was also not accidentally noticed. Today he is a successful signer, but in the past, his Bitcoin transactions showed links to alternate accounts that were caught cheating. Everything is not accidental; you agree?


https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/transaction/32e41e41341dc69a0451b3836c999936fe67816ba2c884db9858eddbae695cfb

https://ninjastic.space/addresses?address=1JKrdC5VHi4hjGN8vuUz1DL1moqRn7iX7H
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.55248573

Just like today, they call you a person who writes crap.

I think JollyGood carefully reviews your account before responding, and the way you showed up will work against you.


Here you are also disingenuous, you were a lawyer, and not much time has passed to forget

When I registered on the forum in 2017 I remember there was a lot of problem with one-liner spam. The merit system was introduced after a while and it helped to reduce spam but not eliminate it. The remaining spammers on the forum learned that if they stretch their rubbish the posts are much less likely to be deleted by the moderators. So it doesn't surprise me that the quotes you post from the OP are mostly from the gambling section. You see a lot of it there. People writing 2 or 3 long paragraphs like: 'Gambling can be good and can be bad, because you can sometimes lose and sometimes win but when you win is good because enjoy the money but when you lose is bad because you feel sad...' Rubbish like that.

JollyGood has been controversial for the last few years now. I kind of wish he would go back to scam investigations & get away from piling on defenseless accounts that may have f'ed up one one way or another so nobody is likely to step up and voice support for them.

OP's question was already answered in the 1st reply or two so no point in clarifying that -- administration will not step in unless there is blatant, coordinated abuse of the trust system taking place. As far as this particular matter is concerned, the trust system is still functioning as intended.


Is moving down from 0 to -13 on this list part of the game?

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

I wouldn't be so sure. 🤫

---

Since the consensus around here is that trust feedback could be used for any or not any reasons at all, then why not we tag everyone we don't like? Oh wait, they are already doing that, next step would be to tag anyone when we report their posts after seeing mods taking no action on our reports?

---

Ps, women after 50 get a bit grumpy, better to ignore them. 😉

I am using facts. I quoted four of those facts (out of dozens if not hundreds in your post history) earlier in this thread. You're a shitposter. But you managed to find a loophole by expanding a typical one-line shitpost into a whole paragraph. This seems to make moderators not want to read much of that shit and you get a pass. It's cringy how your pea brain made that into some sort of high ground that allows you to bitch about other users breaking the rules even though that didn't even happen (again, trust ratings are not subject to forum rules).

I mean... what the fuck are you even trying to say here? I think a "good project" one-liner would have more meaning than this word salad:

Except for the bolded part, you're correct. Don't judge based on sentiments, but on facts; now you understand why the moderators were carefully picked, and you aren't one of them. Anyway, thank you for your comments.

Except for mine, he's been responding to posts on reputation and Meta. He has nothing against me and still clings to his errors. With this attitude, he'll only lose more DT votes.

Clever.  

I'd guess another lie... or is it telepathy?
Yep, I could have been posting about anything related to the OP and trust, but he just assumed I quoted him regarding his accurate feedback. smh.

The rest of his post isn't accurate and doesn't seem worth my time.

Hopefully the unfair red reputation gets removed. I believe you that you haven't posted any AI spam. I've seen JollyGood respond to other threads as well even after, but seemingly ignores you after days of this same thing going on. I heard one bad reputation from DT1 means your account is partially fucked so that really does suck. IMO he doesn't deserve to be taken away from DT1 but he should definitely be more careful with something like this before giving out a red tag.

I have ibweiner ignored, but I assume he posted something about his trust abuse as well.  That idiot gave me negative trust for quoting a return in USD, when literally every single legitimate entity in the world, including the government, only cares about the USD return %.  His denial to accept this isn't based in reality and if this trust logic was applied equally, literally everyone in the speculation section of the forum or anyone who has ever priced anything in dollars here should have red trust.  This is the type of mentally deficient idiot that belongs nowhere near DT...  Yet he's one of the morons along with suchfail (another good ignore) who are running a website all about user stats here while trying to manipulate the trust network.

It's nice to see so many others begin to recognize what a shit show DT turned out to be without guidance.  A failed experiment at this point.

Not, really

I can say it and I'm saying it. You're what's wrong. Doesn't make JG right but JG's feedback doesn't make you right either. Ideally JG should be out of DT and you should be banned.

You're the one who started a thread about forum rules. DT feedback is not subject to forum rules. You're the one breaking the rules.