Topic: IS GIVING RED-TRUST THAT NON-EXPLANATORY ? - page 5. (Read 2901 times)

Even without making subjective, case by case judgements, if you control what the algorithm is, you control the outcome. If you control the inputs of the algorithm (such as by controlling who the merit sources are), you have even greater control over the outcome. Making the algorithm public reduces control somewhat but it makes it somewhat subject to manipulation.

Complete decentralization is a pipe dream. Total decentralization assumes everyone is operating within the community set standards and is not abusing the mechanisms available within it for self serving and or fraudulent purposes. Expecting humans to not do this is quite naive. The most robust systems have both aspects of centralization and decentralization. There is a good book about it if you want to read more.

Even if you don't agree with this argument, the fact is this forum is an inherently centralized entity. You can want it to be decentralized all you like, that doesn't change the fact it runs on a centralized server, is administrated by a centralized group of people, and requires a centralized set of rules to govern it. This whole game where we pretend the forum is can be completely decentralized is childish and more destructive to this community than helpful.

Theymos, being the centralized administrator of this forum has put forth a set of standards we are all supposed to operate within. He really hasn't set the bar that high. All he is requiring is that we operate within a set format, he doesn't dictate the content of the system, only its organizational structure. We don't have to agree with those standards, but if we are intentionally and willfully disregarding those standards, then it is pretty clear exclusion from this system is warranted.

This is exactly why I have been advocating for some more clearly defined rules and standards around here for some time. I don't mind following the rules, but if the rules are ambiguous, unwritten, and arbitrarily enforced, then even if you want to operate within the system it is quite impossible. This inevitably leads to more chaos and conflict than approaching absolutely everything on a case by case basis.

Well the thing is that once a person has a strong grip on being on DT, as Lauda does, it is very difficult to get them off, even if they are scamming or doing something very unethical or illegal.

Lauda should have been excluded from DT when he tried to extort zeroaxl, and anyone who kept Lauda on their trust lists should have been excluded themselves. Lauda basically avoided this by denying he did anything wrong, even though the facts were undisputed and by using strong language that removing him from DT was amounting to helping scammers.

The same is true when he was part of an escrow team and over a million dollars worth of various coins were unaccounted for and none of the escrow agents would answer any questions. Again Lauda denied doing anything wrong and said there wasn’t anything requiring him to give an accounting of what happened to all the money he collected.

If you can come away unscathed and still be on DT after being entrusted with a million dollars that goes missing without even giving an explanation or answering any meaningful questions, there isn’t anything that will cause Lauda to be removed from DT.

I disagree. The second we go all blacklisty on things it's no longer a community controlled system. People just need to continue to show how the system should be used, and point out when it is clearly being used outside of what is acceptable. Then informed of their options. ~ should be used as opposed to blacklisting. I also don't think we should be deciding who people can and can't add to their list, it's their choice if that's the sort of rating system they think has value.

At the end of the day, Lauda is horribly corrupt and he should be condemned in the strongest way possible. He has a very long history of giving negative trust to people critical of him for trivial and/or questionable reasons. He has a history of using his position of power/authority to personally profit (that would not otherwise be available if not for the position of authority/power).

Lauda should be blacklisted from being on anyone’s trust list unless they explicitly add him to their trust list, and ditto for any of his alts. The same should be done for any other person who similarly gives trust.  

Lauda has done some good things for the forum before and has blindly supported the bitcoin core team for a long time. Neither of these are a sufficient reason to excuse his behavior at other times.

You decide..
Who are you with?
theymos or Lauda?

Its easy if you have no stake in the system and are willing to trash it out of spite from being rejected by it. I just think its great you are stuck in a position to argue against yourself using your own words in order to justify your actions. This is what inevitably happens to real liars. Much like the people you choose to abuse, you are damned if you do, and you are damned if you don't.




I think Lauda is arguing that they are not multiple authoritarians, just one. Of course this might change with a psychological break.

How far removed from reality can you possibly be?
You are both DT and a tyrannical authoritarian..

I think the only reason you are on DT is that users are afraid to stand up against you..
"Good outweighs the bad" is a piss poor excuse to keep letting this go on..

I finally did, and I'll shut up when I please (never)..

You are the one wasting everyone's time with this BS..

I am nut "butthurt" about my rating, lol..
I'm "butthurt" about you constantly intimidating other good users threatening to do to them what you have done to us..
Your power of intimidation needs to be removed from you.. Then you can go tagging/flagging whatever you want at your heart's content for all I care.. 

If you think so, go ahead and rate. I will not be screaming, nor shouting nor crying like yall folk are. This is easy if you aren't a sensitive bitch, innit?

You claim you changed your mind, I say you are a liar. Of course there is no problem with using this logic to negative rate people right?

Right.

I'm not DT nor authoritarians. You on the other hand, pushing your bullshit magic-wand guidelines on me, are both. I quit DT precisely to avoid these flush standards while members look away when their buddies steal here and there. Yet you keep trying to push these standards even when I quit DT. Will you fucking get a life already and do what you do best?

~ or not, I will absolutely make no changes to these ratings. Therefore, do everyone a favour and stop being so butthurt about your rating get it over with already: ~Lauda and fucking shut up. I'm not the old cunt that produced you and therefore not here to comfort you when you're crying.

Merited OP
Merited the TS post
Countered
~Lauda added

Lauda is clearly flying off the handle with abusive negative feedback most recently including abusive trust against TS.. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/more-trust-system-abuse-by-lauda-5210651
And abusive trust against me.. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/calling-for-sensible-debate-on-this-use-of-the-trust-system-not-regarding-us-5206862
And now this..

It's well past time to ~Lauda people..
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust
Do it..


You are all just "pajeets" to Lauda..


Lauda has no respect for the guidelines given by theymos and is running around belligerently abusing their DT2 position..

It's time to end it..
We should not accept such runaway authoritarians here staying on DT..

Good outweighs the bad my ass.. DT should be held to a MUCH higher standard than that..

And my favorite..

By your own standard here you are objectively a liar and we should all red trust you over it. Of course in many cases you leave ratings for people "lying" there is no objective evidence, just lots of disagreement in opinion and dislike that certain individuals are getting support that you would like to stop.

That's not an attack, it's a factual statement. You are an alt, who even plagiarised a couple months back. I found wisdom in this post, and apparently this is on-topic.

I do wonder if some alt like say "scam-buster" or someone else is going to make the grand reveal. Consider it a present for 2020 whenever it happens.

Come on, this thread is about if community thinks this type of ratings should be that non-explanatory or not. Keep your personal attacks out, yours is just an example from many as I said in the OP.

No, I don't expect you to take my word for it. I expect you to analyze the data of previous cases of this very familiar situation. Do tell me the percentage ratio difference between the times I was wrong and the times I was right. Indulge yourself with that discovery and you might change your mind. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Almost all of them were monsters to some degree so far, but yes it will be very convenient because I would be very right (quite a very familiar situation, yet again).

I wrote as accurately as I could and did everything that I was allowed to do. You, on the other hand, can remedy the situation quite nicely by doing research. But no, DT member's will look the other way because say "OH NO the reference link is wrong! Counter, counter, counter". All mighty God would throw us in hell if we protected users from somebody with wrong reference links. Biggest sin of them all. This is very fun, keep indulging me.

Excellent. This is what people should be doing, and not crying like their mommy just forbade them from playing outside. These libtard cunts need to fucking grow up already.

---

You probably have realized, based off of your posts that I've read, that I couldn't give a shit about neither community nor theymos guidelines as long as you fight evil and as long as your methods don't involve stupid shit like Lauda (yes, Lauda, I, or moronbozo's alt or viceversa) did in the past (some lines you should not cross ).

Yeah Christmas came up and that seemed as good a time as any to just drop it, but here we are again. I'm not huge on counters personally I see it as a choice. The persons feedback is worth it or not. Some do have a hard time just letting you go, not me. ~ and you come and go on my list often. It will stay like that until you decide to consistently create valid feedback. This is a great example of you claiming to have some greater knowledge than the rest of us that will be revealed in the future to validate the feedback. Just lead with your best foot forward, this isn't some learning experience on setting up a wallet or signing a message. Put forth the evidence you expect us to take at face value exists, or accept that your ratings only further hurt your credibility in these matters.

It's not you who's the problem but everyone else who doesn't take your ratings as fact and confirmation of something far more nefarious behind every character. It will be convenient if even 1 of these users turns out to be the monster under the bed you claim as you "obviously and clearly" warn us with what you consider valid feedback; the whole while not actually painting the whole picture which might reveal a true scammer. So I hope you will accept you didn't do everything to warn people of their true nature when someone gets scammed; as you clearly aren't willing to place truthful and well referenced feedback for these cases.

No I disagree. It is up to the user base not the Admins to make this system work. If nothing else Lauda does push that part of the system effectively and demonstrates how many well respected and trusted users drop the ball in the area of policing our own DT community. Sure there are cases where the wagons rally when it's an obscure member or someone who can easily act as a lightning rod for members to get behind exclusions. It just falls short in cases like this.

It's not banned on DT1. I asked theymos to blacklist me several months back[1]. What I am doing today, I could have been doing a couple months back. There are guidelines that I'm stumbling against, not rules. The guidelines are shit and cause harm, so fuck them. How many times do I have to clarify on your lies and ask you to not perpetuate them? P.S. Your second identity is already compromised, but keep writing so we can keep feeding the machine more data. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

---

[1] He actually didn't even understand my request, so I had to ask twice. But that's a fun story for another day.  

Your behaviour is already banned on DT1 level, but still that doesn't change the feedback to be appearing under default trust and that half banning action doesn't serves it's purpose.

It's trivial for theymos to ban you on all levels assuming he wants to play the role of a central authority. This behaviour isn't banned on any level of DT.