Topic: Is it trust system abuse to increase Trust Score by Dabs? (Read 495 times)

Might as well be a reputation thread ...

It seems Dabs has done a runner with what seems like an outstanding non-collateral loan of $15,000 with lender darkstar_ and another non-collateral loan via zazarb more recently.

This make sense now. I was taking the first explanation and sure it was icopress too.

I think the point I was trying to make was lost: the forum's recommendation in Trust settings is to add "the users who you trust to have good trust ratings and good trust lists". I'm not saying we should copy theymos, I'm saying theymos' Trust list might need an update.

Theymos is free to add / remove anyone in his trust list same as us. Just because he is the admin does not mean everything he does should be a guaranteed practice. Theymos never told us to follow him. In fact, he wants us to have our own inputs and changing the trust setting from old version to the new version reflects the idea. Before it was centralized and only selected few users were in the DT1 picked by the admin. The current trust algorithm is obviously better than we had it before.

One change might make it nearly perfect if we consider the proposal we have discussed on the topic created by DireWolfM14. We need at least more than one net inclusion. Higher number is better though. This will protect the DT spam we currently have and situations like Dabs inclusion can be avoided.

So what? His trust list also includes those who support the war in Ukraine.

This is a clear sign that cleaning up the trust list is not a priority for him (I'm sure if he is reminded of this, he will update it).

An absence of leadership ≠ proof of leadership.

Note that theymos still has Dabs on his Trust list.

Yeah, that is where the problem is here.  Members can certainly use the trust system any way they like, but Theymos did give the forum some guidelines a couple of years back.  It's been mentioned already, but inclusions ought to be reserved for members whose feedbacks you think are accurate, not for members you'd trust with your money.  The latter would warrant a green trust--but then there's the obvious problem if you're a DT member; you can't just give out green trust willy-nilly and certainly not for small trades or trades where your money/assets weren't at risk of being stolen.

Dabs is an old-timer here, so I'm inclined to give him some slack except that if he's on DT1 and has created some DT2 members who might not deserve that honor, that's a problem that ought to be discussed here and with him contributing.

From recollection, I haven't had anything to do with Dabs in the past.  I saw a previous thread raising this issue of supposed mutual trust back scratching - call it what you like...  This time with the issue again being raised, I thought I'll have a look both at Dabs (via their own signature and the threads they have created in the past) and those who have benefited from mutual trust feedback.

---

---

Early threads created by Dabs have a combination of topics - e.g. group buys, loan requests and attempts to start (multiple) casinos are prominent.

Is Dabs still an Escrow?  Their Escrow thread fizzles out in 2018 along with positive trust feedback reviews around the same time.  How active in the forum are these givers of positive trust feedback?  If they are not every active they *may* be unaware their positives are being tut-tutted...  (which in turn lends itself to the premise that Dabs is bosting them to in turn boost himself)

Interesting that SolarisDev announce Dabs as their Escrow for an airdrop, however, on the website for the Solaris Coin Dabs is listed as an "Ambassador" and I can't find a clarification of the roll Dabs has within Solaris Coin's thread/website.

---

---

Also interesting that cabalsim13 came to Dabs on the 19th of March 2019 with a proposal to re-invigorate Dab's Charity food program by neco-bumping Dab's already three year stale charity thread.

Six days later the thread Bitcointalk Charity Program - Give Hope To Everyone! was created (and the rest as they say is history  ).

Less than six months after that Dabs is now the one asking for food to feed their family in their own charity food program thread.

---

---

Of those who have been inactive for more than 999 days, there are two subsets:

These users are bumped to DT2 solely by Dabs - most of these users only trust feedback is to Dabs.

Dropkickdragout      Registration Date:6/9/2011 3:15:27 AM (Active 2951 days ago)
iguru42         Registration Date:6/17/2011 2:18:02 AM (Active 2370 days ago)
yolo2222      Registration Date:12/15/2012 5:53:06 PM (Active 3243 days ago)
shawshankinmate37927   Registration Date:2/23/2013 12:04:02 AM (Active 2328 days ago)
FullLife      Registration Date:3/4/2013 3:28:46 AM (Active 2315 days ago)
mavrick951      Registration Date:4/15/2013 3:46:40 PM (Active 2330 days ago)
chanberg      Registration Date:4/21/2013 4:44:42 AM (Active 1465 days ago)
Micky25         Registration Date:4/28/2013 9:10:59 AM (Active 1125 days ago)
Bakal          Registration Date:5/17/2013 1:19:14 PM (Active 1504 days ago)
shade13         Registration Date:7/3/2013 2:06:50 AM (Active 2999 days ago)
DyslexicZombei      Registration Date:7/25/2013 8:04:18 PM (Active 1636 days ago)
nagysifa      Registration Date:4/30/2014 6:22:18 PM (Active 1481 days ago)
ZypheronBits      Registration Date:10/31/2014 6:51:42 PM (Active 2385 days ago)
bittrojan      Registration Date:9/4/2015 2:42:49 AM (Active 1570 days ago)
Frank Lefty Rosenthal   Registration Date:12/17/2016 12:03:52 PM (Active 1227 days ago)

---

---

These users are either bumped to DT2 by Dabs but they do not give Dabs trust feedback (of any kind)

gudmunsn      Registration Date:4/22/2013 9:33:25 PM (Active 2508 days ago)
gloryninja      Registration Date:9/3/2013 11:19:01 PM (Active 1587 days ago)
bitclever      Registration Date:3/26/2015 6:20:16 AM (Active 2161 days ago)
eldrin         Registration Date:7/15/2017 12:21:16 PM (Active 1142 days ago)
funnychain      Registration Date:9/2/2018 12:52:46 PM (Active 1098 days ago)

(note red denotes banned)

note also - at no point do I consider any of the above to be alts.

I just didn't want to be too radical since I don't know anything about Dabs.

But I do know one thing... an artificially high g'rating can give others a false sense of security.

Exactly, this is how you solve the issue if you indeed see it as one (I personally don't as long as none of those accounts get hijacked by scammers).

Fuck Debs, okay Dabs 🤣
Last week I added and removed (~) some users. It was only usual adding and removing. So nothing I had in mind to explain for Dabs. I am not a regular trust setting checker, I do it very occasionally.

Edit: Upgraded my memory from Debs to Dabs 🤣

Dabs

Dabs
I'm curious what made you include Dabs last week.

If anyone is at fault then it's Dabs. Not these users.
Assuming Debs knowingly added this users in his trust setting after seeing their feedback for him. If his intention was higher up his green ratings then this is an abuse. If he thought these users should be in DT because they can provide good contribution to the system then it's not abuse. Problem, we do not know his intention, we will never too.

If anyone is here need a "~" then it will be Debs.

I know Dabs from WO and I would like some statements from him about it.

It does not matter what was your reasoning but this is a very good example of improving the current scoring system.

Sorry that wasn't supposed to be my intention to focus on feedback. I was just wondering about the certain references that it has. There's no reference to others.

I think that's the choice of the person right, in this case, Dabs. And if he wants to use it that way, he can. That's just from the way I see it. It's up to others to distrust I guess if they think they are up to no good and could really abuse the trust.

Not only does this approach boost trust score, it also motivates users to leave more positive feedbacks for a chance to get on DT2. It's an all round attempt to pad trust overview and make themselves more trustworthy, particularly as they are selling a service.

Wrong use of the trust system for me.

That wasn't my reasoning for starting that poll and making that suggestion, but yes, that would indeed make it much harder for trust system self-scratchers to pad their scores.

Since I made that list, the Trust system was changed and theymos added pagination. That's more than I'm willing to update for something that was only half serious from the start.

---

---

The solution to DT-selfscratching: [POLL] DT2 Status; how many net inclusions should it take?

Way too much work.  Besides, Dabs has been informed about this issue before, and he's well aware that most people find his use of the trust system objectionable.  If he's going to keep padding his inclusions just to make his trust score higher, he's the one that should be excluded.  Who knows, one of those account could turn out to be a really good person to have on DT, but without giving them the chance we may never know.  I would rather exclude those who are misusing the system than those who are coincidentally included by a self-scratcher.

He trusts these people because he did business with them and not because they have an accurate or meaningful feedback history. That's the problem. I added these users to my exclusion list, but they are still on DT (0) anyway. Need 1 more vote.