Topic: Let me be the first to start a bitching thread about the flags - page 3. (Read 1261 times)
Added a couple more bitchings.
...
Give it up Bro. Not that I care on your thoughts anymore. And talking about asshats, much better for you to celebrate for now. And what's up with your garbage? Even the admin proves your facts are pure of shits anyway.Note: I was just curious on what you have said, that's why I remove you into my ignore list but now that I have proven that its nothing to be curious about, now back to my ignore list 😂
You might also consider having a flag that is so unique that only you will have 😊 Stop cryin' now, and move on.
LOL at the supporter of liars and scammers like suchmoon still wanting some WARNING for the trust abuse his pals are still allowed to leave. Wheeled out by lauda to garner some support for the ability to still cause a WARNING on honest members who they fail to present enough evidence to demonstrate is a danger financially to the board.
IF THE FEEDBACK DOES NOT WARRANT A FLAG THEN WHY SHOULD THERE BE ANY WARNING? it confuses the entire thing.
It falls short of the threshold of a warning and is subjective personal garbage.
Put a green smiley face in front of anyone with a negative rating in the old system because since most people on DT have observable instances of lying or scamming or support those that do, a negative rating is an endorsement.
Suchmoon would you support a flag on lauda for blatantly LYING about the instamine of xcoin/dash whilst he was holding bags of it, to SCAM investors into believing the initial distribution was legit??
No you would not so why should anyone have a caution fucking emblem on their account for saying WARNING OTHERS about the scammers you support.
If you can not present feedback that meets the threshold for scamming or CERTAIN negative actions that impact financially at all then why the fuck should there be a warning or caution symbol?
NO!!
I think you should have a warning symbol for knowingly supporting liars and scammers you fat slob.
Anything that does not meet the flagging threshold is not worthy of a warning. It is just confusing and misleading. You yourself will not ensure that lauda an observable liar and scammer has a flag or even one of these warning symbols but you want those that whistleblow on them to have a symbol. NO.
Meet the threshold for a flag, demonstrate the person is financially a danger here or tough shit your feedback is subjective garbage and has to be read before either a NEGATIVE or POSITIVE association should be pinned to the account.
@cabalism13
when can we put a little turd emblem in front of turd world ass lickers trust ratings like yours? filthy little parasite spamming away posting garbage.
NO NO NO last time theymos presented the merit clause in trust lauda worm tongue and suchblob and pals come along and push him to CHANGE the original design that favors them and their cycled 250 merits nonsense.
Theymos should leave it as it is now. Not give in to your bitching and gaming attempts.
Can't meet the transparent threshold for a flag. Fuck off and leave people alone you obese clown.
The only thing I would support is a message saying read and investigate all feedback thoroughly yourselves before making any decisions. A red warning sign makes that decision for them. Red warning signs or ANY negative warning signs should be for those that meet the flagging threshold only or it confuses the entire thing.
IF THE FEEDBACK DOES NOT WARRANT A FLAG THEN WHY SHOULD THERE BE ANY WARNING? it confuses the entire thing.
It falls short of the threshold of a warning and is subjective personal garbage.
Put a green smiley face in front of anyone with a negative rating in the old system because since most people on DT have observable instances of lying or scamming or support those that do, a negative rating is an endorsement.
Suchmoon would you support a flag on lauda for blatantly LYING about the instamine of xcoin/dash whilst he was holding bags of it, to SCAM investors into believing the initial distribution was legit??
No you would not so why should anyone have a caution fucking emblem on their account for saying WARNING OTHERS about the scammers you support.
If you can not present feedback that meets the threshold for scamming or CERTAIN negative actions that impact financially at all then why the fuck should there be a warning or caution symbol?
NO!!
I think you should have a warning symbol for knowingly supporting liars and scammers you fat slob.
Anything that does not meet the flagging threshold is not worthy of a warning. It is just confusing and misleading. You yourself will not ensure that lauda an observable liar and scammer has a flag or even one of these warning symbols but you want those that whistleblow on them to have a symbol. NO.
Meet the threshold for a flag, demonstrate the person is financially a danger here or tough shit your feedback is subjective garbage and has to be read before either a NEGATIVE or POSITIVE association should be pinned to the account.
@cabalism13
when can we put a little turd emblem in front of turd world ass lickers trust ratings like yours? filthy little parasite spamming away posting garbage.
NO NO NO last time theymos presented the merit clause in trust lauda worm tongue and suchblob and pals come along and push him to CHANGE the original design that favors them and their cycled 250 merits nonsense.
Theymos should leave it as it is now. Not give in to your bitching and gaming attempts.
Can't meet the transparent threshold for a flag. Fuck off and leave people alone you obese clown.
The only thing I would support is a message saying read and investigate all feedback thoroughly yourselves before making any decisions. A red warning sign makes that decision for them. Red warning signs or ANY negative warning signs should be for those that meet the flagging threshold only or it confuses the entire thing.
My suggestion was not about replacing the "!!!", I think that one is visible enough.
I want to replace the "#" (non-scam guest/newbie warning) with something more prominent. It should not be red, but rather yellow-ish to be consistent with the color of the warning box itself.
redsn0w's icons could be used for both (replace "#" with the yellow one, and "!!!" with the red one), or perhaps the "#" should be replaced with yellow "!!!" to make it consistent, but the exclamation signs don't look well in that color.
Something like this: I want to replace the "#" (non-scam guest/newbie warning) with something more prominent. It should not be red, but rather yellow-ish to be consistent with the color of the warning box itself.
redsn0w's icons could be used for both (replace "#" with the yellow one, and "!!!" with the red one), or perhaps the "#" should be replaced with yellow "!!!" to make it consistent, but the exclamation signs don't look well in that color.
Here is roughly what I had in mind:
Seems like a great change. Just a '#' makes no sense imo. It's not clear what '#' means, especially not for new users who haven't learned about the trust/flag system yet.
We already have the same: !!!. Your icon can be used, but color should be changed to Red. Everything relates to Trust should be displayed in Red, and we all are familiar with such color, that is a good indicator of Trust issues.
My suggestion was not about replacing the "!!!", I think that one is visible enough.
I want to replace the "#" (non-scam guest/newbie warning) with something more prominent. It should not be red, but rather yellow-ish to be consistent with the color of the warning box itself.
redsn0w's icons could be used for both (replace "#" with the yellow one, and "!!!" with the red one), or perhaps the "#" should be replaced with yellow "!!!" to make it consistent, but the exclamation signs don't look well in that color.
Change the color of the symbol to RED and that would be more suitable.
We already have the same: !!!. Your icon can be used, but color should be changed to Red. Everything relates to Trust should be displayed in Red, and we all are familiar with such color, that is a good indicator of Trust issues.
No problem.
What about this?
Change the color of the symbol to RED and that would be more suitable.
You're a bit late for that 
But Lauda didn't start a thread! I'm still the first!
Added another bitch point to the OP.
What about this?
"#" is a useful as trying to collect air with your bare hands.
^^ which is quite logical to be honest. According to the flag system, no one is scammer unless they have personally scammed you.
Looks like it. Additionally, you are also de-incentivized to support anything. After all, a misjudgement in support could instantly mean you get blacklisted. Why do it at all? Nobody is a scammer.
You're a bit late for that
Support this (weakest-flag type): https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=47.
^^ which is quite logical to be honest. According to the flag system, no one is scammer unless they have personally scammed you.
I don't want to be the party stopper, and believe me, I want to see the scammers flagged once again, just make sure you do it right / valid.
I've read this and, while I'd like to see it widened (under certain limits/rules), currently it's a big "hmmm"...
It's just dumb. Anyone who was scammed, e.g. by an exchange has no direct contract and the third option can never be used. Also if no victim speaks out / creates a flag = no scam occurred. Astounding logic. Look at this request: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.51440061. Nobody who got scammed by YoBit as a exchange user can rightfully make this flag. I've read this and, while I'd like to see it widened (under certain limits/rules), currently it's a big "hmmm"...
Support this (weakest-flag type): https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=47.
1
Here is roughly what I had in mind:
Instead of the current:
I think non-guests and non-newbies deserve a better warning than the tiny inconspicuous "#".
The answer is "no".
2
Add a one-click option to convert an old (pre-flag-system) red trust rating to a newbie/guest yellow box flag. There are many of those ratings with proper references that really should be visible to guests. All other rules would still apply, it would be just a shortcut to make it easier for some folks who look out for scams in Marketplace, ANN/ICO dumpster, etc and would likely be adding hundreds of these flags now.
3
Color confusion. The count of red ratings should be red, not orange. The "+" / "-" signs should be the same color. The green should be more green (not sure if it still turns dark green at a certain value like it used to be). For example:
+2 / =1 / -10
instead of
+2 / =1 / -10
4
More color confusion. The newbie flag (the "yellow box") has this wording:
"... This determination is based on concrete red flags which any knowledgeable & reasonable forum user should agree with ..."
The "red flags" part trips my OCD alarm. I know it's figurative but still. Plus there might be some cultural misinterpretations. I think it should be replaced with "warning signals" or "danger signs" or something like that.
I wish the "#" would be more prominent though, and the less-than-3-supporters contract violation flags had some sort of indicator too. Not red and scary, just more visible.
Here is roughly what I had in mind:
Instead of the current:
I think non-guests and non-newbies deserve a better warning than the tiny inconspicuous "#".
The answer is "no".
2
Add a one-click option to convert an old (pre-flag-system) red trust rating to a newbie/guest yellow box flag. There are many of those ratings with proper references that really should be visible to guests. All other rules would still apply, it would be just a shortcut to make it easier for some folks who look out for scams in Marketplace, ANN/ICO dumpster, etc and would likely be adding hundreds of these flags now.
3
Color confusion. The count of red ratings should be red, not orange. The "+" / "-" signs should be the same color. The green should be more green (not sure if it still turns dark green at a certain value like it used to be). For example:
+2 / =1 / -10
instead of
+2 / =1 / -10
4
More color confusion. The newbie flag (the "yellow box") has this wording:
"... This determination is based on concrete red flags which any knowledgeable & reasonable forum user should agree with ..."
The "red flags" part trips my OCD alarm. I know it's figurative but still. Plus there might be some cultural misinterpretations. I think it should be replaced with "warning signals" or "danger signs" or something like that.
Jump to: