Topic: Marketplace trust - page 19. (Read 83249 times)

This bothers me, too. Just because I haven't traded with people in DefaultTrust is going to make me look untrustworthy. Never mind the year-old forum presence, OTC rating, etc.

Lolwut? Everyone trusted pirate and guess what, he was dangerous. But making people who don't use the trade section look like scammers is just fail.

Now i need someone to give some trust so i don't look like a scammer to the whole forum as my trust thing suddenly become yellow. Someone give me a +1, c'mon 

This is an easily exploitable problem...

What is the point in removing Default trust network when you add somebody?
Doesn't it discourage newbs from using the system?

Hmm.... why is my +xx decreasing when untrusted people gave me positive feedback? I'm sure it wasn't like this last time....

Good article.

What I find interesting is the way the system is being used.

Personally, I am using it to indicate who I trust and don't trust.  That is done by placing feedback on their page.  I make an effort to link to what is driving my opinion.  This helps me determine if I will be interested in doing trades with them in the future.

One result is individuals who I have indicated I do not trust have chosen to give me a negative mark in return.  Rather than address my concern about why I don't consider them trustworthy, instead they have chosen to "counter attack" me.  To me, this is a basic fault in the existing trust system.  Once distrust has been established, there is no process that rebuilds trust.  Those who I have marked as not being trustworthy have no recourse but to return that mark.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out.  I will continue to use the system to indicate who I do and do not trust. My decisions will NOT be based on only trades.  They will be based on all behavioral clues, posts, public information and financial transactions.  Off color jokes, professed membership in racially intolerant organizations, and ridiculous Pollyannish views about anarchy and government will all be included in the assessment that I make, for my personal use.

If you wish to see my assessments, feel free to add me to your trust list with the "Depth" marker set at 1.  I offer no guarantees regarding my assessments but they are there for you to see.


 

I think the trust rating feature has been working a treat. It seems people know how to use it and it has prevented a few people getting scammed. Which is always nice to see. Obviously doesn't stop all scams because people don't want to read and are to lazy the majority of the time.

Good article
+1

Decentralized Hashing article on Marketplace trust, for those new to the idea.

^ reddit

I like that untrusted feedback is hidden,

but please make "Show ratings" stick out more - when you skim the page, it is too easy to miss. Perhaps a button widget would be better?

So....

I am using the "Trust" system to indicate who I trust and who I don't trust. 

If I have a fiduciary dealing with them, I put feedback on their page.

If I trust them, they go on my "Trust List".  I vary the depth of that list from 0 to 3 to see who they trust. 

If I don't trust them, I put feedback on their page with a link to the post(s) and a note as to why I do not trust them.


This, of course, is visible to everyone else.  It has, of course, started to generate reciprocal feedback.



What a wonderful system this "Trust" thing is.

/sarcasm

Rather than bark at you for being absolutely wrong, I'll simply explain the difference of rational fear, common sense and safe trading precautions versus assumption of distrust. Theymos is intending to create a society here of even *more* distrust than we already have all while claiming that we, the people, are irrational. Seems like the same tactics governments use to confuse us against each other and ignore what's happening in the background. If Theymos had a shred of integrity, he would not create a reputation system that doesn't allow a person the right to respond to accusations. I don't even need to warn people of what awful direction this leads us to, all I have to say is I'm not supporting it at all.

Ah, that's what I figured. Thanks for the clarification.

It'll be yellow if his trust score ("Trust: 0") is 0. This is calculated based on the number and type of trusted ratings (from your perspective) as well as time.

Unfortunately I agree, at least in the case of Bitcoin. You're quite a bit better off being suspicious of users until they can prove themselves "trustworthy" (and reaching that point is different for everyone).


Quick question(s) on this (and maybe it's been answered): Anyone without a 'trusted' rating will automatically be 'yellow' from my perspective?
For example, CanaryInTheMine has numerous successful trades ..but should I see his account, it would still show 'yellow' simply because I haven't trusted the same set of users?

They are not being labeled as scammers at all. Yellow means caution and signals that you should be apprehensive about trading with them, as they dont have any verifiable trades. It also means they havent done any bad trades or scams either.

So you are attempting to claim that your Trust system will prevent people from getting scammed?

Given what I have seen of it so far, I think it has a horrible Signal to Noise ratio.

You have a default trust list that includes some rather disreputable individuals.  You don't allow any method of rebuttal for a negative trust rating.  Now you are branding anyone who has not traded as "suspicious".

At this point, I'm less than thrilled with your experiment.  I don't mind having to prove who I am to someone I intend to trade with.  I take great offense at your arbitrary and totally unwarranted branding of me as "suspicious" for no reason what so ever.

enough said

Sure, but not everybody comes here to trade.
And they are labeled as scammers by default by you.

No.  Looks like a theymos thing. 

This American does not agree with the no trades == dangerous idea.

General suspicion the proper attitude if you don't want to get scammed.