Marketplace trust - page 25. | Bitcointalksearch.org

freedomno1

legendary

Activity: 1806

Merit: 1090

Learning the troll avoidance button :)

Quote from: tysat on May 31, 2013, 03:21:24 PM

Quote from: GIANNAT on May 31, 2013, 02:33:49 PM

What happen if a scammer red flag me before going for ever? Will that feedback remain? Does it have any weight?

Feedback only has weight if someone has the person who left it in their trust network.

Good to know checking it out looks like a lot of scammer rage flagging on some people

tysat

legendary

Activity: 966

Merit: 1004

Keep it real

Quote from: GIANNAT on May 31, 2013, 02:33:49 PM

What happen if a scammer red flag me before going for ever? Will that feedback remain? Does it have any weight?

Feedback only has weight if someone has the person who left it in their trust network.

GIANNAT

legendary

Activity: 1038

Merit: 1000

Bitcoin entrepreneur and Pro Trader

What happen if a scammer red flag me before going for ever? Will that feedback remain? Does it have any weight?

theymos

administrator

Activity: 5222

Merit: 13032

Quote from: deslok on May 31, 2013, 11:21:49 AM

So people can overvalue their transactions by bartering a lot of high value paperclips(you can get houses for those still right?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_red_paperclip

Sure, or they could just lie. But their contribution to the trust score is limited, and they might be removed from trust lists for attempting such manipulation.

deslok

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

It's all about the game, and how you play it

Quote from: theymos on May 31, 2013, 10:54:45 AM

Quote from: deslok on May 31, 2013, 10:22:41 AM

why not make the field alphanumeric then at allow it to be risked value, let people denominate it in whatever they want.

Because the numeric value is used in the trust score calculation, so there needs to be a consistent measure of value.

So people can overvalue their transactions by bartering a lot of high value paperclips(you can get houses for those still right?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_red_paperclip

theymos

administrator

Activity: 5222

Merit: 13032

Quote from: deslok on May 31, 2013, 10:22:41 AM

why not make the field alphanumeric then at allow it to be risked value, let people denominate it in whatever they want.

Because the numeric value is used in the trust score calculation, so there needs to be a consistent measure of value.

pekv2

hero member

Activity: 770

Merit: 502

Quote from: deslok on May 31, 2013, 10:22:41 AM

why not make the field alphanumeric then at allow it to be risked value, let people denominate it in whatever they want.

This would be really cool.

Quote from: tysat on May 31, 2013, 10:23:16 AM

It's not lying, see the wording on the trust page:

Quote

Risked BTC amount is money that the person could have stolen or did steal. For example, if you do a currency trade where the other person sends first, your feedback for them would have 0 risked BTC and their feedback for you would have risked BTC equal to the BTC value of the trade.

Notice the bolded/underlined part at the end. Trying to denominate risked amount in different currencies just adds confusion.

Oic, my apologies. I'll just use the comment section for other crypto-currencies. I'm sure I will not be the only member needing to go back in time to find out what was what to submit a trust feedback, as this trust system was never put in place in the beginning creation of the forum. I'll drop the subject here.

Thanks, tysat.

tysat

legendary

Activity: 966

Merit: 1004

Keep it real

Quote from: FCTaiChi on May 31, 2013, 10:35:18 AM

there may be a very simple solution to this with a slight change in the column's name. 'Value in BTC risked' 'BTC value of transaction'

I think this is a good idea.

FCTaiChi

sr. member

Activity: 308

Merit: 250

decentralizedhashing.com

Good point tysat. I think his problem with this is that the column is named 'BTC risked' Whereas this could imply risking your reputation, currency or anything else.
I'm not sure what it could be, but there may be a very simple solution to this with a slight change in the column's name. 'Value in BTC risked' 'BTC value of transaction'

It's perfectly easy to understand once you know what the column means, but at first glance it can be a bit confusing.

tysat

legendary

Activity: 966

Merit: 1004

Keep it real

Quote from: pekv2 on May 31, 2013, 10:20:14 AM

Quote from: theymos on May 31, 2013, 09:14:05 AM

Quote from: pekv2 on May 31, 2013, 09:09:39 AM

Edit:
Imo, that would be a form of lieing.

No, because the "Risked BTC" field is only meant to indicate how much value you risked. It doesn't matter what currency you used. You could even use that field for a barter transaction where no BTC was involved.

I'm not being shitty, might sound like it, but I'm not. You're entitled to your opinion, as much as I am. Imo, it's considered lieing.

It's not lying, see the wording on the trust page:

Quote

Risked BTC amount is money that the person could have stolen or did steal. For example, if you do a currency trade where the other person sends first, your feedback for them would have 0 risked BTC and their feedback for you would have risked BTC equal to the BTC value of the trade.

Notice the bolded/underlined part at the end. Trying to denominate risked amount in different currencies just adds confusion.

deslok

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

It's all about the game, and how you play it

Quote from: theymos on May 31, 2013, 09:14:05 AM

Quote from: pekv2 on May 31, 2013, 09:09:39 AM

Edit:
Imo, that would be a form of lieing.

No, because the "Risked BTC" field is only meant to indicate how much value you risked. It doesn't matter what currency you used. You could even use that field for a barter transaction where no BTC was involved.

why not make the field alphanumeric then at allow it to be risked value, let people denominate it in whatever they want.

pekv2

hero member

Activity: 770

Merit: 502

Quote from: theymos on May 31, 2013, 09:14:05 AM

Quote from: pekv2 on May 31, 2013, 09:09:39 AM

Edit:
Imo, that would be a form of lieing.

No, because the "Risked BTC" field is only meant to indicate how much value you risked. It doesn't matter what currency you used. You could even use that field for a barter transaction where no BTC was involved.

I'm not being shitty, might sound like it, but I'm not. You're entitled to your opinion, as much as I am. Imo, it's considered lieing.

theymos

administrator

Activity: 5222

Merit: 13032

Quote from: pekv2 on May 31, 2013, 09:09:39 AM

Edit:
Imo, that would be a form of lieing.

No, because the "Risked BTC" field is only meant to indicate how much value you risked. It doesn't matter what currency you used. You could even use that field for a barter transaction where no BTC was involved.

pekv2

hero member

Activity: 770

Merit: 502

Quote from: theymos on May 31, 2013, 09:02:59 AM

Quote from: pekv2 on May 31, 2013, 09:01:12 AM

As Cablesaurus accepts litecoin as a payment method. Could you add to the trust system, Risked LTC? I traded LTC for a powered adapter with him, and had to put Risked LTC into the comments section.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=3784

Convert the LTC to BTC using the exchange rate at the time of rating.

Yea, see the problem is, I didn't risk BTC. I risked LTC. But I will leave it at that. Thanks Theymos

.

Edit:
Imo, that would be a form of lieing.

theymos

administrator

Activity: 5222

Merit: 13032

Quote from: pekv2 on May 31, 2013, 09:01:12 AM

As Cablesaurus accepts litecoin as a payment method. Could you add to the trust system, Risked LTC? I traded LTC for a powered adapter with him, and had to put Risked LTC into the comments section.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=3784

Convert the LTC to BTC using the exchange rate at the time of rating.

pekv2

hero member

Activity: 770

Merit: 502

As Cablesaurus accepts litecoin as a payment method. Could you add to the trust system, Risked LTC? I traded LTC for a powered adapter with him, and had to put Risked LTC into the comments section.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=3784

Thanks in advance.

FiatKiller

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

The other "flaw" is that like on Ebay, you are nervous to give someone a bad review because payback is a b*tch. Alot of people will not buy from someone with less than a 99% positive.

pekv2

hero member

Activity: 770

Merit: 502

Quote from: keatonatron on May 30, 2013, 09:45:01 AM

Congrats Theymos, you just invented Ripple™ Grin

Bitcointalk has IOU's and flaws that ripple has?

keatonatron

sr. member

Activity: 308

Merit: 250

Jack of oh so many trades.

Congrats Theymos, you just invented Ripple™ Grin

deslok

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

It's all about the game, and how you play it

Quote from: bitcoinbear on May 29, 2013, 12:10:52 PM

Quote from: Matthew N. Wright on May 29, 2013, 11:07:11 AM

Quote from: bitcoinbear on May 29, 2013, 09:55:57 AM

So have the button say "Trust this person's feedback" to make it clear what the button does.

Exactly, and as an earlier poster said, this "Trust" thing is kind of unnecessary when you could just lock in the opinions of people whom did transactions with you by agreeing through the forum to exchange feedback on transactions. Press a button, agree to contract between two people, optional escrow, leave feedback, done. No need to trust anyone else's potentially political bias through negative feedback.

I think you have it backwards. the "trusted feedback" is not meant to protect against superfluous negative feedback, it protects against sock-puppet positive feedback gaming the system. I can make a bunch of accounts and give myself rave reviews, but those would all show up as "untrusted feedback" since you have no reason to trust any of those accounts, and thus you would still want to be wary of me.

While i understand that we need some form of system, this one is absurd, the default trust dept being auto set to two is going to do little to nothing, make me decide to trust people theymos trusts specifically without suddenly trusting everyone that hostfat does(i think default trust shouldn't exist at all ...)

Topic: Marketplace trust - page 25. (Read 83235 times)