Now that "Merit" has been introduced into the forum in other to encourage high quality posts of members, would that have any positive effect on members who might have received negative trust as a result of shitpost and not scam accusation? Particularly if they receive "Merit" on their current post base on the high quality as compared to what their post use to be in the past.
Thank you so much for this fundamental question which has made Theymos to speak out against the miss use of the Trust system by the newly introduced DT members. 
Topic: "Merit" effect on Negative Trust (Read 797 times)
Merit is useless if an account has negative trust, the main reason why merit feature was implemented for the sake of good posting In a constructive quality post for participating campaigns and for the contribution of information in this forum. decision is upon the shoulder of superiors.
Correct. Giving someone who has negative ratings merit is just a waste of those points.Now that "Merit" has been introduced into the forum in other to encourage high quality posts of members, would that have any positive effect on members who might have received negative trust as a result of shitpost and not scam accusation? Particularly if they receive "Merit" on their current post base on the high quality as compared to what their post use to be in the past.
Maybe it's destroy shit posting but scammers still with legendaries accounts and still promotion their shit scam projects. Administration fights against spams but not with fraud!Now that "Merit" has been introduced into the forum in other to encourage high quality posts of members, would that have any positive effect on members who might have received negative trust as a result of shitpost and not scam accusation? Particularly if they receive "Merit" on their current post base on the high quality as compared to what their post use to be in the past.
Maybe it's destroy shit posting but scammers still with legendaries accounts and still promotion their shit scam projects. Administration fights against spams but not with fraud! Now that "Merit" has been introduced into the forum in other to encourage high quality posts of members, would that have any positive effect on members who might have received negative trust as a result of shitpost and not scam accusation? Particularly if they receive "Merit" on their current post base on the high quality as compared to what their post use to be in the past.
If I think the "merit" system is very good for members because this system is really appropriate to help other members with posts that are useful not just post subject to quickly rise ranking
Especially for me the beginner, must really learn a lot
Merit is useless if an account has negative trust, the main reason why merit feature was implemented for the sake of good posting In a constructive quality post for participating campaigns and for the contribution of information in this forum. decision is upon the shoulder of superiors.
Merit is for good posting, good posting is paid if you are a participant of any campaigns you don't get paid with your post if you are not in a campaign ( for normal members only) neg trust is for scammers so if you got merit while you have neg trust then it serves as your medal rewarded to you for your genuine (information) post.
Merit is for good posting, good posting is paid if you are a participant of any campaigns you don't get paid with your post if you are not in a campaign ( for normal members only) neg trust is for scammers so if you got merit while you have neg trust then it serves as your medal rewarded to you for your genuine (information) post.
That's partially why I sped up work on merit. I don't agree with using the trust system for pure spam; that's not what it was designed for.
Maybe you can rename the "trust" in something "concluded deals"?Just adding "trading" in front of trust should be enough for trust to be only for trades. Also, everything else can remain the same with the trusted and untrusted feedback.
"Concluded deals" somehow seems like it's only for successful deals and that would be ok if ones (who would otherwise get negative trust) get banned instead.
You did better than me (thank you).
English is not my native language.
Trust is a very vague concept.
I don't think it will have an impact on his/her trust score even if he makes some quality posts and receive merits.In addition, it's quite difficult to make good quality posts every time you do. Anyway, even if he has negative trust, it won't matter because I doubt people just look at the trust score and assume that he/she is unreliable. For me personally, I check the reasons behind the negative trust.
Yes, Probably negative trust is not the basis on giving the merit even you have a shitpost on your past their is no need to back there if your post is high quality giving a merit is easy they dont look at the trust you have the important is you help on people who have questions and help also the bitcoin forum.
That's partially why I sped up work on merit. I don't agree with using the trust system for pure spam; that's not what it was designed for.
Maybe you can rename the "trust" in something "concluded deals"?Just adding "trading" in front of trust should be enough for trust to be only for trades. Also, everything else can remain the same with the trusted and untrusted feedback.
"Concluded deals" somehow seems like it's only for successful deals and that would be ok if ones (who would otherwise get negative trust) get banned instead.
Your posts are not meaningful, they are utter garbage. You are in no position to speak or argue against the system.
Okay Lauda 
You find that funny?
No More Farmer And Spammer For Increase his Rank!! Good bye, love u theymos Nice System, i hate people at the marketplace just ask price, then not appear again, He just want to increasing rank,,
Nice System, i hate people at the marketplace just ask price, then not appear again, He just want to increasing rank,, It seems that 10 days ago knew how the system worked and that you wouldn't be ranking up anytime soon. Why the sudden change of attitude? Especially that you haven't made any effort to improve your posts in that time. You're still spamming altcoin threads with bullshit and forgetting to turn off your caps lock.
That's partially why I sped up work on merit. I don't agree with using the trust system for pure spam; that's not what it was designed for.
Maybe you can rename the "trust" in something "concluded deals"?
i know you are trying to protect the forum from the overwhelming spamming that been happening lately but i also hope you would put that new merit under some beta testing to watch for the abusing of the system as for my self what you might consider spam is people sharing their opinions with the community trying to spread the good word about crypto currency to help share the vision that we all share for crypto currencies in the future
I think even sir theymos said this we as a member of this forum specially for those users who already have red tagged in their account will be more responsible for every post they made. I think DT2 will remove that negative trust if they see that you will work to improve your/our post quality and that only remind us that this forum is not only for money we need to contribute more valuable post about the topic we want to reply.
No. Why would I be removing perfectly valid negatives based on merit points given by strangers? What a joke. That's partially why I sped up work on merit. I don't agree with using the trust system for pure spam; that's not what it was designed for.
I think even sir theymos said this we as a member of this forum specially for those users who already have red tagged in their account will be more responsible for every post they made. I think it has possibility that DT2 will remove that negative trust if they see that you will work to improve your/our post quality and that only remind us that this forum is not only for money we need to contribute more valuable post about the topic we want to reply. That's partially why I sped up work on merit. I don't agree with using the trust system for pure spam; that's not what it was designed for.
Please Theymos use Another ways, Dont use Merit system, its hard for people reach rank, even they post meaningfull post... i always see people just gave merit for Legendary only, That's partially why I sped up work on merit. I don't agree with using the trust system for pure spam; that's not what it was designed for.
Please Theymos use Another ways, Dont use Merit system, its hard for people reach rank, even they post meaningfull post... i always see people just gave merit for Legendary only, That's partially why I sped up work on merit. I don't agree with using the trust system for pure spam; that's not what it was designed for.
Please Theymos use Another ways, Dont use Merit system, its hard for people reach rank, even they post meaningfull post... i always see people just gave merit for Legendary only, That's partially why I sped up work on merit. I don't agree with using the trust system for pure spam; that's not what it was designed for.
Finally. Love this very needed post to clarify your stance on what's been happening. +50 Merit points.....Wanted to give all 500
Ive been contacting these DTs but they ignored my request to remove it,and most of the people who got redtrust from them aren't native english speakers.
Just because we shouldn't do it, that doesn't mean that those users haven't really deserved it. That's partially why I sped up work on merit. I don't agree with using the trust system for pure spam; that's not what it was designed for.
Finally the forum owner speaks up,these DTs are having fun giving red trusts to anyone who they see posted "shitposts"according to their own standards.Ive been contacting these DTs but they ignored my request to remove it,and most of the people who got redtrust from them aren't native english speakers.I added a trust system to the marketplace sections. When you're logged in, you'll now see something like this next to Marketplace posts:
Redtrust according to you shouldnt be given based on quality of post.
Clearly some of these DTs are violating your own guidelines,isnt that unfair? i didnt scam people nor tried to,but they gave me red trust for a reason like this "This user writes generic shitposts. This pollutes bitcointalk to his benefit exclusively. Should NEVER be paid to post"
Get paid? I never wanted to join any of these campaigns,I am just here to learn something about cryptocurrencies.
Well if you ask me these DTs should receive some evaluation from the community before they got promoted.
And if these DTs received negative evaluation you should remove them from default trust list.
Oops if you do that,there will be some DTs that will surely be remove from the default trust
Lauda,actmyname,and ThePharmacist.
these three are obviously default trust abusers.
They have given redtrust to thousands of people according to their quality post.
You should know which of these DTs are doing their job thats why we need a voting system to promote and demote default trust.
And i wont be suprised if these three add me an extra red trust ratings for my bravery to speak.
Quote
Trust: 1: -0 / +12(3) [/quote
On feedback pages, you can leave trade feedback. There are no rules for this, but here are some guidelines:
- Do not rate people based on the quality of their posts
On feedback pages, you can leave trade feedback. There are no rules for this, but here are some guidelines:
- Do not rate people based on the quality of their posts
Redtrust according to you shouldnt be given based on quality of post.
Clearly some of these DTs are violating your own guidelines,isnt that unfair? i didnt scam people nor tried to,but they gave me red trust for a reason like this "This user writes generic shitposts. This pollutes bitcointalk to his benefit exclusively. Should NEVER be paid to post"
Get paid? I never wanted to join any of these campaigns,I am just here to learn something about cryptocurrencies.
Well if you ask me these DTs should receive some evaluation from the community before they got promoted.
And if these DTs received negative evaluation you should remove them from default trust list.
Oops if you do that,there will be some DTs that will surely be remove from the default trust
Lauda,actmyname,and ThePharmacist.
these three are obviously default trust abusers.They have given redtrust to thousands of people according to their quality post.
You should know which of these DTs are doing their job thats why we need a voting system to promote and demote default trust.
And i wont be suprised if these three add me an extra red trust ratings for my bravery to speak.
That's partially why I sped up work on merit. I don't agree with using the trust system for pure spam; that's not what it was designed for.
Finally. Love this very needed post to clarify your stance on what's been happening. +50 Merit points.....Wanted to give all 500
That's partially why I sped up work on merit. I don't agree with using the trust system for pure spam; that's not what it was designed for.
Yes, but only as a side effect of merit. I think actmyname and The Pharmacist are the only ones really leaving negative trust on the DT network to spammers, and actmyname has stated that he will review people who request it and remove the negative trust if he feels it's needed. I don't know if The Pharmacist has said anything, but I'd expect them to be reasonable and forgiving, if the user has actually improved.
I am also thinking of, if the person who got a negative trust in the past got reasonsble amount of merits, since merits are acquired through the quality of our posts, will it not be contradictory to the fact that he got negative trust for shitposting? Or will there be a chance that his red trust be lost because of merits he gained for quality posts this time?- How about making a new rule for negative trusted users ,if they manage to get the merit amount to rank up then their negative trust will be removed , this will be a stimulating thing for them to improve the quality of their posts and reduce spammers .
Anyway I think everybody deserve a second chance not just wait for actmyname or the pharmacist to rewiw their posts and get forgiveness from them
Yes, but only as a side effect of merit. I think actmyname and The Pharmacist are the only ones really leaving negative trust on the DT network to spammers, and actmyname has stated that he will review people who request it and remove the negative trust if he feels it's needed. I don't know if The Pharmacist has said anything, but I'd expect them to be reasonable and forgiving, if the user has actually improved.
I am also thinking of, if the person who got a negative trust in the past got reasonsble amount of merits, since merits are acquired through the quality of our posts, will it not be contradictory to the fact that he got negative trust for shitposting? Or will there be a chance that his red trust be lost because of merits he gained for quality posts this time?
Yes, but only as a side effect of merit. I think actmyname and The Pharmacist are the only ones really leaving negative trust on the DT network to spammers, and actmyname has stated that he will review people who request it and remove the negative trust if he feels it's needed. I don't know if The Pharmacist has said anything, but I'd expect them to be reasonable and forgiving, if the user has actually improved.
Now that "Merit" has been introduced into the forum in other to encourage high quality posts of members, would that have any positive effect on members who might have received negative trust as a result of shitpost and not scam accusation? Particularly if they receive "Merit" on their current post base on the high quality as compared to what their post use to be in the past.
Jump to: