Pages:
Author

Topic: MOD ABUSING THE TRUST RATING SYSTEM IN GMAXWELL - page 2. (Read 3131 times)

hero member
Activity: 924
Merit: 1000
Watch out for the "Neg-Rep-Dogie-Police".....
Trust is not moderated so the only recourse is to work it out with the person that left it.

Have you seen his postings? I fear that there is no dealing with this person - he's too far gone judging by the PM's he sent me (which I reported)......& I don't want to lower myself to his level by entering into a rep battle - it's pointless.
KWH
legendary
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1045
In Collateral I Trust.
I noticed that this user had neg-rep'd me earlier - even though I have had no personal contact with him nor have I ever done any trading with him. I pm'd the member asking for an explanation, and received four very confused replies in quick succession - all of which made hardly any sense at all. From what I could make out, he's under the impression that the whole world & it's solar system is against him for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with me.

I have done many 100's worth of BTC trades with members of this forum, as well as providing a Amazon BTC payment service over the 2 years I have been a member here - with not a single unhappy customer & a 100% trust rate, all done without escrow - based only on trust, until this strange character came along. It is damaging to myself & my business here, something needs to be done about members like him.

I have not replied to any of his confused PM's, and have contacted gmaxwell to see if there is any way to resolve the situation.

Trust is not moderated so the only recourse is to work it out with the person that left it.
hero member
Activity: 924
Merit: 1000
Watch out for the "Neg-Rep-Dogie-Police".....
I noticed that this user had neg-rep'd me earlier - even though I have had no personal contact with him nor have I ever done any trading with him. I pm'd the member asking for an explanation, and received four very confused replies in quick succession - all of which made hardly any sense at all. From what I could make out, he's under the impression that the whole world & it's solar system is against him for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with me.

I have done many 100's worth of BTC trades with members of this forum, as well as providing a Amazon BTC payment service over the 2 years I have been a member here - with not a single unhappy customer & a 100% trust rate, all done without escrow - based only on trust, until this strange character came along. It is damaging to myself & my business here, something needs to be done about members like him.

I have not replied to any of his confused PM's, and have contacted gmaxwell to see if there is any way to resolve the situation.
KWH
legendary
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1045
In Collateral I Trust.
You are too fixated on Trust = trade when it is not. Had it been for trade only, wouldn't it be called Trade instead of Trust?  Feedback can and should be left to warn others of a shady individual or an outstanding character in another. "Would you Trust JoeBlow." To only use Trust for trades is absurd as it would stop the hundreds of warnings from others that were not scammed by a person that has scammed in the past and is likely to scam again. No method is perfect and can also be misused.
Besides, you have left Trust for others that were not trade only so I guess it's only an issue unless you are doing it, right? Copy and paste feedback doesn't count!
I would suggest you work with gmaxwell to remove his feedback as it's the only way it will get removed.
Move past your fixation.


member
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
The system views negative ratings as saying, "this user scammed me and no one should trust him ever." People don't need to view negative ratings this way, and I don't think that it's dishonest to give someone negative trust even if you weren't scammed, but that's how the system views it. There probably should be a neutral or less strong negative rating type, but such a thing doesn't exist now. The best thing you can do at the moment to achieve that sort of effect is create another account that isn't trusted by anyone and use that.

With this in mind, I think that it is correct for someone to be labeled as high-risk if they receive many positive ratings for only one month and then they start getting scam accusations. This pattern is very common for scammers: build up your reputation with a few good trades and then start scamming people.


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:
Quote
Trust: 1: -0 / +12(3)

The first number is the user's trust score calculated based on how consistently they've received positive feedback. Probably no one will get a score above 0 until the system has been around for at least a month. The second number is the number of reported scams. The third number increases with the number of positive reports, as does the fourth number in parenthesis, though the fourth number is more resistant to abuse. This text changes color depending on the score. Users with a negative score (attainable through scamming) get a red warning attached to their posts.

These scores are taken from your trust network. They are not global scores. You can edit your trust network here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust
If your trust depth is set to 2 (the default), you will trust feedback by people you trust, people they trust, and people they trust. I might change the default in the future; we'll see how this works. Your trust list is public.

On feedback pages, you can leave trade feedback. There are no rules for this, but here are some guidelines:
- List all of the trades that you do with people (or at least the major ones). This is not like #bitcoin-otc where you give people just one score.
- Do not rate people based on the quality of their posts.
- Older ratings count for more, so don't delete old ratings if you can avoid it.
- "Risked BTC" is how much money you could have lost if the person you're rating had turned out to be a scammer. Or, if they are a scammer, it's how much you lost. Use the BTC value at the time of reporting.
- It's OK to post a rating about the person in general, not tied to a specific trade.
- If you want to make a rating stronger, increase "Risked BTC". 50 extra risked BTC is equivalent to an additional rating.

If your trust list is totally empty, you trust "DefaultTrust", which includes some trustworthy people that I'll select. But if you add anyone to your trust list, even if they don't trust anyone, DefaultTrust will no longer be considered part of your trust list.

In the near future I'll add these same ratings to PMs.

Tell me if you see any bugs. I didn't test this much yet.


So what type of system is it okay to go around post neg trust ratings on NON TRADES there should be no way that should be allowed on a trust rating as it more to do with trades.... 

So basically of the above and their own rule we all can run around the forum gave each other neg feedback for no good reasons you may as well lose the trust score on the forum then as it not worth a piece of shit when it comes to it at the end of the day if everyone can abuse it via the cause above on NON trade related issues
KWH
legendary
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1045
In Collateral I Trust.
The system views negative ratings as saying, "this user scammed me and no one should trust him ever." People don't need to view negative ratings this way, and I don't think that it's dishonest to give someone negative trust even if you weren't scammed, but that's how the system views it. There probably should be a neutral or less strong negative rating type, but such a thing doesn't exist now. The best thing you can do at the moment to achieve that sort of effect is create another account that isn't trusted by anyone and use that.

With this in mind, I think that it is correct for someone to be labeled as high-risk if they receive many positive ratings for only one month and then they start getting scam accusations. This pattern is very common for scammers: build up your reputation with a few good trades and then start scamming people.


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:
Quote
Trust: 1: -0 / +12(3)

The first number is the user's trust score calculated based on how consistently they've received positive feedback. Probably no one will get a score above 0 until the system has been around for at least a month. The second number is the number of reported scams. The third number increases with the number of positive reports, as does the fourth number in parenthesis, though the fourth number is more resistant to abuse. This text changes color depending on the score. Users with a negative score (attainable through scamming) get a red warning attached to their posts.

These scores are taken from your trust network. They are not global scores. You can edit your trust network here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust
If your trust depth is set to 2 (the default), you will trust feedback by people you trust, people they trust, and people they trust. I might change the default in the future; we'll see how this works. Your trust list is public.

On feedback pages, you can leave trade feedback. There are no rules for this, but here are some guidelines:
- List all of the trades that you do with people (or at least the major ones). This is not like #bitcoin-otc where you give people just one score.
- Do not rate people based on the quality of their posts.
- Older ratings count for more, so don't delete old ratings if you can avoid it.
- "Risked BTC" is how much money you could have lost if the person you're rating had turned out to be a scammer. Or, if they are a scammer, it's how much you lost. Use the BTC value at the time of reporting.
- It's OK to post a rating about the person in general, not tied to a specific trade.
- If you want to make a rating stronger, increase "Risked BTC". 50 extra risked BTC is equivalent to an additional rating.

If your trust list is totally empty, you trust "DefaultTrust", which includes some trustworthy people that I'll select. But if you add anyone to your trust list, even if they don't trust anyone, DefaultTrust will no longer be considered part of your trust list.

In the near future I'll add these same ratings to PMs.

Tell me if you see any bugs. I didn't test this much yet.
member
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
Back to my previous point, what good is a trust system where people aren't allowed to warn people? He said that he does not trust you, however he has not traded with you. Its not a false claim.

Again how can a user leave a neg feedback with out ever doing a trade Huh?

Because if there was a rule saying you can't leave negative feedback without trading with them, there would be no warnings before someone is scammed and the system would be completely useless. Gmaxwell is trying to prevent you from scamming people (Again I don't know the backstory nor do I especially care as I had no intentions on trading with you anyway, so I'm not going to judge) as long as he isn't lying, I don't see a problem with it. He says he does not trust you and why, he does mention that he did not lose any money to you, and is essentially warning others why he feels how he does, it is then up for them to judge the validity of his warning.

Lmao well he lying to start of with can form a pretty strong case there "This user has been attacking people for posting honest concerns about what appears to be a pretty obvious scam; as well as disrupting conversations with offtopic ranting. He seems to be very unreliable. I'm not sure if it's confusion, trolling, or what. But I consider them untrustworthy.
:

As the scam he talk about is not a scam lmao   which is related to this thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=782765.40 and there a number of posters that have supported the pool op up on a number of different times now....

What this is the MOD in question is linked to the p2 users that are trying to attack a legit pool and owner...    And the mod in question is been a dick cause the scam acc is baseless   this what it boils down too at the end of the day

Ps the mod in question is well aware this thread is here
legendary
Activity: 2590
Merit: 2156
Welcome to the SaltySpitoon, how Tough are ya?
Back to my previous point, what good is a trust system where people aren't allowed to warn people? He said that he does not trust you, however he has not traded with you. Its not a false claim.

Again how can a user leave a neg feedback with out ever doing a trade Huh?

Because if there was a rule saying you can't leave negative feedback without trading with them, there would be no warnings before someone is scammed and the system would be completely useless. Gmaxwell is trying to prevent you from scamming people (Again I don't know the backstory nor do I especially care as I had no intentions on trading with you anyway, so I'm not going to judge) as long as he isn't lying, I don't see a problem with it. He says he does not trust you and why, he does mention that he did not lose any money to you, and is essentially warning others why he feels how he does, it is then up for them to judge the validity of his warning.
member
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
Back to my previous point, what good is a trust system where people aren't allowed to warn people? He said that he does not trust you, however he has not traded with you. Its not a false claim.

Again how can a user leave a neg feedback with out ever doing a trade Huh?  It would be like me if I wanted to be an ass I could right now leave a neg on you but will not....     This is a) an unethical by the mod in question and b) abusing the system that there to rate traders
legendary
Activity: 2590
Merit: 2156
Welcome to the SaltySpitoon, how Tough are ya?
Back to my previous point, what good is a trust system where people aren't allowed to warn people? He said that he does not trust you, however he has not traded with you. Its not a false claim.
member
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
But the system for trades lmao there was no trade nor any plans for a trade he done this for BS reasons based on forum posts in the BAN pool scam thread that it

straight of the trust page

"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."

So he is abusing the system how many others has he done it too

Its not just for trades, its a feedback system. If you had scammed him on a trade, the BTC value wouldn't be 0. If you had to trade with someone to leave feedback, it would be completely worthless, then scammers would be able to scam, get negative feedback, and then ditch the account. I don't know any backstory nor do I care, but as long as he isn't falsely accusing you of having scammed him, hes not abusing the system. He did not say "This user scammed me for X amount" he pretty clearly said that he does not personally trust you, and the amount that you scammed him for was 0.

Sorry it states it for trades on the page again ""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.""

Even the warning states this "Warning: Trade with extreme caution!"

As above what every users on here can no to town on each other trust scores for having a option as that what ya both are saying
legendary
Activity: 2590
Merit: 2156
Welcome to the SaltySpitoon, how Tough are ya?
But the system for trades lmao there was no trade nor any plans for a trade he done this for BS reasons based on forum posts in the BAN pool scam thread that it

straight of the trust page

"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."

So he is abusing the system how many others has he done it too

Its not just for trades, its a feedback system. If you had scammed him on a trade, the BTC value wouldn't be 0. If you had to trade with someone to leave feedback, it would be completely worthless, then scammers would be able to scam, get negative feedback, and then ditch the account. I don't know any backstory nor do I care, but as long as he isn't falsely accusing you of having scammed him, hes not abusing the system. He did not say "This user scammed me for X amount" he pretty clearly said that he does not personally trust you, and the amount that you scammed him for was 0.
member
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
But the system for trades lmao there was no trade nor any plans for a trade he done this for BS reasons based on forum posts in the BAN pool scam thread that it which mind you the users that are attacking the pool in question have yet been able to come up with proof to back their BS claim up Smiley        

straight of the trust page

"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."

So he is abusing the system how many others has he done it too will have to check this out as it a good look that a mod is leaving these bs trust ratings
legendary
Activity: 2590
Merit: 2156
Welcome to the SaltySpitoon, how Tough are ya?
Seems perfectly fine to me. Risked BTC amount 0, because you did not personally scam him, and the reason for the negative trust is well explained.
member
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
gmaxwell
Staff
Legendary
*
Offline

Activity: 1260



View Profile  Personal Message (Offline)
Trust: 91: -1 / +205(97)
Re: your neg trust rating
« Sent to: fire000 on: Today at 06:47:57 PM »
« You have forwarded or responded to this message. »
Reply with quoteQuote  ReplyReply  Remove this messageDelete  
Quote from: fire000 on Today at 06:31:42 PM
User   Date   Risked BTC amount   Reference   Comments
gmaxwell 91: -1 / +205(97)   2014-10-16   0.00000000      This user has been attacking people for posting honest concerns about what appears to be a pretty obvious scam; as well as disrupting conversations with offtopic ranting. He seems to be very unreliable. I'm not sure if it's confusion, trolling, or what. But I consider them untrustworthy.


How can one leave a neg rating on one they never done a TRADE with Huh?   Ps you are so far wrong it not funny in fact is a user that is very trustworthy and in fact leans btc out to people and borrowers BTC and has never had an issue on a number of different sites....   So in reply to this BS I have left a return neg on you I will remove it once that BS rating is lifted "just returning a bs rating back at you ya tosser will remove this when ya grow up and remove the bs rating on me Smiley You are a tosser mate Ps it does not worry me you are staff ya clown"

The mod reply to the issue above
Your negative rating has no effect on me, except further establishing the you are crazy, unethical, or both. It hurts your reputation, not mine.

The thing I have to laugh about in this mod/users reply is the part unethical...    It unethical for a MOD to be leaving BS ratings on users that they have never done a trade with or had any dealings with on the trade side of things...   How ethical is that by a mod to abuse a system that was set up to protect users from scams..   Goes to show how much the trust system is BS here on bittalk if a MOD see a system as a JOKE and it top be abused as this MOD has done in this case....

So guessing everyone can go to town on each others trust on this forum without ever doing a trade etc...    So go for it guys as the mod in question reckons it alright to do it....    

Ps I am sure gmaxwell would love a ton of neg trust ratings left on him so feel free to gave them to him Smiley

The above was a PM sent to the mod in question to get they BS neg feedback lifted and well everyone can see what the MOD thinks of it Smiley
Pages:
Jump to: