Topic: My fears about forum trust system. - page 2. (Read 489 times)

No need to have any fear, speaking from what I've seen, DT is very friendly and when you known the DT rules and community standards, everything is ok.  
LoyceV's guide is a very good start.  
There's also an useful thread from xtraelv: Discussion about acceptable and unacceptable behavior. Community values. DT (see also his second post)
In fact, DT is only acting if there's (coordinated) abuse ongoing. Abuse against DT values / DT standards.

Regarding trust abuse:
We had a case some years ago, when some accounts from the turkish section tried to manipulate their way into DT with friends or even alts. The accounts didn't deserve a positive trust and it was very clear that the accounts were trying to cheat their way into DT.

I've lost track about all the threads but here are some:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/revolution-of-bitcointalkorg-v-5247155
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/turkish-merit-source-selling-accounts-and-nepotism-on-local-5219960

The main discussion happened in the dedicated trust topic: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/defaulttrust-changes-5095156 (I don't know which page exactly, maybe someone knows about it)

There have been very long discussions about it. The abuse was very clear and some accounts were red tagged. Receiving a red tag is only for serious offenses. And the case some years ago was very serious.
Today, the tools like from LoyceV are very advanced to detect trust abuse very early to avoid escalations.
Often it's enough when the abusers are distrusted (added ~ to the trust list), meaning they are getting excluded.
They might get a neutral tag to for pointing it out to potential trading partners.


But no need to worry here for you because DT is giving people a chance to improve. Or at least I am doing this.
Keep in mind that the issue some years ago was a very clear offense, where many accounts were involved and some more shady stuff.

So, you are safe.  

---

Exactly, DT is a decentralized reputation system created in the first half of the previous decade and maintained by the Bitcointalk since it was established (with some changes in 2019).

---

Trust is mainly based on trades to evaluate whether the account in question can be trusted or not.
An account that has done 100 trades with 1 BTC is more trustworthy than a shitposter with 0 trades.

That's how trust was developed. Some years ago, there was a part where the feedback included a "risked amount" of BTC, to show how much BTC was involved.
More BTC = more trustworthy.

But that "risked amount" was removed in 2019.
I found it very useful but since BTC increased so much in price, it was removed...

---

Exactly, trust is to prevent scams and offer a decentralized reputation system to recognize trusted (having many successful trades) accounts.

This is not true, Theymos doesn't have to trust anyone to be on DT1. DT1 members are voted from eligible members but what I believe is through Lottery voting then Theymos publishes the DT1 members every beginning of month.

To be eligible, a profile must meet this criteria



This threads can be helpful to you
1. DefaultTrust changes
2. LoyceV's Beginners guide to correct use of the Trust system
3. ★ Keep your role on default trust (DT) selection ★


It will get noticed, especially if they get elected on DT1, and they may get excluded by other members.

Some group of people tried to manipulate the system but failed miserably (Remove Corruption From DT - Union Trust List

No, i think you should leave a neutral feedback if you believe a user is a quality poster and his posts have maybe helped you improve your knowledge, or something similar to that. That is what i read in LoyceV's Beginners guide to correct use of the Trust system
No. Spammers posts should be reported, a moderator will delete the posts, if the spammer continues, the moderator knows what to do. I will quote LoyceV again here
It is extremely unlikely that 50 members will work together on bitcointalk.

Anything above DT2 is a huge network. It's like LinkedIn 3rd and more connection. Almost everyone is included into the network so there are no point for anything above DT2.

With the current net score which is just one inclusion (then maintain the score 0) to be in the DT2 is too easy. A bad DT1 member can make as many DT2 members as he wants. We already have a discussion and most of us consider we should have a net inclusion of above 1. Higher the number of net score is safer for the system. I personally would consider anything above or equal to 3.

I raised this topic after a post by 1miau, so that the community can discuss some issues bothering me.

When I was a newbie, I was curious to know many things. I asked The Pharmacist what DT1 and DT2 meant. He sent me a link and explained briefly that DT1 are users trusted by theymos while DT2 are users trusted by the people theymos trusted.
After that brief explanation, I was curious why there is no DT3, DT4 and so on. But I didn't want to bother him the more.

My understanding of the trust system is that it is not moderated, just as scam is not moderated and also the merit system. But the abuse of any of the above is not encouraged.

• Is a user trusted based on how long he has been in the forum?: I believe the answer is No. You can be 5yrs+ here and not trusted while a user like EZ0010 with only 5 activities would be trusted much.
• Is Trust + what one begs to have?: My answer is No. The trust system is mainly because of marketplace activities (services and goods), in order to know who to do business with. Any other trust that isn't based on successful business or the case similar to EZ0010 is not cogent to me. Trusting someone because he bursts scam doesn't mean that the person cannot scam. Though it could give the user an expression authority to tag scammers whenever. Well, that is why every good trust feedback should have a concise and precised feedback with references.
• Must everyone be positively trusted?: My answer is No. I do not bother to build my trust list because till now, I am not involved in selling or services rendering. But I have many users here that I trust their judgement, but I don't think it's worth stressing myself about. The case of EZ0010 could be anyone else. Many users here including myself would send the money back to theymos, but because the incident didn't involve us, there's no way to prove. My point is, allow trust to come naturally, don't beg or pay for it.
• Should a user be trusted because he is a quality poster?: I leave this to the community to decide.
  Hint: Should a spammer be tagged? If a spammer can be tagged, it therefore means a quality poster can be trusted. Is this correct?
  Then a spammer could be neg tagged for spamming, yet he doesn't have the potential to scam as he has done numerous businesses. Lolx...the mystery of trust system.

My fear about the trust system which is in accordance with 1miau: If a group of scammers upto 50 persons are working together and one among the 50 gets a positive trust. He can in turn trust the remaining 49 scam users and they inturn trust one another. Then, the trust system would be compromised.