Topic: Nominate (insert name here) to the default trust list - page 16. (Read 15596 times)
I would suggest adding user master-p to the list. He is an escrow here, and has really been helpful. From what I know he doesn't even charge a fees. And is online most of the time.
Dude all these whiny posts about vod or quickseller are just from butthurt scammers, i dont even know how anyone would take them seriously, most of them have negative ratings from other important people aswell such as badbear or tomatocage, you name it. They then often try to say that qs is an alt of badbear or that kind of stupid shit, 99.9% of quickseller or vod ratings are accurate, maybe theres a case where they failed, everyone can fail but that doesnt mean they should be gone from the default trust list.
Really ? How do you know this ? Do you look at each case personally ? Just day before a trusted member ndhnc was accused by Quickseller in the scam accusation, which is likely incorrect . So you are saying ndhnc is a butthurt scammer now ?
Being in Default trust isn't just about being trustworthy, but a mixture of things. One of them being good judgement.
And that is why this thread is not to be taken seriously.
But I do believe that in a forum that deals with 'business in cryptography' only those people should get 'high levels of trust score' who have done a high number of honest trades / business here.
Not just any Tom Dick and Jerry (see what I did there ??) should get that privilege.
With that and also OP giving himself first position on poll I don't think it was meant to be equal for all. Using alphabetic order would have given i a better shot at looking equal. OP wan't to be added I think was a big motivator for him doing this thread.
I could be wrong. I am not always right.
Seriously, read the entire post, its the world cup host rule.
Putting up a name here does not guarantee a spot in the default trust list, it doesnt even get you any closer either.
Being in Default trust isn't just about being trustworthy, but a mixture of things. One of them being good judgement.
Your rules:
Rules to be nominated :
10 positive trade streak -
Which means trust score gained by personal grudge/favoritism wont be counted and it's a streak, implying you werent neg'd by someone recently (up to 10 trades in the past)
Minimum Trust Score required : 55
You didnt think 10 was the joining threshold did you ?
Your trust:
How was your name added? Or did I get something wrong here?
I would nominate MZ in this list as he seems to be a trustworthy member.
Rules to be nominated :
10 positive trade streak -
Which means trust score gained by personal grudge/favoritism wont be counted and it's a streak, implying you werent neg'd by someone recently (up to 10 trades in the past)
Minimum Trust Score required : 55
You didnt think 10 was the joining threshold did you ?
Your trust:
How was your name added? Or did I get something wrong here?
I would nominate MZ in this list as he seems to be a trustworthy member.
With that and also OP giving himself first position on poll I don't think it was meant to be equal for all. Using alphabetic order would have given i a better shot at looking equal. OP wan't to be added I think was a big motivator for him doing this thread.
I could be wrong. I am not always right.
Dude all these whiny posts about vod or quickseller are just from butthurt scammers, i dont even know how anyone would take them seriously, most of them have negative ratings from other important people aswell such as badbear or tomatocage, you name it. They then often try to say that qs is an alt of badbear or that kind of stupid shit, 99.9% of quickseller or vod ratings are accurate, maybe theres a case where they failed, everyone can fail but that doesnt mean they should be gone from the default trust list.
My point is that any kind of 'Forum police' should not be given the power to defame anyone thats my point of view, I believe in a world without censorship and prejudice, any member who gains 'trust' out of busting scams and policing bad conduct has the potential to become corrupt and in turn defame anyone they 'dont like personally' and since this is the internet I sternly believe that future behavior is not always reflective of past conduct.
Even though I support vigilance I dont support vigilantism. Thats my point of view, no one has to agree to it.
Like I said this is a FUN post and lets not make it anymore serious than it needs to be.
I guess the MZ reference up there meant Zakir, who has a trust score of 8 as viewed from my account so cant add him.
I guess the MZ reference up there meant Zakir, who has a trust score of 8 as viewed from my account so cant add him.
How was your name added? Or did I get something wrong here?
hero member
Activity: 560
Merit: 509
I prefer Zakir over Muhammed when mentioning me!
I disagree. Trust is not the main factor for being in default trust list. Even highly trusted users, can't be in default trust list. See CITM, for example.
Your rules:
Rules to be nominated :
10 positive trade streak -
Which means trust score gained by personal grudge/favoritism wont be counted and it's a streak, implying you werent neg'd by someone recently (up to 10 trades in the past)
Minimum Trust Score required : 55
You didnt think 10 was the joining threshold did you ?
Your trust:
How was your name added? Or did I get something wrong here?
I would nominate MZ in this list as he seems to be a trustworthy member.
Rules to be nominated :
10 positive trade streak -
Which means trust score gained by personal grudge/favoritism wont be counted and it's a streak, implying you werent neg'd by someone recently (up to 10 trades in the past)
Minimum Trust Score required : 55
You didnt think 10 was the joining threshold did you ?
Your trust:
How was your name added? Or did I get something wrong here?
I would nominate MZ in this list as he seems to be a trustworthy member.
I have nothing to gain with any of the nominations getting added. So I cosider myself impartial.
I think OgNasty has become very trustworthy. I mean when you think about escrow his name if who you think of (as least I do). So if they were going to add someone I don't think they could go wrong with him.
I think OgNasty has become very trustworthy. I mean when you think about escrow his name if who you think of (as least I do). So if they were going to add someone I don't think they could go wrong with him.
Dude all these whiny posts about vod or quickseller are just from butthurt scammers, i dont even know how anyone would take them seriously, most of them have negative ratings from other important people aswell such as badbear or tomatocage, you name it. They then often try to say that qs is an alt of badbear or that kind of stupid shit, 99.9% of quickseller or vod ratings are accurate, maybe theres a case where they failed, everyone can fail but that doesnt mean they should be gone from the default trust list.
Minimum Trust Score required : 55
You didnt think 10 was the joining threshold did you ?
I don't see trust scores the same way as you do, so how will I know whether someone has a score of 55+?You didnt think 10 was the joining threshold did you ?
It's not like any sensible person would have DefaulTrust in their trust list, anyway
To start with I am putting up a few names.
People won't be able to change their vote if someone is added to the list, will they? That doesn't really make sense.edit: s/
Good question.
My settings are :
Trust List :
DefaultTrust
Trust Depth : 2
Minimum Trust Score required : 55
You didnt think 10 was the joining threshold did you ?
I don't see trust scores the same way as you do, so how will I know whether someone has a score of 55+?You didnt think 10 was the joining threshold did you ?
It's not like any sensible person would have DefaulTrust in their trust list, anyway
To start with I am putting up a few names.
People won't be able to change their vote if someone is added to the list, will they? That doesn't really make sense.edit: s/
Seeing how the debate about whether VOD should be IN the default trust list has heated up over the past week on this thread.
I thought there should be a legitimate way for people to nominate themselves to be 'promoted' to the default trust list.
I'm sure the forum owner / government spy (JOKE - follow link to read more) or the moderators here wont take this thread seriously but its fun to play our little political voting game.
Rules to be nominated :
10 positive trade streak -
Which means trust score gained by personal grudge/favoritism wont be counted and it's a streak, implying you werent neg'd by someone recently (up to 10 trades in the past)
Minimum Trust Score required : 55
You didnt think 10 was the joining threshold did you ?
No forum cops allowed -
Yeah sorry guys, I am not against the whole vigilance thing and I do think that such users have a definite place in this forum but they shouldnt get 'power' to defame anyone.
Its a poll with no winners -
Dont start whining if you are leading in the poll and still the moderators or the owner havent put you in the default list, like I said this is a fun topic and chances are you will NOT be in the default list because of this thread.
World Cup Host Nation rule
Just like the US got entry into their first World Cup (soccer) because they were the host nation of the 94 WC. SO, this is my idea, my thread, I get a spot on the poll, stop arguing!
Yes this does mean I get to put my name up there bypassing all the other rules.
So if you want your name in the poll & win your virtual elections, simply put up your name in the replies below.
To start with I am putting up a few names.
~UPDATE~
Have explained this point in the replies, but since its too much hard work for most of you to read the full post let alone browse all replies, I'm stating the point here as well.
Lets get thing out in the clear for everyone, I have no interest to get to the default trust depth, right now.
But the fact that people are even considering 'voting' for me or in other case vouching for me - even as a joke - shows how flawed this system really is. The very reason that this topic exists is because I am trying to point out how useless and monopolized the trust system really is.
Gaining trust is so damn easy, all you have to do is suck up to a couple of guys, bust some scams and viola! you are IN the top circle of the trust and all of a sudden you have the power to declare that this person is suspicious, I am a "COP", I have a gun and I'll shoot this bastard down. No I am not comparing guys like Quickie Boy to real cops but stating how things can get out of hands.
There are more than one instance where this theory has failed and has ruined a profile and you know what gives next ? The person simply recreates a another account or even better BUYS A HIGH REP ACCOUNT and the fact that a same IP is allowed to create / own multiple accounts is also appalling. I know banning multiple IP logins isnt fair but at least create a tracking system like Bitlendingclub where similar IP accounts are shown to the public.
We are at the forefront of the Bitcoin revolution on this forum and this forum is riddled with cheap politics like this, WE NEED TO CHANGE.
Important points that need to be featured :
You are missing the whole point, this post opposes giving trust points to scam busting. Scam busting is ethically wrong and is a short cut to gain massive amounts of trust without doing anything other than trolling around playing pretend cop.
Users should be encouraged to trade with even the most trusted people like Theymos / John K with one eye opened. The moment you introduce the age old 'reference' system it is a cocktail of disaster because then you are simply encouraging people to blindly trust the 'most trusted' person - who could turn out to be a scammer. Example : Tradefortress.
This thread has now deviated from 'Fun poll to show how the trust system is flawed' to 'legendster is probably a scammer' and now to 'Legendster is immoral because he rented his sig space to a probable ponzi scheme'
I've said it numerous times : If the forum takes no responsibility for the ads that they put up, why should I take responsibility for the content of the signature space that I have rented out?
I am not endorsing anything that is in my signature space which is the result of a signature campaign. I'm renting it out to the highest bidder, I have taken the money in advance and I'll see to it that the buyer gets what he has paid for.
I thought there should be a legitimate way for people to nominate themselves to be 'promoted' to the default trust list.
I'm sure the forum owner / government spy (JOKE - follow link to read more) or the moderators here wont take this thread seriously but its fun to play our little political voting game.
Rules to be nominated :
10 positive trade streak -
Which means trust score gained by personal grudge/favoritism wont be counted and it's a streak, implying you werent neg'd by someone recently (up to 10 trades in the past)
Minimum Trust Score required : 55
You didnt think 10 was the joining threshold did you ?
No forum cops allowed -
Yeah sorry guys, I am not against the whole vigilance thing and I do think that such users have a definite place in this forum but they shouldnt get 'power' to defame anyone.
Its a poll with no winners -
Dont start whining if you are leading in the poll and still the moderators or the owner havent put you in the default list, like I said this is a fun topic and chances are you will NOT be in the default list because of this thread.
World Cup Host Nation rule
Just like the US got entry into their first World Cup (soccer) because they were the host nation of the 94 WC. SO, this is my idea, my thread, I get a spot on the poll, stop arguing!
Yes this does mean I get to put my name up there bypassing all the other rules.So if you want your name in the poll & win your virtual elections, simply put up your name in the replies below.
To start with I am putting up a few names.
~UPDATE~
Have explained this point in the replies, but since its too much hard work for most of you to read the full post let alone browse all replies, I'm stating the point here as well.
Lets get thing out in the clear for everyone, I have no interest to get to the default trust depth, right now.
But the fact that people are even considering 'voting' for me or in other case vouching for me - even as a joke - shows how flawed this system really is. The very reason that this topic exists is because I am trying to point out how useless and monopolized the trust system really is.
Gaining trust is so damn easy, all you have to do is suck up to a couple of guys, bust some scams and viola! you are IN the top circle of the trust and all of a sudden you have the power to declare that this person is suspicious, I am a "COP", I have a gun and I'll shoot this bastard down. No I am not comparing guys like Quickie Boy to real cops but stating how things can get out of hands.
There are more than one instance where this theory has failed and has ruined a profile and you know what gives next ? The person simply recreates a another account or even better BUYS A HIGH REP ACCOUNT and the fact that a same IP is allowed to create / own multiple accounts is also appalling. I know banning multiple IP logins isnt fair but at least create a tracking system like Bitlendingclub where similar IP accounts are shown to the public.
We are at the forefront of the Bitcoin revolution on this forum and this forum is riddled with cheap politics like this, WE NEED TO CHANGE.
Important points that need to be featured :
..... why give default trust to people who won't be really looking for scammers? I mean they'll be busy with their business. Are they trustworthy though? Yes .......
You are missing the whole point, this post opposes giving trust points to scam busting. Scam busting is ethically wrong and is a short cut to gain massive amounts of trust without doing anything other than trolling around playing pretend cop.
Users should be encouraged to trade with even the most trusted people like Theymos / John K with one eye opened. The moment you introduce the age old 'reference' system it is a cocktail of disaster because then you are simply encouraging people to blindly trust the 'most trusted' person - who could turn out to be a scammer. Example : Tradefortress.
This thread has now deviated from 'Fun poll to show how the trust system is flawed' to 'legendster is probably a scammer' and now to 'Legendster is immoral because he rented his sig space to a probable ponzi scheme'
I've said it numerous times : If the forum takes no responsibility for the ads that they put up, why should I take responsibility for the content of the signature space that I have rented out?
I am not endorsing anything that is in my signature space which is the result of a signature campaign. I'm renting it out to the highest bidder, I have taken the money in advance and I'll see to it that the buyer gets what he has paid for.
Jump to: