Topic: people "buying" trust without you noticing? (Read 2691 times)

Well most of the times banks do the same, they ask you what are you going to do with the money. You should care because if he is using the loans to gamble, that doesnt guarantee its gonna pay in the future

Well you can leave someone a positive trust feedback as long as you deem the user as a trustworthy one or you completed a trade with him/her. Loans aren't different. Also, why do you care on how those loans were used? It should be none of your business after all. But I partly agree that somehow, the trust rating is being abused.

The default trust system is what you make of it. Should anyone trust anyone who they don't personally trust? Absolutely not. Default trust isn't about who is trustworthy, its about who is trustworthy to leave accurate feedback for others. An absolute scumbag could be on default trust, as long as they leave people accurate feedback. Feedback for someone does not mean they should be trusted, and the only difference between trusted/untrusted feedback, is "trusted" is where newbies or anyone for that matter should begin investigations before trading. I certainly don't trust everyone on default trust, nor should anyone.

People get too caught up using the green or red numbers as 100% absolute scores which is rediculous. The only thing that default trust does, is creates a group of people to oversee their own feedback. All that does is discourages trust spam, as it holds members to community created standards. I could count probably 10 people on default trust that hold any additional weight to their feedback over anyone else in my opinion. No offense to Dooglus for example, but although he is on default trust, I have never dealt with him personally, nor do I know anything about his character/logic/rationale so I wouldn't trust his feedback implicitly any more than I would anyone's. A two post newbie that has a feasible claim, a reference link, and an explanation of the situation is more valuable than a default trust member's feedback with fewer details. Its a good guideline for newbies who have absolutely no impressions of anyone, but anyone who has been around for years has seen individual's business practices, they have had interactions with other members, and can judge things for what they are, on a case by case basis.

I don't really have any impression of all of the quickseller threads. Thread volume and complaints means very little to me by itself, and I haven't read the claims to fact check. If its valid, Badbear will remove him from default trust, or things will be resolved. The funny thing is, if you tag 20 people as scammers, 19 of which actually are, and then they band together to make 10 threads about how corrupt you are, its not going to look too good. People on default trust are supposed to be able to read through the BS while not missing actual issues. Hopefully anyway.
 

No issues "personally" with anyone really as I have met very few people in these forums to make that sort of assessment. For only seeing me from forum posts 1.5 to 1.75BTC sounds like a fair start heheheh. Only person I met that I have problem with is Josh Zerlan. We all know why he is not to be trusted. The others I am at war with are circumspect basing on how they attempt to manipulate consumers or support those who manipulate consumers here in these forums.

The more enemies the better given the lack of ethics for some of these people I will gladly wear red from each of them 100x over as the spam indicates. It is a badge of honor to me and I'd rather it be left there so when I am proven right it hangs there as a reminder. Look hard at Marto74 and Loshia as an example of being proven right in the longer term. Fraudster and shill symbiotic relations there all clearly documented still in the trust ratings.

I posted a thread about the trust spam and nothing was done, Dogie was slammed with the same spam and nothing was done. I don't care really my business / profession doesn't hinge on this trust system at all and any dealings in this space I am certain if asked I would never hold 80K USD again given what Avalon did with the chips I had weeks of sleepless nights till that was resolved and I got coins back in the rightful owners hands and I was relieved. Ugg never again. Within my field of education I am well respected with hardly anyone you would call an enemy at most adversaries and even then that is pushing it as I often train my direct competitors to be better educators.

====

As for the Trust System being able to balance itself out or self regulate sort of mentality, I don't agree with that entirely, and there have been some discussions on how to better the system hopefully those discussions lead somewhere but for me it will NEVER trust anyone unless I am willing to lose 100% of what I put in. Currently my foray into BTC mining is a net loss. BTC purchases net gain. Overall even. I know risk. I have seen reward and loss.

Personally those in the default need to be more proactive in verifying any person they add and I mean VERIFY who the hell they are not just based on past reputation in dealing within the forum. Most of the recent issues with Default Trust have stemmed from unvetted people abusing it. Something with Quickseller stinks to high heaven I don't really like anyone that is completely anonymous being on the default trust too many ways to abuse the system in that way.

I already seen peep be selling the trust even posting threads asking if its ok to sell trust because he is on the default trust list. Its absurd that this is happening especially with theymos having so much money to make a better forum and stop all the scamming. -10btc to anyone who buys or sells trust, thats just fucked up man.

It can't be enforced ever. Which is why people must CHECK the trust and why it was there. I don't blindly send 5 bitcoin to anyone with shiny green trust. I check each individual trust, check reference, and see if it is valid, then form my opinion after that.

These are good thoughts and I agree, but how can they be enforced without the trust system being moderated?

I agree on escrow guys not leaving feedback so easily. A good example is OgNasty for escrow...he did not leave me a feedback until at least 15+ escrows were done successfully. I think trust here should be VERY hard to earn as it does provide you with a lot of potential to scam. Several months back I was not at home and my hot wallet machine was down. I was able to get a 5BTC loan in roughly 20 minutes with 0 collateral due to my trust score. Most of the escrows are also default trusted level 2, so their ratings do count as extra. I do not think a user who takes a micro loan should get feedback left for it right away.

Leaving positive trust is not bad, whats bad is that people may not look at the ratings or what they mean exactly and they would blindly trust someone that for example gives loans wich require no trust at all since he would probably ask for collateral so he is not risking anything

Lol, I wouldn't trust Satoshi with 780 BTC. My point was that I dont see the problem with someone leaving truthful feedback. I've done small deals with people, and I've left them positive feedback, I just carefully explain my risks and the details of the trade, its up for whoever is trading with that person next to interpret their trade scores. I've left people positive feedback when I served as their escrow agent as well, but again I left that I had 0 risked bitcoins, and explained that I had served as escrow and that things had gone well. The Bitcoin value isn't the only thing that is worth knowing about someone's trading history. How well their communication, shipping times, etc are almost as valuable information as how much money they have been trusted with in the past.

Since you asked, I figure I would trust you with around 1.5-1.75 BTC, unless you have personal issues with me, in which case I'd trust you with 1 BTC or a bit less. And damn, your feedback page isn't pretty. I didn't see many claims that had anything to do with your financial trustworthiness, but damn do you have a lot of enemies. How many enemies someone has is also worth noting.

I've been in the Bitcoin scene for quite a while, you don't need to worry about me. I've never been scammed, because I've calculated trustworthiness to a near perfect science. Self interest my friends, people won't go against their own self interest, unless there are other motives towards screwing you over, which is how I factored that I'd trust you with less if I was one of your enemies (I'm not as far as I know).

*edit* Btw bick, you could probably ask to get your negative trust spam removed. The people with 100 negative ratings for you in the form of poems and stories actually make it difficult to read. Pretty sure that falls under the trust spam category that you could ask to have removed.

How is that relevant to what he said?

How about 780 BTC and few people that verify it?

Then a mass of bullshit neg ratings?

Would you give me $80K USD to hold for you?

Trust no one unless you are willing and able to lose every satoshi.

Wow! thanks for pointing that out!
I use SebastianJu as escrow always because as per my experience he is the fastest and best , after certain Feedbacks i already asked him to not give me anymore feedbacks so to make my profile look like full of his feedbacks and i asked him now to remove all his feedbacks for Escrow except one.
I don't really care about it , i use my well known name on here and i can be easily tracked back , why would i ever scam anyone . Am fine with always using Escrow. I easily make a good profit with trades and the btc community have provided so much to me and it'll keep providing it.

---

My first ever trade was of selling stellar to some guy and as i remember until 2 months ago , sofia was selling these cards without any problem . He/she still is , but since it is considered taboo now , so i've stopped it! Most of my trades are for account selling not Cards , learn to read properly.
Also , QS prefers leaving tags for useless things and not leaving feedback for trades. I could care less, knowing pretty well what kind of person he is.
There is always a bigger picture around here for some people and some will know it , i could care less about it , even if someone negs me out of frustration (as many here does) , it would be fine as long as i use Escrow . So , why bother

Building up trust is the same to me, if he really needs the loans, yea okay but why would a person need so many loans? And when most of them are small loans its just weird. Thats why im saying to not trust people just because they have green on their trust

Indeed, and i think no one should trust people who give loans because they lose nothing if they require collateral, and i know a lot of people with a lot of trust points just because they give loans wich is stupid. I would consider a loan or a trade to be a positive trust point if it is big enough.

Which is why everyone should actually click the reference and decide for themselves whether the trade holds any value in trust. I never trust loans as valid trust, but I look at things with how much money they COULD have stolen, like holding 10 btc in there website or something.

The same logic can be used for trades as well, not just loans. You can never be sure whether a person has done a trade just for trust, or is really interested in the trade. 

Very easy to buy trust here. I could ask for like 20 different loans, build up trust from untrusted, and probably trusted members, only lose like 5% from generious interest, and never actually use the loans. Paying 5% on 1 btc total is 0.05 and you could make MUCH more money from scamming with your positive trust than 0.05 btc. Trust with loans should be disregarded.

The exact same thing happened to me as well. I did a trade with someone for PayPal to Bitcoin for a fairly small amount (< $50) and everything went smooth. He asked me to leave some trust so I did. Less than 24 hours later, he ended up scamming someone for $100 or so. The person he scammed was fairly close to leaving me negative trust, as well as one other person who traded with him, just for dealing with this guy. He suspected that I was an alt account of the scammer, as well as the other guy the scammer traded with.

I think a wise decision would to only leave feedback to users who you've traded over x BTC with. Whether it be 0.5 BTC or 3 BTC, I suspect that would cut down on feedback buyers.

I don't think that 'buying trust' would have actually been a thing if most people cared to create a personal trust list and therefore there wasn't any need for a default trust. This along with the fact that the whole trust concept would have been more meaningful if people were looking at the ratings and evaluating the volume and worthiness of the ratings from the trust page and not from a programmed overall rating.