Topic: people "buying" trust without you noticing? - page 2. (Read 2691 times)
I think it depends because here is the thing, if an user gives a collateral for a loan and he repays it that doesnt mean he is trustworthy it means he didnt want to lose the collateral. And also as i said before giving loans without collateral is stupid for this reasons
I don't see why someone shouldn't leave feedback for loans that they complete. If someone borrows 0.01 BTC and pays back 0.015 BTC, make sure you leave that in your feedback. If someone has proven themselves trustworthy with 0.01 BTC, that doesn't mean they are trustworthy with any larger sums.
500 positive feedback from the most trusted members of the forum for 0.01 BTC each, doesn't make that person trustworthy with 5 BTC, maybe with 0.05.
500 positive feedback from the most trusted members of the forum for 0.01 BTC each, doesn't make that person trustworthy with 5 BTC, maybe with 0.05.
I think another thing people overlook is how absurd it is for escrows to leave positive trust to those who use their services. Completing a deal through escrow requires 0 trust at all, yet you have users like this who now have fairly high trust ratings just from using the same default trusted escrow multiple times. It is much easier to buy default trust through escrow than through lending, the second party in the trade can just be your alt account and all it costs you is the escrow fee, which is barely anything.
It is especially absurd to be leaving 5 trust ratings for small trades when he might as well have been trading with himself.
I think it doesn't exist an 'how to' for the trust system, everyone can leave his positive trust (as much times he wants) but it is normal that everyone should also trade with his own diligence and check always the (complete) 'history' of that account.
I don't see why someone shouldn't leave feedback for loans that they complete. If someone borrows 0.01 BTC and pays back 0.015 BTC, make sure you leave that in your feedback. If someone has proven themselves trustworthy with 0.01 BTC, that doesn't mean they are trustworthy with any larger sums.
500 positive feedback from the most trusted members of the forum for 0.01 BTC each, doesn't make that person trustworthy with 5 BTC, maybe with 0.05.
500 positive feedback from the most trusted members of the forum for 0.01 BTC each, doesn't make that person trustworthy with 5 BTC, maybe with 0.05.
I think another thing people overlook is how absurd it is for escrows to leave positive trust to those who use their services. Completing a deal through escrow requires 0 trust at all, yet you have users like this who now have fairly high trust ratings just from using the same default trusted escrow multiple times. It is much easier to buy default trust through escrow than through lending, the second party in the trade can just be your alt account and all it costs you is the escrow fee, which is barely anything.
It is especially absurd to be leaving 5 trust ratings for small trades when he might as well have been trading with himself.
I don't see why someone shouldn't leave feedback for loans that they complete. If someone borrows 0.01 BTC and pays back 0.015 BTC, make sure you leave that in your feedback. If someone has proven themselves trustworthy with 0.01 BTC, that doesn't mean they are trustworthy with any larger sums.
500 positive feedback from the most trusted members of the forum for 0.01 BTC each, doesn't make that person trustworthy with 5 BTC, maybe with 0.05.
500 positive feedback from the most trusted members of the forum for 0.01 BTC each, doesn't make that person trustworthy with 5 BTC, maybe with 0.05.
I think another thing people overlook is how absurd it is for escrows to leave positive trust to those who use their services. Completing a deal through escrow requires 0 trust at all, yet you have users like this who now have fairly high trust ratings just from using the same default trusted escrow multiple times. It is much easier to buy default trust through escrow than through lending, the second party in the trade can just be your alt account and all it costs you is the escrow fee, which is barely anything.
He does initially look trustworthy but even a cursory look shows that all his feedback come from escrow and buying carded gift cards. I would definitely not trade first with that person and hope others would do the same due diligence before engaging in trade. We can't expect the trust system to hold our hands 100% through the trade process.
I don't see why someone shouldn't leave feedback for loans that they complete. If someone borrows 0.01 BTC and pays back 0.015 BTC, make sure you leave that in your feedback. If someone has proven themselves trustworthy with 0.01 BTC, that doesn't mean they are trustworthy with any larger sums.
500 positive feedback from the most trusted members of the forum for 0.01 BTC each, doesn't make that person trustworthy with 5 BTC, maybe with 0.05.
500 positive feedback from the most trusted members of the forum for 0.01 BTC each, doesn't make that person trustworthy with 5 BTC, maybe with 0.05.
Agreed. If I'm going to do a trade with somebody, I will definitely look at the trust/references first to see what kind of transactions they have been involved with including how much, who sent first, etc.
Trust isn't 100% perfect. It's only an initial indicator of what you're dealing with.
I don't see why someone shouldn't leave feedback for loans that they complete. If someone borrows 0.01 BTC and pays back 0.015 BTC, make sure you leave that in your feedback. If someone has proven themselves trustworthy with 0.01 BTC, that doesn't mean they are trustworthy with any larger sums.
500 positive feedback from the most trusted members of the forum for 0.01 BTC each, doesn't make that person trustworthy with 5 BTC, maybe with 0.05.
500 positive feedback from the most trusted members of the forum for 0.01 BTC each, doesn't make that person trustworthy with 5 BTC, maybe with 0.05.
I think another thing people overlook is how absurd it is for escrows to leave positive trust to those who use their services. Completing a deal through escrow requires 0 trust at all, yet you have users like this who now have fairly high trust ratings just from using the same default trusted escrow multiple times. It is much easier to buy default trust through escrow than through lending, the second party in the trade can just be your alt account and all it costs you is the escrow fee, which is barely anything.
If I can say my personal 'story', I gave a loan to an user and he repaid very quickly but after he also started to send me a lot of PMs asking for a positive trust... a lot of things are not changed.
It's normal people do take small loan for mostly for rating. Better lender stop giving feedback for small loan.
Everytime I do trade with new users they always try to forced me to give positive trust. And I mostly time deny that by saying I don't give trust feedback before 3-4 transaction with me. So sometime those user try to do some small transaction with me and I stopped trading with them so they won't ask feedback again. Only give them who are doing really genuine trades.
I think lender also try to do this and stopped giving feedback to trust abuser.
Exactly, now I (rarely) leave a positive, negative or neutral trust to someone (only few cases, because I really trust that user).
The whole lending thread is somehow to gaun trust ratings from another user. Especially the no collateral ones.
For the lenders that want collateral:
Most of the lenders want an amount of altcoin etc as collateral that is 120% of the loan amount. The question is, why dont just exchange the altcoin to bitcoin and use it? Why give someone 12$ for 10$ in a short period of time and pay 11$(+ interest back)
That literally makes no sense at all...
For the lenders that want collateral:
Most of the lenders want an amount of altcoin etc as collateral that is 120% of the loan amount. The question is, why dont just exchange the altcoin to bitcoin and use it? Why give someone 12$ for 10$ in a short period of time and pay 11$(+ interest back)
That literally makes no sense at all...
This is why are named "loans". The interest % is normal, and for the question about the altcoin (as collateral) maybe it is because who want s bitcoin wants also to 'save' his altcoin (so he does not want to exchange it for bitcoin).
If I can say my personal 'story', I gave a loan to an user and he repaid very quickly but after he also started to send me a lot of PMs asking for a positive trust... a lot of things are not changed.
Some loanees are easy to spot as trying to build reputation. I had previously been aware of Oscarftw and sickler, both whom have defaulted and left.
The whole lending thread is somehow to gaun trust ratings from another user. Especially the no collateral ones.
For the lenders that want collateral:
Most of the lenders want an amount of altcoin etc as collateral that is 120% of the loan amount. The question is, why dont just exchange the altcoin to bitcoin and use it? Why give someone 12$ for 10$ in a short period of time and pay 11$(+ interest back)
That literally makes no sense at all...
For the lenders that want collateral:
Most of the lenders want an amount of altcoin etc as collateral that is 120% of the loan amount. The question is, why dont just exchange the altcoin to bitcoin and use it? Why give someone 12$ for 10$ in a short period of time and pay 11$(+ interest back)
That literally makes no sense at all...
I don't see why someone shouldn't leave feedback for loans that they complete. If someone borrows 0.01 BTC and pays back 0.015 BTC, make sure you leave that in your feedback. If someone has proven themselves trustworthy with 0.01 BTC, that doesn't mean they are trustworthy with any larger sums.
500 positive feedback from the most trusted members of the forum for 0.01 BTC each, doesn't make that person trustworthy with 5 BTC, maybe with 0.05.
500 positive feedback from the most trusted members of the forum for 0.01 BTC each, doesn't make that person trustworthy with 5 BTC, maybe with 0.05.
But newbie don't understand this logic. They just understand that user has many feedback. and they care for feedback not amount.
I don't see why someone shouldn't leave feedback for loans that they complete. If someone borrows 0.01 BTC and pays back 0.015 BTC, make sure you leave that in your feedback. If someone has proven themselves trustworthy with 0.01 BTC, that doesn't mean they are trustworthy with any larger sums.
500 positive feedback from the most trusted members of the forum for 0.01 BTC each, doesn't make that person trustworthy with 5 BTC, maybe with 0.05.
500 positive feedback from the most trusted members of the forum for 0.01 BTC each, doesn't make that person trustworthy with 5 BTC, maybe with 0.05.
I don't believe in giving positive trust to any member as it's like giving a person a reputation of always being trusted. I had given a person positive trust earlier when I had completed a trade with him successfully and he turned out to scam someone else. The people who he scammed almost blamed me for giving him a feedback just after one trade and that was a lesson learnt by me that I cannot take the responsibility of even a known person being trustworthy. They try to abuse the trust system then.
I don't see why someone shouldn't leave feedback for loans that they complete. If someone borrows 0.01 BTC and pays back 0.015 BTC, make sure you leave that in your feedback. If someone has proven themselves trustworthy with 0.01 BTC, that doesn't mean they are trustworthy with any larger sums.
500 positive feedback from the most trusted members of the forum for 0.01 BTC each, doesn't make that person trustworthy with 5 BTC, maybe with 0.05.
500 positive feedback from the most trusted members of the forum for 0.01 BTC each, doesn't make that person trustworthy with 5 BTC, maybe with 0.05.
If I can say my personal 'story', I gave a loan to an user and he repaid very quickly but after he also started to send me a lot of PMs asking for a positive trust... a lot of things are not changed.
It's normal people do take small loan for mostly for rating. Better lender stop giving feedback for small loan.
Everytime I do trade with new users they always try to forced me to give positive trust. And I mostly time deny that by saying I don't give trust feedback before 3-4 transaction with me. So sometime those user try to do some small transaction with me and I stopped trading with them so they won't ask feedback again. Only give them who are doing really genuine trades.
I think lender also try to do this and stopped giving feedback to trust abuser.
If I can say my personal 'story', I gave a loan to an user and he repaid very quickly but after he also started to send me a lot of PMs asking for a positive trust... a lot of things are not changed.
I would say a lot of the loans are for gambling if they a frequently borrowing not that it is any of our business 
Yeh that should be a limit to what entitles positive feedback from a trusted member, i mean if i borrow 0.01 and pay back 0.013 then i should not get any trust for that imo if i borrowed 0.4btc and then repayed would be nice to have some trust because i was clearly trust worthy.
Yeh that should be a limit to what entitles positive feedback from a trusted member, i mean if i borrow 0.01 and pay back 0.013 then i should not get any trust for that imo if i borrowed 0.4btc and then repayed would be nice to have some trust because i was clearly trust worthy. If it was "without you noticing", you wouldn't be posting this thread
He said with you noticing...not without him.
That's why I put it between " "
People should not hand out trust for tiny trades like that. I am willing to guess a majority of the lenders and borrowers would stop loaning if the ratings stopped.
And that was probably OP's point
People should not hand out trust for tiny trades like that. I am willing to guess a majority of the lenders and borrowers would stop loaning if the ratings stopped.
I like to check the lending section on this forum because is quite funny and sometimes i notice a guy who has some trust and is looking for loan without collateral, most of the time he gets it because he has good trust but then you check his trust and its all from previous loans. What has this guy been doing with all these loans? Like i saw a guy with literally more than 15 feedbacks from loans. Does he really need those loans or is he "buying trust" because it just seems weird. Other thing is that most people that do that look for really small loans
This is may undirectly attempt to buy a trust. But actually we can clarify what account that can be trust. Just because he can repaid the loan so he can being trust. For someone who has been a long time being this forum , we can clarify it.
The problem is someone new on forum and looking a trust member ( trust from loan ). That's why we must keep educate someone pure new to this forum and lead it into right direction
Same thing they do on BTCJam they call it "reputation building loans". I guess it is an easy way to build trust rather than via selling or escrowing etc... I noticed that when I was doing loans the people I lent were very concerned about me leaving feedback for them. Building a reputation here is not really an easy task, but most people really do not need one unless they trade here. I do understand why people want lots of green next to their name though as it does provide some benefits.
Yes im pretty sure there is people here that do that, get loans or give loans for the sole purpose of building trust, i mean you could ask for loans of 0.01 and repay them with a interest of 50% even and you would basically be buying trust for 0.005 btc
If it was "without you noticing", you wouldn't be posting this thread
He said with you noticing...not without him.
Same thing they do on BTCJam they call it "reputation building loans". I guess it is an easy way to build trust rather than via selling or escrowing etc... I noticed that when I was doing loans the people I lent were very concerned about me leaving feedback for them. Building a reputation here is not really an easy task, but most people really do not need one unless they trade here. I do understand why people want lots of green next to their name though as it does provide some benefits.
Jump to: