Topic: RED Trust...is it enough for fraudulent work ??? (Read 2260 times)

I have to do it sometimes soon, the problem is editing big post from the phone is horrible. I need some free time behind the PC and when I get the chance I'll do it.

This may be quite useful to quote in your trust section of your: Don't Panic:  Iasenkos Official Hitchhiker's Guide to the BTCitcointalk Galaxy [/b]

I've just included a link to that here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.38765392 so I didn't have to duplicate the information that you have already provided.

It is a funny thread if you compare it to a real life situation like " if a traffic light has shown a red light and you are trespassing it and got hit, can you blame the red light or the one who make the traffic light or the police?" It is almost the same like how DT trust works. I believe red trust from DT with enough reference on the scam are trusted enough to stop us from being scammed, which can reduce the number of scam in the future, but it seems there are more people who like to gamble by trespassing the red light nowadays, and when they got hit, they blame others.

Yes¹, I know - you are having a good time. Happy for you.

Indeed! So let's walk through that direction then....

Anyway....
You can visit the post, I have updated it: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/--4221113

---

Update
¹ The "Yes" was not meant to say that investing in that site is safe.  

I will request to OP, please lock this thread from lower left. Look like discussion is gone out of subject. Even red tag not enough for scammer/spammer it's give warning to dealing with red taged member's. There is reference on comment why tagged a member's. So it's easy to find who is scammer or spammer.

Fixed that quote for you with proper link 
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/--4221113
As you can see, time is today, as I just signed up to "project2018" under your sponsorship. Tell me, as my sponsor, is it safe to invest in that site? 

Ok, i will stop posting and replying to this topic because it went to completely different direction. Or not?

 

Show me where I have doxxed your wife.

You just made the accusation. Now provide the proof.

Dox:
In regards to your information - you published your full name and LinkedIn profile as well as your twitter.

You posted your name and linkedin here in April and rest of the stuff here in May

Unless I published your phone number or home address (which I won't) there is nothing more to doxx.

Archive for reference

Promoting twitter account to promote ponzi now is becoming a blame for doxxing. See how you manipulate information?  
Did I (?) When? After you pulled my information from the web and dumped them on your post or before?


Would you mind? http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4019640.new
Screenshot


This is an older cached version on google by the way which anyone (the world) could access and even they still can.




http://archive.is/CiVJK#selection-1067.41-1067.84
May be someone will be interested to click on those images from the bottom from this google page

On the top under the navigation follow those ones which has  this...
Bitcoin Forum > Economy > Trading Discussion > Scam Accusations (Moderator: Cyrus) > Serial feedback blackmailer - mdayonliner

Have I volunteered my wife's social media information?

See this is what I am calling diversion. This has already been responded.

Why are you bringing old stuffs again? These has answered already. Diversion? The original conversation was started here with me and marlboroza so that I can talk back and forth with him/her but you stepped in and again started messing things around.

---

Good that you are keeping all the quotes so that I can not change information which I don't actually. I always keep records intact even if I see I could get trouble. You can justify from the PM I sent to Lutpin where I could delete the evidence but I archived it just to keep reference. Too much for me going through but yes I will see the link and will write you back.

It's really good to see how hard you guys are trying to keep the forum free from scam. On the process you even do not bother to cool down your head and readjust your prior perception. All these things I have done in the past does not have anything to do with the forum lifetime. I never scammed anyone on the forum nor even outside the forum but here I am, defending myself to restore my honour. I may not be able to fight against it alone but I will try my best.

Few things not the  least....
Time is relevant
Place is relevant

It's very curious, you have trust system where when user gives someone green/red trust, there is a reference link or explanation of reasons. From them and with your mind/brain, you have to decide whether trust or not user.
Looking for "ideas" how are you going to deal with scammers? Everyone can lie, no matter what you'll do, it's impossible to prevent.
And it's not our duty ensure a safe environment here for our upcoming generation. Our duty is to share knowledge and help each other. When we had bad deal, we mark them. Don't look for help in everything, take some risks on your own.

Quoted for for record, archived here http://archive.is/FrCjd and reposted here https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/--4221113

RED trust might not be enough but doing more is on the basis of the power available to the people with default trust ability and doing the right thing which I am sure if given more, they would surely try to reduce the amount of people engaged in fraudulent activities on the forum. The most important we need to focus on is the enlightenment of people not to fall for scams as some of those scams are really too cheap for someone who values money to see but as a newbie greedy to make tons of money within a short period of time, everything seems legit and the quickest way to achieve financial objectives.

More in my opinion needs to be done on accounts exchange as everyone that is on the forum, is dealt with on that basis. The moment that part can be sanitized, more of high ranked accounts would be nuked to carry out fraudulent activities while the newbie accounts would still be seen with much suspicions to be trusted with funds.

Stop talking crap Mdayonliner.

I didn't dox you. You doxed yourself. You even volunteered the information. Here




Nothing I posted was irrelevant to the accusation. I didn't post any details that didn't need to be there. Everything is available because either you posted it on the internet yourself or it is public record. I deliberately did not post information that was unnecessary.

You are selective in your posts. Stop scamming everyone with your "poor me" story.

This is how you treat people:


You got caught scamming. You promoted a scam and people that participated in the scam lost money and bitcoin.

End of story.

I have never promoted any ponzi on the forum not even since I have started my journey here. After that last video I left all the online affilaite businesses promoting for others.




I had/have nothing personal with you. Have I bought anyone from here? They also have problems with me like you have.


The image says,

To be precise, it cannot be called a punishment, but it is more of a warning for others not to trust the person for anything in future. And that works, if people are careful when doing things involving money.


The trust system is for the users of this forum to be safe from frauds or scams as it represents the reputation of a user that is involved in something in this forum, or has an account in the forum but doing something bad outside it and is caught. A user cannot get back to doing something again in the forum with the same account if it is marked red, obviously. If they do it outside the forum, then it is your responsibility not to trust someone just like that.


Of course it is your responsibility if you deal with someone having negative trust and get scammed. When you see a board saying "Danger ahead" and you still go there, it is you who is responsible for what happens.


It is enough. Banning someone for only being untrustworthy is not how this forum works. So this generation or any upcoming generations will have to learn to understand warnings.


You should learn not to blindly trust anyone, no matter how good others say they are. Someone in the DT is not supposed to be an angel, or to be trusted with anything, because they are included in DT if someone already in DT gives them a positive trust rating, and that does not mean they cannot do wrong things, except from some of them.

---

Why are you bringing all this "I have never promoted scam on forum" crap? What difference does it make?

Are you denying that you promoted a ponzi ?


I posted in accordance to the rules - it was information you had posted on the forum yourself.

In order to be able to post more information and ensure that google cannot index it I moved it to the investigations forum in accordance to the rules.


You are not actively defending yourself - you are creating a diversion by trying to make me look bad.

If you defend yourself then you explain your actions. You can't explain your involvement in the ponzi so you create a diversion instead.

Effectively you are harassing and stalking me by doing that. You could just never mention my name again and then I never will reply to you again.

archive for reference
O - is he?

You were stalking on my wife's social media pages.
You are still spreading lies against me that I am promoting ponzi on the forum and my twitter promotion was to advertise ponzi.
You were/are harassing me just because I found suspicious activities on your merit transaction.
You think If I can post my private stuffs on the forum then you can too

Who is nonsense?

---

You always create diversion when I try to defend my reputation on the forum.
Anyway I would ask the readers to refresh their mind which I actually posted for everyone to read here

Obviously you didn't understand what he was saying. He was referring to you when he said:


He was referring to you when he was talking about the "games".

Anyone doing any research will see that you are quoting most of the other stuff out of context. I'm not going to waste my time replying to most of the nonsense that you have posted.

Obviously when anything goes wrong for you it is automatically my fault.

Yes - you are doing a good job at stalking me.

Check each topic and see who mentions xtraelv or mdayonliner first in that thread.

Archive for reference

Where in my twitter? What makes you think I promoted it here to advertise scam? Your manipulated mind can think anything and I see that is working very well.
I always said the self promotion was to add it on my portfolio because I wanted to offer signature and bounty management service.
I understand your petty games.

---

¹

All the media accounts are set to public and are asking for followers so you can advertise more.

I am a stalker for looking at an advertised social media account ?

Remember - it was you that told me:




There is a link right under it with the video and time that you say it.  After you say Uday is a good guy you explain how much money people lost due to his actions. That is what I was talking about.


You are so concerned about your privacy that you post links to your social media on bitcointalk here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.37072867

There is nothing "personal" about advertising a SCAM on a publicly view-able social media page that is linked to a social media page that is actively advertised on here..

Quoted for reference

You are ignoring others post by the way.

Where?

What time is the truth?

First my brother, now you have started stalking my wife too?
What next? My upcoming child?

Can anyone see I am contently getting exposed. My personal privacy, family privacy everything are dragging into the forum from entire web just to make me look bad?

By the way Notice the date on the image December 4, 2017.

---------------------------------------------


Can we consider the date and time?
archive





I was talking about uday when he was not proven guilty (completely), things were getting dark but nobody knew what was in his mind to be honest, was he actually trying to scam exit or a victim or whatever. The justification was from his past good acts. I remember I was blaming him for mismanagement, coz those he trusted, those were surrounding him were basically always telling him good job, good job.

The article on the other hand was written when everything was confirmed about uday.  

You still think you are not biased and not manipulating everything to make me the bad guy just because there was a question on your merit exchanging history and I suspected it.

You keep on persistently trying to malign my character. Just read some of the things you posted about me from the first day till now. I'm not going to waste my time posting it all on here.


The facts are simple:

You promoted ponzies and you got exposed. - nothing to do with me. Something YOU did.

You make it sound like it was long time ago that you promoted ponzis. Not true.

You entice bitcointalk users to follow your social media here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.37072867

You advertised revshare ponzis on your social media accounts - which are still visible today.

This was on your wifes social media account December 2017:




https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/--4221113

This is what you say:
https://youtu.be/EzO0Y6SoSt8?t=67
Uday is a very honest, he has integrity . Uday is a very good guy.

This is what others say:
https://www.scamfinance.com/mypayingads-com-review-the-hyip-ponzi-that-just-wont-die/
Uday Nara – apparently a very well-known scammer in online get-rich-quick circles
The operation has “gone under” a few times already, yet its pushers simply refuse to let it all die.

https://youtu.be/EzO0Y6SoSt8?t=785

This is where you talk about all your downline people and friends lost thousands of dollars. Keep in mind that prior to that you stated: Uday is a very honest, he has integrity . Uday is a very good guy.

And how about the time?

---

Everything was started from here when I suspected a merit abusing in between xtraelv and Lafu. Things could really ended up nicely if I could get a good constructive response of this post which was made in response of his earlier two posts in a row 1, 2. Please see footnote below for the timestamps^{^} of these posts.

xtraelv wanted to hurt me with his words, he wanted to humiliate me very badly to the community also with whatever possibly he can. I never wanted to bring anyone's reference without their permission but seems like I will need to do this shameful act just to prove that how desperate he was to make me guilty by any means... May be some of these evidence will speak for me or may be not but I feel I need to.


Thanks suchmoon

Thanks The Pharmacist



Thanks DdmrDdmr

And this was a private message...

Now at this point I have two red trusts - one from you and another from hilariousandco which indeed proves that xtraelv successfully humiliated me to the community because I made him upset and so mad with the red trust (which I replaced later with a neutral by the way) I left for him for suspicious merit exchanging with his friend.

By the way, I have few questions for you to ask which I may ask later or I will just let it go, just not sure at this point.

---

^{^}:
Bad for me that I can not even bring everything in a logical order because he has done the edit/update on almost all of his posts so many times that anyone who will go through the posts they will hardly find he was talking nonsense at that time when all those bullshits were very highly tensed.
Very early post 1:

Post 2:

My very early response

Also please go through the timestamps of all of his activities on this and this topic. My responses also had edit/updates but I left enough update notes, used Strikethrough (when possible).


This is not just one time, s/he done it several times. Deleting/editing/updating a post on an accusation case (without a tail) which actually based on written evidence can entirely change the direction and can turn the table completely to the wrong side.

Anyway, Sadly - looking at my trust page if anyone tells me that I am the bad guy then I would not wonder.

Any of them    Location is irrelevant.
Quoted for reference and archived http://archive.is/bzAV6

I don't know how many times we will need to talk about all these... LOL

Anyway...

-----------------------------------

Answered above


By the way the full explanation is on several posts of the investigation topic especially on this and this post. I am really sick and tired of this whole MLM made up thing that I promoted them on the forum (This is a complete lie, I never promoted any of them on the forum, those businesses were even gone long ago when I joined the forum). in fact, those businesses were not even MLM, they were revshare model. I was doing affiliate marketing as an independent affiliate. Can you guys give me a break in it?





There are many more good stuffs I can bring which makes me feel better, these reflect my reputations. The honour I receive from the members drives me to devote my time for the forum and the community. One can not just buy it with money. I do not know about you lot but for me these worth more than anything else. The money is just a tool for me, it simply does not define me who I am.

PS: Vod, hilariousandco, you and The Pharmacist are the four DTs who I see (no offence to others by the way, may be you guys are more active but I may missed it) very often doing the job actively. LoyceV is another one but she is not actively tagging others. Among all of you I find you and LoyceV are publicly giving people enough space to fix their mistakes. People actually need to have their chances to fix their errors. No one is 100% clean and perfect.

It's time for me to have a dinner but before I go, I would like to thank you marlboroza to give me the chance to clear up my chest. I really needed to take it out. Also, thank you everyone who supports my work, appreciate my contribution to the forum, offer me their helping hands when I need them, care to warn me when they see I may get into trouble and all sorts of good stuffs.

As a bitcointalk forum member I will always try to make the forum scam free and clean. I think its my responsibility too. That's why I opened this topic... in here sone guys got red trust in past and I think they trying to send their old account merit to new account but in a clever way. But something really hurting me that is a SR rank member mdayonliner taking the side of those merit abusers. Taking here something which is not related to this topic. its nothing but to save thoae abusers. already some DT members put their eyes on it and it is to notify that mydayonliner have also got red trust in his or her account.  If its bad to mention something suspicious above our DT meblmers eyes to helpp them on their moto o making forum scam free clean than I am sorry from my side. In previous messages everyone can understand how mydayonliner trying to defense me andnd trying to tell me its wrong to help oir DT s by opening this kinda topic.😞
I can't believe why you are not tag him yet where you already provide all proof by yourself.

I believe negative rating with reference link pointing to why someone was tagged is more than enough.
You are confusing merit, rank and trust.

---

---

So you agree that this account should have been negative tagged long time ago https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.40471597 , from its early days http://archive.is/Hkkow#selection-2781.0-2781.235 ?

Self admitted rule breaker...

Merit beggar:



Reference link is pointing to post which was edited the same day:


Do you think this account should be tagged with -ve for begging merit, the same way this account was tagged with -ve:




Tell me, based on 1-5 and your observation of forum rules, trust system and scammers...

1) breaking forum rules
2) begging for merit
3) exchanging merit between family members
4) advertising refshare schemes
5) offering to escrow more than $100,000

...should people trust this account or tag this account with negative trust, to make sure - as OP said "...its our duty to ensure a safe environment here for our upcoming generation", we keep forum clean and safe?

Sorry for the off-topic here but this is really valuable information, so I want to ask xtralev if I can use this quoted piece in my [Guide]How to detect rule-breakers.Techniques and tips. of cource I'll mention my source

When you see the minus figure on the DT list it doesn't mean that they were previously positive. The (-2) just means that 2 members of DT1 have put an exclusion in place. That could just be a pre-emptive action to stop someone else adding them. AFAIK there is no historical record of who was on DT.

I have also tagged for extreme shitposting, and trying to scam other companies.  (Selling fake MS software, fake facebook likes, fake youtube views etc).

Well OP you inspired me to update my topic regarding posting Tips, reading this may assist you in the future.

Go to this post of yours and remove the entire quote as it's massively long and unnecessary to your reply.

---

This was one of the first rabbit holes I traveled down when I was bored and began looking into peoples feedback, both trusted and untrusted. I'm fuzzy on it but it had something to do with outing a scammer, but the way they went about it was deemed untrustworthy by DT. Most accounts I think still would have trusted them with money but not the position on DT.

This forum definitely has an interesting nuance, and some hard lines have been drawn roughly down the middle of the DT networks.


Each DT has their own perception of things and it can be confusing at times. In general just don't try "biting off more than you can chew" or do anything shady and you will be fine.

Thanks for sharing expand knowledge. its really helpful for forum members like us.I know as a DT member you have got strict rules and honestly I feel good to see that. We want to create our position here by our hard work & creativity. We just need proper guidense from someone one like you.Thanks again

I got aTriz showing as being on DT2 (I temporarily disabled my custom list)



I'm not sure of who the OP was referring to but I can think of a few.

Escrow.ms
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/escrowms-76380 escrow.ms
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/warning-pankaj-bhardwaj-alias-escrowms-has-been-arrested-dont-escrow-him-1359865 (arrested for fraud)

Tradefortress of CoinLenders and Inputs.io,
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/tradefortress-67058

Siameze (sold account used for dodgy ICO)
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/siameze-121562

Blackarrow
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/blackarrow-105804
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/black-arrow-litecoin-asic-scam-1125552

The problem is that even though these people ended up having issues and scam accusations against them their prior contributions should not be ignored. That is what got them to that stage in the first place.

Businesses do fail - crypto was high risk and still is high risk.

Some of it I covered here:
Bitcointalk trolls, dysfunction and all out flame wars. Guide to the scandals.

Senior members are still people. Fortunately a lot of scammers are discovered before they reach to that level.

Not necessarily.  There are a lot of members on DT who do nothing to actively stop scams.  Take a good look at who's on DT1 & DT2, and you'll see a lot of them aren't even here all that much.  There really aren't that many members tagging scammers, and it's not our job to do that.  I do it because I think it's a good use of the weight of trust that a DT member can leave, and if DT members weren't tagging them we'd have total anarchy on bitcointalk.

Having said that, I got put on DT2 because I was tagging shitposters (I don't do this anymore) and account-selling scammy folks (I still do this).  But I think a lot of DT members are made simply because someone higher in the hierarchy trusts them--and that's completely valid IMO.

I'd be interested to know who you're talking about here.  I don't dispute that this has happened, because in my time on the forum I've seen members kicked off DT for all sorts of shenanigans.  Quickseller, Master-P, and TECSHARE are two that immediately come to mind, but there are more.  aTriz wasn't on DT, but he was probably close to getting on it and he was a good campaign manager who ruined his reputation by not calling out a scam soon enough.  I'm curious as to who you are referring to, however.

I have too.  Mdayonliner is one member who comes to mind, although his negative trust was recently acquired because he offered to escrow a huge sum of money.  It isn't obvious that he was trying to scam, but I certainly see how it could be suspicious.  Can't bring myself to merit people like QS, though.  Even though his posts are very well written and can be helpful, it drives me bonkers to read them because I know they're rooted in total hypocrisy.  Also I have a custom trust list and I'm sure I've merited some folks whose trust would be negative on a lot of other member's trust display.

Huh.  Well, that just shows you how unfortunate that situation was.  He obviously could be trusted with money, since he held the funds for his sig campaigns, and he always paid on time.  It's too bad, but I hope he continues paying people back--not sure where he stands on that right now, but it did look like he was trying to recently.

And yeah...escrow.ms.  I was trying to think of that name and couldn't recall it.  That just goes to show you how fragile DT membership is.  You screw up and you're gone.  TECSHARE didn't even scam anyone.  He was booted off DT for misusing the trust system if I recall correctly.  I think he's a total asshole, but I'd still do business with him because by all accounts he's a trustworthy businessman.  Not going to happen, because he has the same opinion of me, but I'm just sayin'.

Not really. For a start a lot of legendary accounts already have 1000 merit automatically from the merit that was provided to them automatically when the merit system was introduced.  Merit is for post quality and not for trust.

I have merited some users with negative trust because their post was good - sometimes their post was brilliant and very useful.

Trust is based on opinion - so the person placing it feels there is a reason to warn others.

I use a modified trust list to include people I know and trust and exclude people I don't trust.

Negative trust does not necessarily mean that the person is a "written off" in all aspects. This is why it is really important to place a reference link and clear explanation why the rating has been given. (Same applies for positive trust)

Anyone can provide trust or negative trust and people on the DT list is not directly controlled by the forum. They are "independent agents".

Some scams are clearly defined while others are more subjective. For instance - if a business fails due to no illegal activity of the member. Is it a scam because people lost funds - or is it not a scam because no illegal activity was involved ?

Things that can get people negative trust from a DT are:
Attempted or successful fraud or theft.
Business activity that resulted in the loss of funds by others.
Account sales
Merit sales / swapping
Harassing a DT
Offering escrow without a track record
Asking for a no collateral loan
Shilling / advertising MLM or ponzi
Escrowing for themselves
Late loan repayments / loan defaults.
Any other untrustworthy or illegal behavior.

Saying "I don't trust you" is subjective. It doesn't mean there has been a judicial process that has found the person to be guilty of a crime.

Sometimes minor dishonesty is a sign of more less obvious stuff. Like Al Capone who was convicted on tax evasion.

Also just because a person has done something in the past (history is something that we rely on to identify patterns of behavior) it doesn't mean that they will repeat their mistake or haven't reformed.  

Some historical scams and failures have also been very good learning processes for the Crypto community.
Some of it resulted in Terms like:
"To get Goxed" Definition: To suffer from mt. gox’s technical glitches; to get screwed over by mt. gox; to lose all your money in a speculative investment .
"To take a Big Vern holiday" Definition: To disappear like Paul Vernon - the owner and CEO of the now defunct Cryptsy who "vanished" like the exchange funds. (Also referred to as an "exit scam".
"To receive a (Butterfly Labs) BFL upgrade" Definition: To receive something substandard much later than promised.
"To buy a Yesminer" Definition: To pay for something and never receive it.

There was a thread about why scams are not moderated and it has good reasons:

OP, Avoid multiple posts in a row.

---

In this environment "Red Trust" is enough. Scams are not moderated here so this is an indication that individuals need to look into things a little more before proceeding in any deals.


I'm pretty lost in what your point is here. Are you are referring to trusted members having red trust??  That can happen as retaliatory feedback; DT members can also receive negative from other DT members. Anyone can leave feedback and you can see it by looking beyond just the trusted feedback.


No they are here as a tool to provide some insight into the activities good or bad, based on their perception.

Obviously DT members are here to stop prohibited activity and what they do is only for the improvement of forum fame.

If someone dealing with the people who got negative trust for scam then they are responsible for what they were doing,the forum or DT member can't do anything for such a nonsense activity.

yeah i am agree with your opinion. if something happens like that tag anyone because DT think he is going to lead to fraudulent . without enough proof or investigation its not fair to give anyone RED TRUST

The thing is trust is not moderated. Maybe if it will be in the future, we can talk about some "standards/guidelines" for it.

I have seen a lot of people getting red trust just as a precaution or for intent and not for the actual "bad deed". This is somewhat unfair and should be reconsidered.

Not to mention that there is a lot of red trust sent out regarding merit transactions that is irelevant for the purpose the trust system was created. Theymos himself said that you are welcome to top up anyone whom you think should rank up and I'm not sure why people care about merit that much to send red trust for it.

As OP said, I agree red trust isn't good enough to stop people from doing bad things and we may need to have better punishments for repeat offenders.

If you break forum rules then you should get warned (red tag) it does not matter if you have 1000 merits or you are a legendary member or even admin. Rules are rules. However, a defaulter should have enough rights to explain his reasons. If the reasons are not satisfactory then don't remove the red.

If someone do an on forum bad act (breaking rules) which is confirmed, then tag them but it's too much when you tag someone because you think this could lead to that. The experience you have had and the experience others have are not same besides just because you are a DT does not mean that you are a mind reader.

A confirmed rule breaker should defiantly get red tag, does not matter if he has 1000 merits and even a Legend. And in it I do not see any spoiling on the forum fame.

Before giving RED TRUST to anyone i think DT members obviously investigate properly.but my question is isn't it alarming when we see someone have 1000 merits but got red trust. This kind of profile spoils our forum fame.

As long as you have trust on the DTs judgement, I think red trust should work. Question is/are...

Do we really blindly trust the DTs red trusts?
Have they positioned themselves much higher that no one will questions their red trust? Not from the fear but from the basic moral.
Do they take enough time before leaving a red trust? A wrong red trust left by them can harm the user in many ways.
Do they give the other person enough time to explain? People have reasons for the acts they do. They have the rights to explain.
If they make mistake on leaving a red trust do they consider a review standing from a neutral point and compromise their ego?


There could be so many parameters to judge the DTs red trust and if you are satisfied and confident with the red trusts they leave then only a red trust should work.

Dear respectable members,
As an forum member i wanna put an question to Everyone.
My question is:

When any Person of this forum get connected with any fraudulent work or supporting any kinda work which is really harmful for rest of us and investor.Is it the only punishment to give him red trust. we have seen from past record many well reputed members of this forum support fraud ICO, scam Shit Exchange, Fraud projects which are nothing but scam. But as a result we also observe that our DT members are taking action by giving RED TRUST to them. after spending some time they get back to their work again. yeah i know someone can rise a question that if anyone see red trust and although he or she make payment or deal with him whats the responsibility of us then, but as a bitcointalk forum member its our duty to ensure a safe environment here for our upcoming generation. Just only giving RED TRUST is not enough. we need to take much harder action. if we look 1 years back in this forum members profile you can see many trusted members already got RED TRUST . If someone experienced and well reputed members like them engaged in this kinda scam or fraudulent activities what we will learn from them.

My request to all respective DT members to think again on this rising issue and update the rules by which bitcointalk forum will regain its fame