Pages:
Author

Topic: Replacing DefaultTrust - page 3. (Read 16259 times)

global moderator
Activity: 3990
Merit: 2713
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
January 24, 2015, 04:07:21 AM
Personally I think it is simply too easy to jump into the marketplace; buy a Hero or Senior Account, perhaps even with no Trust Posts, do a small number of micro transactions to gain some posts, and then run any number of scams to steal peoples money or information.

I know theymos has more than enough on his plate right now, especially with the recent outage and disk issues- but personally I think instituting a simple ban on buying and selling accounts would provide greater security and be of greater benefit to the community than completely revising and restructuring the entire Trust System. The later also being, from what I would imagine, a whole lot of work.

Strato

It wouldn't. Banning the sale of accounts won't stop it from happening; it'll just be pushed off site and give users a false sense of security that it now doesn't happen. Besides, most people don't buy accounts to scam but when they do they're usually busted by the community before they even get the chance to so you've got more chance of wasting your money than actually scamming it from someone else.
legendary
Activity: 1022
Merit: 1010
January 24, 2015, 03:17:34 AM
Personally I see no problems with the current trust system. It allows people to set their own depth of how many levels they wish to see at default, and it is simple enough for a user to view all feedback posted prior to doing business with any particular user.

This may have been said; but the bigger issue at hand that I see is that the forum openly allows users to buy and sell accounts.

Many online services, and nearly all of the big tech/social media sites strictly prohibit this-- and for good reason.

Personally I think it is simply too easy to jump into the marketplace; buy a Hero or Senior Account, perhaps even with no Trust Posts, do a small number of micro transactions to gain some posts, and then run any number of scams to steal peoples money or information.

I know theymos has more than enough on his plate right now, especially with the recent outage and disk issues- but personally I think instituting a simple ban on buying and selling accounts would provide greater security and be of greater benefit to the community than completely revising and restructuring the entire Trust System. The later also being, from what I would imagine, a whole lot of work.

Strato
legendary
Activity: 3472
Merit: 4801
January 12, 2015, 10:23:32 AM
Also, some people who I consider very trustworthy . . . didn't make the list simply because they don't spam up every thread with their unsolicited opinion like I do Tongue

I'm guessing someone already said this and I'm going to look like a silly newb for not reading the entire thread before commenting on it.  However, I'm pressed for time at the moment, so I'm going to risk it in case it hasn't been mentioned yet:

The important thing that MANY people seem not to realize is that the "Trust List" should NOT be a list of trusted individuals.  If your trust list is a list of individuals that you trust, then you are DOING IT WRONG.

Your "Trust List" SHOULD BE a list of individuals whose OPINIONS YOU VALUE.  By adding someone to your "Trust List" you are effectively saying: "If this person has expressed an opinion about another individual, I value that opinion far more than I value the opinions of the rest of the users on bitcointalk.

You can value the opinions that someone expresses about others even if you wouldn't trust them to hold on to a single satoshi for you.  You can also trust someone to hold on to 10,000 BTC, and still not value the things they have to say about other users.
Vod
legendary
Activity: 3668
Merit: 3010
Licking my boob since 1970
January 11, 2015, 08:59:50 PM
demands for 100 BTC for the proof.

That 100 BTC would go to the people you stole from.  I don't need your coins.   Wink
vip
Activity: 1316
Merit: 1043
👻
January 11, 2015, 07:17:47 PM
You are still unable to provide an example to support your baseless accusation.

Caught you in a lie yet again.  Been proven many times already.   Wink

This is absolutely incorrect. Vod has NEVER been able to 'prove' a 'lie' that TECSHARE has told. It has been in fact established that Vod's accusations is entirely baseless, and all he can do is resort to diverting the topic, claiming supposed proves when such has never existed, ad hominem attacks, and demands for 100 BTC for the proof.

Please read through this thread and you will see that Vod's accusations are entirely baseless, and no proof has ever been proved: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=915823.0;all
legendary
Activity: 2492
Merit: 1473
LEALANA Bitcoin Grim Reaper
January 11, 2015, 05:38:51 PM
What is the TL;DR?

Not sure I want to sift through the thread just to find out it isn't productive...

Tl;dr theymos proposed a new trust system and the votes for/against it were pretty much evenly split, and it's no longer productive because most of it is bickering by Techshare who managed to derail this thread like he does every other to whine about his removal from the trust list.

Thanks for this now I will not waste further time reading here.
legendary
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1001
January 11, 2015, 05:35:12 PM
nope. You can buy trust now in the alt section  Cheesy

I would spend 5 BTC to get higher trust than the admins.

Where is there proof of this? Doesn't seem like it would be effective.
hero member
Activity: 501
Merit: 503
January 11, 2015, 05:32:43 PM
nope. You can buy trust now in the alt section  Cheesy

I would spend 5 BTC to get higher trust than the admins.
legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
January 11, 2015, 09:28:01 AM
What is the TL;DR?

Not sure I want to sift through the thread just to find out it isn't productive...

Tl;dr theymos proposed a new trust system and the votes for/against it were pretty much evenly split, and it's no longer productive because most of it is bickering by Techshare who managed to derail this thread like he does every other to whine about his removal from the trust list.
Yeah, right. Because my words are so powerful I can snap my fingers and the whole community rallies behind me. As staff, you would never see the malcontent that is created by this system, because everyone here is afraid to speak up under threat of harassment of people like VOD, or from the staff for being critical of them. This was popular sentiment BEFORE I spoke up, all I did was harness it. I am just one of the few who refuse to be intimidated by the same people responsible for the trust abuse to begin with. So please... check yourself first. Additionally as far as bickering goes - it takes two. Maybe you should muzzle your rabid dog, because I left and he is still talking about me.
global moderator
Activity: 3990
Merit: 2713
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
January 11, 2015, 02:43:20 AM
What is the TL;DR?

Not sure I want to sift through the thread just to find out it isn't productive...

Tl;dr theymos proposed a new trust system and the votes for/against it were pretty much evenly split, and it's no longer productive because most of it is bickering by Techshare who managed to derail this thread like he does every other to whine about his removal from the trust list.
legendary
Activity: 2492
Merit: 1473
LEALANA Bitcoin Grim Reaper
January 11, 2015, 02:36:34 AM
The vote is split fairly evenly, so this isn't very helpful. But I've decided to table this particular proposal for now.

It is split very evenly. Even the users who voted for each seem so. Interesting that BadBear didn't vote (unless he did on an alt account). I think the current system is the best solution but should be tweaked or kept a closer eye on the people who are on there and maybe limiting the number of users that each person can put on.

I didn't vote because while I'm not sure default trust is the best solution, I've decided I don't think this is either, so I decided to stay out of it. It's easy to say everyone should make their own trust lists, and they should, but fact is newbies won't know who to trust.

I guess it's time to stop reading this thread, it's no longer productive.

What is the TL;DR?

Not sure I want to sift through the thread just to find out it isn't productive...
Vod
legendary
Activity: 3668
Merit: 3010
Licking my boob since 1970
January 11, 2015, 02:22:22 AM
Vod, are you going to slap TECSHARE with negative for hijacking this thread? /sarc

Sir, your point was made with or without the "/sarc".

I am no longer leaving negative feedback based on personal gut feelings alone.
sr. member
Activity: 322
Merit: 250
https://dadice.com | Click my signature to join!
January 11, 2015, 01:59:36 AM
Because people don't know how to take their arguments off of a thread like this and to a different Meta thread.

It is split quite evenly, yes. Unfortunately it's going to take a while to think of a solution that will satisfy most people.

Well I would think a good starting point would be to get rid of selling accounts. Wouldn't that put reasonable doubt into the trust equation?

How would this help and how is it enforcable? Even if account sales were banned people would just sell them offsite and it will give others a false sense of security.

Problem is, how do you moderate account selling?

Ban when IP changes? Nope. No way in hell, people have IP changes all the time.

And in reality, that's really the only way. There's no easy way to track accounts changing hands, unless you're the NSA.

It's not and would be incredibly difficult and a waste of time to police, hence why it is currently allowed.

Problem is, how do you moderate account selling?

Ban when IP changes? Nope. No way in hell, people have IP changes all the time.

And in reality, that's really the only way. There's no easy way to track accounts changing hands, unless you're the NSA.

Well, IMHO, I suppose that if everybody starts to put accounts sellers & traders as exclusions on their own trust lists maybe this could try to discourage such activities.

Just food for thought

You're free to do that but unless they've demonstrated untrustworthy behaviour I don't think they should be treated this way as account selling isn't against the rules. In fact, BadBear recently added Quickseller to his trust list.

Personally, I'm not against account selling if people involved behave responsably and i can live with it till such practice is allowed by forum rules. However, i'm not sure if i could trust a user who engagé in such trades specially if such people engage in trading hacked account or used to sell it to scammers, etc. I don't judge Others if they may trust such people since they may know them better.
I just put forward my tought.

You're free to do that but unless they've demonstrated untrustworthy behaviour I don't think they should be treated this way as account selling isn't against the rules. In fact, BadBear recently added Quickseller to his trust list.
To be fair, I think he deserved it. Quickseller has been looking out for hacked accounts, scams and has been leaving good feedback at all times.

In effect such a type of situation may worry me a lot since i cannot say if if i could trust a user engaged in trading hacked accounts or selling accounts to scammers. Just as i may not trust someone who give out too many good feedbacks (but maybe He's only a lucky trader who meet only honest people). However, I was not to single out him...i was just thinking about the situation since infact is all a matter of trust.
Because people don't know how to take their arguments off of a thread like this and to a different Meta thread.

It is split quite evenly, yes. Unfortunately it's going to take a while to think of a solution that will satisfy most people.

Well I would think a good starting point would be to get rid of selling accounts. Wouldn't that put reasonable doubt into the trust equation?

How would this help and how is it enforcable? Even if account sales were banned people would just sell them offsite and it will give others a false sense of security.

Problem is, how do you moderate account selling?

Ban when IP changes? Nope. No way in hell, people have IP changes all the time.

And in reality, that's really the only way. There's no easy way to track accounts changing hands, unless you're the NSA.

It's not and would be incredibly difficult and a waste of time to police, hence why it is currently allowed.

Problem is, how do you moderate account selling?

Ban when IP changes? Nope. No way in hell, people have IP changes all the time.

And in reality, that's really the only way. There's no easy way to track accounts changing hands, unless you're the NSA.

Well, IMHO, I suppose that if everybody starts to put accounts sellers & traders as exclusions on their own trust lists maybe this could try to discourage such activities.

Just food for thought

You're free to do that but unless they've demonstrated untrustworthy behaviour I don't think they should be treated this way as account selling isn't against the rules. In fact, BadBear recently added Quickseller to his trust list.

Personally, I'm not against account selling if people involved behave responsably and i can live with it till such practice is allowed by forum rules. However, i'm not sure if i could trust a user who engagé in such trades specially if such people engage in trading hacked account or used to sell it to scammers, etc. I don't judge Others if they may trust such people since they may know them better.
I just put forward my tought.

You're free to do that but unless they've demonstrated untrustworthy behaviour I don't think they should be treated this way as account selling isn't against the rules. In fact, BadBear recently added Quickseller to his trust list.
To be fair, I think he deserved it. Quickseller has been looking out for hacked accounts, scams and has been leaving good feedback at all times.

In effect such a type of situation may worry me a lot since i cannot say if if i could trust a user engaged in trading hacked accounts or selling accounts to scammers. Just as i may not trust someone who give out too many good feedbacks (but maybe He's only a lucky trader who meet only honest people). However, I was not to single out him...i was just thinking about the situation since infact is all a matter of trust.

You're free to do that but unless they've demonstrated untrustworthy behaviour I don't think they should be treated this way as account selling isn't against the rules. In fact, BadBear recently added Quickseller to his trust list.
To be fair, I think he deserved it. Quickseller has been looking out for hacked accounts, scams and has been leaving good feedback at all times.

I don't dispute that. He seems to know the rules better than most as well.

As I said before myself, I have noting against the rules or Quickseller in particular, but i think everyone should reflect on how much you can trust people engaged in account trading in particular if they are trading hacked accounts or selling established account to scammers or leaving too many good feedbacks. IMHO, I'm not so confident to be able to trust enough the judgement of such a kind of users.
global moderator
Activity: 3990
Merit: 2713
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
January 11, 2015, 01:30:10 AM
You're free to do that but unless they've demonstrated untrustworthy behaviour I don't think they should be treated this way as account selling isn't against the rules. In fact, BadBear recently added Quickseller to his trust list.
To be fair, I think he deserved it. Quickseller has been looking out for hacked accounts, scams and has been leaving good feedback at all times.

I don't dispute that. He seems to know the rules better than most as well.
donator
Activity: 2352
Merit: 1060
between a rock and a block!
January 11, 2015, 01:24:09 AM
Vod, are you going to slap tecshare with negative for hijacking this thread? /sarc
copper member
Activity: 3948
Merit: 2201
Verified awesomeness ✔
January 10, 2015, 09:17:33 AM
You're free to do that but unless they've demonstrated untrustworthy behaviour I don't think they should be treated this way as account selling isn't against the rules. In fact, BadBear recently added Quickseller to his trust list.
To be fair, I think he deserved it. Quickseller has been looking out for hacked accounts, scams and has been leaving good feedback at all times.
global moderator
Activity: 3990
Merit: 2713
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
January 10, 2015, 07:44:09 AM
Because people don't know how to take their arguments off of a thread like this and to a different Meta thread.

It is split quite evenly, yes. Unfortunately it's going to take a while to think of a solution that will satisfy most people.

Well I would think a good starting point would be to get rid of selling accounts. Wouldn't that put reasonable doubt into the trust equation?

How would this help and how is it enforcable? Even if account sales were banned people would just sell them offsite and it will give others a false sense of security.

Problem is, how do you moderate account selling?

Ban when IP changes? Nope. No way in hell, people have IP changes all the time.

And in reality, that's really the only way. There's no easy way to track accounts changing hands, unless you're the NSA.

It's not and would be incredibly difficult and a waste of time to police, hence why it is currently allowed.

Problem is, how do you moderate account selling?

Ban when IP changes? Nope. No way in hell, people have IP changes all the time.

And in reality, that's really the only way. There's no easy way to track accounts changing hands, unless you're the NSA.

Well, IMHO, I suppose that if everybody starts to put accounts sellers & traders as exclusions on their own trust lists maybe this could try to discourage such activities.

Just food for thought

You're free to do that but unless they've demonstrated untrustworthy behaviour I don't think they should be treated this way as account selling isn't against the rules. In fact, BadBear recently added Quickseller to his trust list.
sr. member
Activity: 322
Merit: 250
https://dadice.com | Click my signature to join!
January 10, 2015, 07:43:46 AM
Problem is, how do you moderate account selling?

Ban when IP changes? Nope. No way in hell, people have IP changes all the time.

And in reality, that's really the only way. There's no easy way to track accounts changing hands, unless you're the NSA.

Well, IMHO, I suppose that if everybody starts to put accounts sellers & traders as exclusions on their own trust lists maybe this could try to discourage such activities.

Just food for thought
legendary
Activity: 1134
Merit: 1118
January 10, 2015, 07:39:13 AM
Problem is, how do you moderate account selling?

Ban when IP changes? Nope. No way in hell, people have IP changes all the time.

And in reality, that's really the only way. There's no easy way to track accounts changing hands, unless you're the NSA.
legendary
Activity: 1582
Merit: 1019
011110000110110101110010
January 10, 2015, 07:35:45 AM
Because people don't know how to take their arguments off of a thread like this and to a different Meta thread.

It is split quite evenly, yes. Unfortunately it's going to take a while to think of a solution that will satisfy most people.

Well I would think a good starting point would be to get rid of selling accounts. Wouldn't that put reasonable doubt into the trust equation?
Pages:
Jump to: