The latest change in the trust system has a flaw making it abusable - page 4.

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1004

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

Quote from: Vod on September 08, 2015, 10:43:29 PM

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on September 08, 2015, 10:36:05 PM

should I repost mine since Wardricks really came first?

Yes, if you want. Your feedback came after his, and nullified his feedback. I saw it.

Then you deleted your feedback. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1171059.msg12357041#msg12357041

You can re-add it without anyone questioning ethics.

Just to be clear, I added mine AFTER Wardricks, then removed it, because Quickseller
persuaded me to. After further reviewing including communicating with tspacepilot
by PM and hearing his explanation, I readded it. Both of my feedbacks came after
Wardrick.

At that point, Warddrick deleted and re-added.

alani123

legendary

Activity: 2394

Merit: 1412

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

I think that the current system should be changed to prevent such battles. IMO the latest comment canceling out previous ones is stupid on it's own. I won't go into explaining why I believe that but it's just made worse by the fact that there are no condtitions. As we saw, two people could keep deleting and reposting their comments to cancel out each other up to infinity.

Vod

legendary

Activity: 3668

Merit: 3010

Licking my boob since 1970

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on September 08, 2015, 10:36:05 PM

should I repost mine since Wardricks really came first?

Yes, if you want. Your feedback came after his, and nullified his feedback. I saw it.

Then you deleted your feedback. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.12357041

You can re-add it without anyone questioning ethics.

Quickseller

copper member

Activity: 2870

Merit: 2298

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on September 08, 2015, 10:36:05 PM

should I repost mine since Wardricks really came first?

You do realize that tspacepilot pretty clearly indicated that he had no interest in repaying any amount of money that he received that he should not have right? His responses were nowhere along the lines of "the amounts you are telling me to repay are too high, I want to figure out how much I actually owe you and will pay you back". His response was much closer to "it does not matter if I scammed, no transaction took place in the currency exchange section of bitcointalk.org therefore the trust rating was unjust, and BTW I dispute the amount".

Vod

legendary

Activity: 3668

Merit: 3010

Licking my boob since 1970

If you delete and re-post feedback to trick the feedback system, that is unethical behavior as you are probably on the default trust list.

tarsua

sr. member

Activity: 266

Merit: 250

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on September 08, 2015, 10:36:05 PM

should I repost mine since Wardricks really came first?

yes, yours did come after his, the record should show that

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1004

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

should I repost mine since Wardricks really came first?

alani123

legendary

Activity: 2394

Merit: 1412

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Recently theymos changed the trust system so that when someone receives positive ratings they can be canceled out by a single negative one. But this single rating can be canceled by a more recent positive rating.

But it gets confusing. The example of tspacepilot shopwcases that.

I'll put events in a timeline.

1. tspacepilot has a neutral rating of 0: -0 / +3
2. Wardrick leaves negative making it ? ??: -1 / +3
3. jonald_fyookball cancels Wardrick making it 0: -1 / +4
4. Wardrick deletes and reposts his rating making it ? ??: -1 / +4

I guess theymos didn't have this in mind when he was making that change.

Topic: The latest change in the trust system has a flaw making it abusable - page 4. (Read 3945 times)