Topic: The whole reputation system is pure garbage (Read 822 times)

Something isn't right here, OP isn't happy about something that I must ask. With the above mentioned names I feel the OP is pissed about them for maybe giving his account the red tag, I think you have said what they did but have you told us what you did before receiving the red tag? Well you alone know why those users you mentioned was attacking your account like are you the only one in this forum as of then?
Knowing what you did is really important and you have to lay a complain, but did you?

When you wrote rinse and repeat, what immediately came to my mind regarding the Reputation board were the number of members making new threads about receiving a neutral tag and then as a result of it their alt-accounts were uncovered after members dug deeper.

There are similar rinse and repeat cases in Meta where members created threads using new accounts asking for their bans to be overturned. I cannot recall a single ban thread that I read deserved to be overturned. One disastrous move by the moderators was to revoke the ban on naim027 and that led to more problems with conduct around the forum. That might be a case of when rinse and repeat worked.

We cannot have people on the same page and to reasons the same way, but the worst that could happen to someone on the forum is not to be able to control their personal characters together with emotions on this forum, at least we should know how to behave when it comes to dealing with the public in an open platform like this, everyone will appear base on how his true identity is in life while on this forum.


The reputation board is open for everyone to express themselves and not meant for some set of people only, you can bring your personal feelings on what is being observed wrong about someone or something, this is to create fair and free justification for all members while on this forum in other to avoid scam, troll, abuse on personal right and for those involved in illegal activities or trying to abuse the power vested on them, the law of karma will soon visit them and vindicate the oppressed.

There are numerous other threads by the OP and others of the same ilk - they usually fizzle out fairly quickly with both the OP and their intended targets loosing interest until they find a new shiny topic to berate.

Rinse and repeat.

Sad really.

The OP created this thread on 12th June 2023 and was last active on 28th June 2023. If he is not interested in posting here with responses why are members continuing to post here? It seems the thread was created to vent frustration at having negative trust on his Thule account therefore it would be a consideration for a moderator to lock the thread as it really does serve zero purpose.

OP from what you dropped I feel you're angry about something you are not letting us know, I find it hard to believe that high ranked members who are keeping a better reputation in this forum would support something bad in this forum or encourage scammers to go on with their evil act. I mean, is that even happening?
I don't know about you but if you feel the reputation system is deliberately killing good account like you said, why not make a report or give us prove than dropping blank accusations. I really don't know where this is going but OP is better you fight for something than fighting for nothing, if something is not cool with you say it and defend all you saying.

Rest assured I only culled those that are well and truly covered by others as I outlined in previous posts.

These are my latest two to receive trust feedback (negative) from me:

I hope you manage to get over your past relationships one day.

Quote from: Timelord2067 on June 22, 2023, 06:07:51 PM

I challenge you to bring your trust feedback left for others down from it's current 3000+ to something more realistic such as say not more than 500 (preferably less than 400 as I have done) that only include a reference link with explanation because quite frankly your trust feedback fit this description:

Quote

And when talking about DT members....they haven't always acted in good faith

I'd prefer more feedback than less, especially with cycling DT members. You can choose to provide greater weight to your own feedback but that would only be known to those that either frequent your feedback or know your sentiment thereof.

Glass houses:

Have to agree with you on that one, on both counts; cops often make arrests based on flimsy evidence and then expect the situation to resolve itself in the court system--and that's a huge pain in the ass for the defendant.

And when talking about DT members....they haven't always acted in good faith, although some of the worst examples of that are either gone from the forum or are no longer on DT.  That's one big difference between cops and DT members; the latter will lose their position if they make too many bad judgements, whereas police officers rarely get fired unless they mess up in a very serious and very public way (like wrongful shootings and such).

Anyhow, I've already said my piece here.  I just came across Latviand's post while reviewing his history and wanted to reply.

You don't have to engage in using weird words so harsh on them because that doesn't change anything on what has already transpired between you and them that led to the tag they lety on you


This should mean alot to you in understanding that no one is above the law even Satoshi Nakamoto himself if he's active on the forum he has created, some of these guys you mentioned had one or two different issues that brings about their leaving and not all were banned or scammed people.

 
Have you ever try make a move to present your own accusation on them having cognite evidence to back it up, just don't be envious for being tagged by those who have a clear evidence on you and you have nothing to show as against them.
 

And you're part of those scammers they are always hunting after to take as prey and feast their teeth with your sauce meal after being caught.

Ahh, mea culpa. I read the thread months ago and was too focused on the merit requirement from members who trusted you for voting eligibility that I forgot the part about active-time requirement.

It looks as though the OP has had his moment of venting his frustration at the demise of his trust list. He has not logged in again after creating this thread.

If he were to at least post here with a valid debate or argument it would be possible to engage with him but as the feedback cites the OP making death threats amongst other things, is it appropriate for him to even question why he received the negative feedback in the first place?

If you'll look through through the first link you mentioned you'll see that if the one hasn't been on the forum for three days and hasn't posted anything for 30 days he will not be eligible to be selected to DT1 list. So it is impossible to stay in DT1 being inactive.

You can be not selected to DT1 for other reasons as well, including that there are usually more than a 100 of eligible for 100 places. But if you are inactive you'll definitely not be selected.

There was some really weird accusation against me a couple of years ago, completely made up. Dimwits like Thule will latch on to anything. For all I know he made it up himself, although the accuser seemed to be more literate so maybe not.

The funny thing is that I actually revised my rating to a neutral basically saying that Thule is a bullshit artist. Apparently he's also colorblind.

A bit semantic, but if I may give further explanation to clarify the statement to avoid any member's confusion, currently DT1 status is "revoked" not because they're active or long inactive, the current DT1 system is constantly reshufled once every month to maintain fairness and its decentralism.

---

[Ackk... I didn't realize you're here, almost lose a chance to reply you and derail a nice thread by bringing some color into it.]

One may argue she stole his dignity. Hmm?


or perhaps IQ? Hmmm???

Only DT1 status is not being approved in case of long inactivity, DT2 status is based on trust of DT1 members and will not be taken away just because of inactivity. DT2 tags are visible by default as well. I'm in DT2 and not in DT1 at the moment, but my tags are visible anyway. So to wait until the one is out of DT1 and then all from DT1 who trust him are also out of DT1 could take too much time. It's better to try to solve a problem with DT member when he's still active on a forum and not to wait the problem will resolve itself.

Not really good to make this happen even if this was been suggested to anyone especially with heavy cased where the person create huge scams. For minor cases maybe its good to look at it but much better to leave those things exist since sometimes other users will look at it as their indicator to do better job so that they avoid to get the same negative feedback to other user. Maybe best for other active user which have negative feedback is to wait. Since provably the DT status of that user might be taken out due to inactivity.

friends, what contributions have you made to the forum so that you say that they are frauds while you are an honest person?

if in real life we had a court that punished bad people then the reputation system in this forum is a brilliant idea, it locks you to perform actions that are strictly prohibited in the forum so you no longer earn anything.

I haven't said anywhere that feedback left by inactive members should be removed. I just said that in some cases such outdated feedbacks  might be bigger or smaller issue.
I agree with your point about defaulted loans which were paid later that at least neutral feedback should remain for future reference.

What baffles me the most from this ridiculous topic is this part:


I highly doubt that either suchmoon or Foxpup ever stole anything from you.

Really? All the police have an evidence first before arresting someone? Wow, so the cases of planted evidence isn't real? That analogy isn't really helpful if you're defending or on the side of the DT members because it implies that they can give someone red trust with impunity.
You literally have the word "removed" in the reply that I've quoted, what do you mean you're not talking about removing feedbacks from inactive members. Loan defaulting is another case though, I think that there's should never be a removal even if they've paid their defaulted loan, maybe just changing it to neutral to indicate that this person has defaulted a loan but have paid it eventually. Even if it's not removed, pretty sure other DT members can step in to leave a neutral trust so as to help them clarify the information about why there's still a red trust.

No, I disagree with you on this very statement of yours about the "Trust system" being a complete garbage, because I strongly don't think any forum member will give a user negative trust if he/she hasn't gone against the rules of this forum, which in your case, I just saw that your first negative trust was as a result of you trying a buy a "Hero" member account 5yrs ago i.e 2017, which you ought to have known with your 3yrs experience that it was against the rules and could likely result to your ban. Because the "Trust system" has done more good than harm, as it helps us easily identify alleged forum scammers and the trusted reputable forum members.


Link: https://archive.is/QvnqD

Negative trust given by both actmyname and The Sceptical Chymist

I completely agree with. Before dealing with someoene it would be best to check all feedbacks, maybe also pay some attention to feedbacks left by non DT members, especially if it have reference. One negative maybe won't ruin your reputation, but still, it doesn't looks good. IIRC, there was several cases when theymos removed no longer valid feeback which was left by member who passed away.

Some another DT member can leave a review with explanation of a new condition. Negative tags not a number only. When someone wants to learn about someone else he reads all feedback and then can make conclusions basing on that. We know several stories when forum users have some negative tags but it doesn't really matter, they don't have big problems with that because it's or irrelevant from the start or become irrelevant.

Each case should be considered by itself. If there is some really big problem, I think we can ask admin for help. But in mostly all cases there's no need in that.

I'm not talking about removing feedbacks left by inactive members, most of it remain to be legit and valid. But there is some cases feedbacks become wrong. Let's say user receive negative trust for not returning loan. And after some time user who left him feedback dies or simply become inactive. User repays loan, but he still can't get rid of red trust. Offcourse, it would be wrong to remove all feedbacks left by inactive member or remove him from DT because all other his feebacks remains legit. For now such issue doesn't happens often, but eventually it will become more frequent.
Sometimes DT members leave negative feedbacks when they have personal war against certain member or giving relatiory feedback, but that's not one of these cases. It's not that OP didn't deserved all feedbacks he got.

Logically, when the police arrest someone, they must be accompanied by strong evidence, not based on wanting to show that authority is in their hands or the rank that is on their shoulders. DT members don't have any arrogance or personal grudges when sticking someone's butt with red paint, they work according to the rules that apply in the forum.

Op thinks like that because he feels he is standing in the right position, according to his point of view he has never felt he has ever made a mistake so he assumes that DT members have abused trust by damaging his reputation. I am one who believes in the workings of DT members who are still in a neutral position, they will not touch anyone if they have never made a mistake that has crossed the line in the forum.

Removal of the negative feedbacks from inactive members will defeat the purpose of that system, the feedbacks serves as a warning and caution for other people that might engage the person that has the feedback in the future so the system works just fine. Of course OP would say that it's unfair because he got almost all of the DT members on his bad side not to mention that the feedback is mentioning extortion which I think is a pretty serious offense, I mean isn't that a crime irl? His case isn't definitely one of those unfair ones, DT members in my experience in the forum aren't vindictive and logical when it comes to giving someone the ever infamous red trust.

Well, I'm still here with no big scam accusations, except for the misunderstanding about the free gay pornography which I still maintain is not a scam.

My anilingual orgies are no business of yours. They're not even included in the pornography package (perhaps that's the source of the misunderstanding).

I am sure he is suggesting Yogg.
VOD's reputation is because of OG and VOD can not stand along with each others.
Lauda, we all know how s/he was.
suchmoon, revised the tag to neutral, I think that's not his concern anymore.
Foxup Foxpup is having fun since then with his merit recycling troll club. I think it was for cryptohunter only.

He hasn't specify anyone else, I will not analyze them 🤣

Your account didn't get destroyed, you whining whelp.  You were able to log in and bitch about a problem that you didn't and probably never could have solved while you were active in 2020.  And if you still think it's destroyed, stop trying to use it and just go away.

Big scam accusations, eh?  That's disingenuous, because as you probably know quite well, most DT members of the old era had pages of negative trust and the vast majority of it is retaliatory.  Example: click on my trust page and have a good looky-look.

I forgot you even existed.  Then I looked at your trust and saw that I tagged you in 2018.  Is that showing up red for you?  By the way, what's all this ass licking you're referring to?  Please, enlighten all the members who haven't been here while you were off in space masturbating.

So summarizing, as I see it, we don't really have any big disagreement in this case. I agree that a situation when several DT members are wrong in the same case is something unusual, I just say that it is possible. And as for this case if there will be no strong arguments from OP I suppose there's no reason for own research. Red tags for account or merit trading is what I support. So even if other tags could be revoked some way it has no real sense to waste my time on that.

The system is far from perfect but we have choice to make it better. Give people reasons to hear you. Ignore people who always find you are a problem. You are always open to be friendly to others. If you have no one here to trust you, to hear you then try to make friends. If you can not make friends then this is not a place for you.

After all these years you still have the anger in you.

So, can you suggest alternatives to current trust system? Ok, even if red trust from inactive members would be removed, your account still would be full of negative feedbacks. You want to say that all these feedbacks aren't valid? OK, I'm not going deep into it and argue about it.
I only can see problem in some cases with feedbacks from inactive DT members, but I don't think that your case is one of these.

That means I have lied to myself severally on this issue. In as much as I will not totally disagree with you on this, I strongly believe that it will only be in a rare situation that upto or more than 5 DT members will be wrong on a particular issue.

Whenever I see an account painted with alot of red tags, I do not bother going through all case by case. What I simply do is check the uniformity of the tag. If 8 out of 10 negative tags are pointing to one offence, I'll simply assume it's true. I only investigate more when there are significant inconsistent or contradiction among the DTs that left the tag.


You have a strong argument here and I tend to agree with you. Although, DT is more lenient these days than before. But one thing is that, once an account is not trusted by majority and there appears to be a slight reason to tag the account, no one will have the guts or courage to defend the account.
So, most times, the consequences of previous tags is more tags with less solid reasons.

1. If we saw that there are good arguments for that that feedback is all wrong we can do many things. In another topic some users decided that one from DT was wrong and distrusted him so his voice become less important. It is a hard decision so there could be other possible decision: if it was obvious we could write a good explanation why some DT members were not right and why their tags should not be taken into account and then leave neutral or positive reviews with links on that. And these are just two options we can do ourselves, not asking admin for help. So we are not so powerless and helpless.

2. There were not all DT members who left the tags for him. Just several. And even a group of DT members of course can be wrong. And while I was looking through the reviews with blaming him in DT manipulation I thought it could be something like that, because DT manipulation should lead to distrusting not to negative tags. But then I saw some tags left for accounts trading and it is not something wrong to tag for it. So I decided not to waste time on research if later tags were right or wrong as it was long ago and matters not much in this case.

If OP wanted to get some help from community it is he who should give arguments case by case. It is not what others have to do for him. And I see just his emotional harangue but no arguments to think about.

Op, I would have had much to say, but I went to your Trust profile to read the feedbacks and I wanted to follow them case by case but then I realised it will be a total waste of time because;
1. I cannot undo the feedbacks
2. All the DT members cannot be wrong at the same time.
You had at a time attempted to manipulate the trust system openly and the system fought against you.

But since you noticed that majority of the people that left you the tags which you considered unjust have left the forum, you would have allowed the account to go with them than coming to put up a reputation garbage drama.
Meanwhile, I'll  greatly align with JollyGood here. If you have a better and maybe flawless approach to the trust system, kindly suggest same to theymos. He'll be glad.

Umm... excuse me, I didn't mean to ruin the mood, but... wouldn't your statement, that the current reputation system --and by it, you actually tried to say DT system-- is garbage a tad bit contradictory? Given you utilized the very same system to try to remove one particular negative feedback from sticking to your profile?

It's useless for you to make this thread by mentioning several names of forum members who have been inactive for a long time, it will not make your account clean of red ink. 9 Red trust urged me to immediately see your Trust summary, there one member of DT @Vod gave an ultimatum in your Trust summary comments. There his attitude is very clear, he will not revoke Red trust for any reason. It's hard clean up your account's reputation if you refer to references used by DT members, especially since some of them have long since left the forum.
Give us one reason to support your accusation by calling This reputation system is pure garbage, your anger is so groundless, DT members will not act rashly when throwing chili peppers into someone's ass.

Did you send any PM to theymos explaining you had better alternatives to the current DT system? I presume you do have better ideas therefore you should have written to him and what did he say as a reply especially since you mention the reputation system is pure garbage which is supporting scammers.

Would you elaborate on what exactly could or should be done that would improve this forum in a multitude of ways including making it safer for newbies to not be scammed and for spammers and scammers to be easily and swiftly dealt with.

And, after reading your trust history I wondered if you would you also take the opportunity to explain why you used this forum to make threats of violence against other forum members.

I wasn't on there, so I don't really know what's the real situation and I won't read every post on the reference where they give you negative feedback. But as far as I can see, you're conducting in account sale, so it's a valid negative feedback.

You need to learn to use reference when you're leaving a feedback to someone's account, it's hard to believe what's you're saying when you're not attach a reference.

So my account basicly got destroyed by old DT members like Lauda,Yogg,TMAN,VOD etc and many asslickers who wanted to benefit by licking their asses.


So after 3 years later majority of them are gone with big scam accusations.
Its sad to see that my account is filled with red trsust from these scammers and their ass lickers like foxup,suchmoon (which i also consider a big scammer who stole mining equipment) and many others
and people who are the biggest scammers had and still have control over bitcointalk .

This repuation system is pure garbage killing honest accounts and supporting scammers gaining trust to scam other people.