Topic: TRUST ABUSE BY NEW DT MEMBERS.. Theymos should review the trust system. (Read 1207 times)

It does seem a bit arbitrary that the post referenced in your negative rating shows multiple other users bidding who did not receive negative trust for the same auction. In my opinion all the bids look equally as (un)trustworthy, although I suppose giving negative trust to staff is a no no 

Thread for reference: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.15020839

Some sections of the forum have the showing of trust disabled so you can't see the ratings. It's not just this thread it's entire sub-forums.

Sorry, just a technical question: why in this thread the red trust doesn't appear? Just curious.

There is no point in this discussion: I was redflagged because I was in the wrong thread; I tried to argue with Lauda, and he made me "an idiot", he said I've "a backwards morals" and he gave me more penality flags. Oh, well...

I suspect that in a face to face meeting he would have a very different attitude, but this is not the point.

I only want to say that my argument was - and still is - this one: if you make undiscriminated redflagging, just by your arbitrary opinion, without a clear criterion, anyone will feel insecure, and will start to open more an more accounts just to go on with campaigns, with an explosion of shitposts.
I didn't say that I "find it acceptable to avoid ratings with alt accounts", I just said that this is what will happen, and there is an evident confirmation.

If you want to stop shitpost, and get rid of all these "3rd world cancer", as you defined the rest of us, a very simple solution exists: take off signatures from any profiles and let people make promotion only on other channels.
Shitpost will stop immediately and your forum will be the elitistic club that you all are dreaming about.

Is this opinion "shit"? May be, but I'd like to hear at least some logical explainations and not insults (and may be, some more redflagging...)

A master's degree is next to worthless. What exactly is your point?

Where have I said that ratings should be given out on a whim? Nowhere. There is a reason some things taken longer than others. It took me over a month to get to the ICO bumpers. If you believe some things were improperly handled, then make your case. Just make sure you do it *properly*.

LOL. If you think I one of them who came here complaining and whining about my Red Trust, think otherwise. Don't think too highly of yourself it's as if you're the only one who got a masters degree in here.

I admire your move on cleaning this forum of those shitposters (and I am one of them). But don't you think its too vague and generalized to tag anyone without a thorough investigation?

I meant *you* as in *everyone* who got tagged and is complaining right away.

Rechecking of all ratings periodically is not possible unless you the development of an AI for me as that is not constrained by organic limits.

Disagreed. We should be tagging anyone who deserves it.

TBH, it's an outright waste of time.

No not for me. I am not one of the "Cry-babies" who had been posting complaints about their Red Trust nor sent a PM to a DT member, I can still move and post freely even I have been tagged and I have no problem with that.

The problem is DT members should actually recheck and evaluate their tagging to be more accurate. Which I think they wouldn't do since they are not paid for doing so. The tagging should be improved and only be tagging the worst of the worst as VOD said. And at least give a more specific reason as to why he/she is being tagged to make it more acceptable rather "shitposter 3rd World spammers", "non-English speaking shitposter".

Being polite does not harm one's pride anyway.

Stop trolling.

Maybe instead of:
a) Instantly sending complaints via PM in the form of: "Please sir, remove trust I need money from this job".
b) Opening complaint threads in different sections;

you should take the time to improve yourself and ask for a review. Is that so hard?

Are you certain of that? How thorough have they checked an Account before leaving a feedback? At least give a decent more accepting feedback as to why they have been tagged.

I'm sure that they've checked before leaving the feedback (duh), but of course false positives can occur, and they can be easily fixed if it is in fact false by PMing that user who left the trust, or by creating a thread in Reputation if they don't respond or refuse to change, even if you are obviously right.

Sorry if I lack the common sense your saying.

But that's where the problem is since accuracy is not perfect. Some of the DT members haven't given the chance to these "ShitPosters" to redeem themselves. Instead of giving them a chance to speak, they will get a ton of "English Lessons" as to why they should never react. Creating a scare to the whole community that "when reacting to a DT member you will get tagged".


Has it crossed their mind the "DT members" to check and evaluate if the imposed RED trust they have given is accurate? I think no.

I'm sure that we've fully understood each other. Language is not a barrier in this case.
If you're being sarcastic about your accuracy rate, maybe you should try to improve it.

The *warning* as you intend it, it was not supposed to be used the way The Pharmacist used it. It now makes my account less if not completely eligible with future trades.  Which is completely unfair, as I already performed smooth trades in the past.
My "one-line shitposting" is not intended as what you guys are fighting against because I never join signature campaigns nor I need to rank up.

There are a *few* for which you could argue that, none of which were mentioned in Meta recently as they do not affect shitposters nor ICO bumpers.

Anyone have any idea how many DT members are abusing the trust system?

We could come together to re-establish trust for people who are DT targets, but that would be a somewhat time consuming manual process.

Your *warning* was received on    2018-01-10.

It looks like you don't really understand English. I implied that you did this for your statement, and the accuracy part was sarcastic. Do I really need to explain this? Maybe you should go back to school.

"randomly statistical analysis based on nothing other than your own belief". What is this, a stretch from Mein Kampf?
looks exactly the justice model and parameters used by Nazi Germany or USSR. Quite unfair in my opinion 

In addition, I should have been given a warning at least.

So what? That's your personal opinion, I ask questions mostly (that can be useful to other persons if replied).
As I stated before, I am here since 2013 and this has been my second signature campaign in 4 years. I joined it because I am supporting the project (I invested in it as well). I do not join campaigns on a mothly basis nor I will.
I don't understand why my account should be labeled as negative trusted.
I will try to improve my forum cointribution tho.

By randomly doing statistical analysis based on nothing other than your own belief, you surely are going to get some very accurate estimates.

Your posts are horrible. You should never be allowed in a campaign of any kind again.

Do you have any suggestions on how to restore my status? I can't believe my 2013 account got redflagged for no reasons whatsoever.

By massively red-tagging users without a proper analysis for each case, i believe that rate is by far higher in this forum.

And you think admitting it here is going to make the situation any better ? I have given you a negative feedback for being the person who makes multiples accounts after getting tagged.Shorty I expect the DT members to do the same.
Changing profiles doesn't change the person behind the screen.So is it time to say goodbye to this account until you make a new one and I tag you again ? See ya!

If we stay at quibbling you needn't break rules/guidelines but you nevertheless can act against them.
Yes, I feared, that you'd "take legitimate "bashing" posts over 3rd world shitposting any day".
To return constructive: I suggest to keep  censorships about post quality away from feedback system as it was considered by theymos.

I vote for that. Had to restart a profil because of an idiot giving red for no reason.

The rate of false convictions in the US is over 1%. What makes you think that forum members, especially with such different backgrounds, can reach an accuracy of 100%? You lack common sense.

There are no DT rules and you can't break guidelines. Either you follow them or you do not. It's a choice.

I'd take legitimate "bashing" posts over 3rd world shitposting any day.

I guess it is because the forum operated at a loss in previous years but in 2017 it had a profit due to, mainly, campaigns. Also, I agree that another reason (linked to the previous one) might be that it will reduce traffic, so he’s been trying to come up with a not so drastic solution like the new non-signature boards.

I understand him up to a point. When things are going well from a financial perspective and you are the number one bitcoin forum you fear that taking radical changes might mess all up.

I have seen a few wrongly given negatives.

I don't support this kind of bashing neither the content of your last post nore vocabulary of some DT members like "third world shit poster"

Feel sorry for you but "The  Pharmist" mind does not work.  He has written  Garbage one-line shitposter.


Well A person "The  Pharmist" who is Garbage himself, born and breed in Garbage everything seems to be garbage to him 

I love the red paint getting splashed everywhere!  It's about time TBH.  It is refreshing to see the slew of butt hurt shitposters crying!


A lot of viable easy methods exist to virtually eliminate the current shitposting plague but they stop once they hit the top of the ladder, why is that exactly?  Why is banning account sales or paying member fee for signatures off the table?  I get that they are off the table but why?

I am left to surmise (quite possibly wrong) that implementing these options would significantly reduce traffic, thus the traffic generated by the plague is highly valued?  For example, on the vast majority of the forum the plague is running wild.  The staggering amount of users here only for a paycheck is sickening. A test solution is to set up a little tiny quarantine corner for those actually here for learning and sharing about BTC...  

So if we look at the traffic as "highly valued" then we need to retain the traffic and improve quality of the posters.  As we can see from the current state of things this does not seem to be an achievable goal?  Sometimes you can't have your cake and eat it too!

Perhaps their is another reason for taking some of the more effective methods off the table.  If we knew this information it might make it easier to provide useful suggestions for fixing things?

The risk I see in letting this go unchecked is that eventually the plague takes over completely.  When the only people left are the plague the value of their traffic will dwindle.

Anyway that's my rant!  Keep up the red paint Dt'ers hit em where it hurts!

You know better, how DT flags count.
You have no better solution right now, because activities of some DT members (not yours) are against the rules/guidelines. If you don't like the rules/guidelines, then discuss them with Theymos. And hopefully he won't give out the forum to members, who are earning money with bashing posts.

How is this not to be considered an abuse of the trust system?
I have been given a negative trust cause my latest posts were only one-like questions and following ann threads posts, but I have a bit more quality overall post history. What's wrong with it?
This was my very first signature campaign, and I do not intend to join another one, I was just supporting the project.

If my perception is right, then red-tagging is not 100% accurate? And some of the tagged members might not be involved in shitposting or any event that had led to tagging?

You are giving Red trust even on the basis that the User belong to Philippines..lol ...

Just see yourself how you will die on my post here..

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.28685648

 

False positives will occur in just about any system. As long as their percentage is low enough, it is fine.

This is the best that we can do until theymos wakes up or gives control of the forum to someone else.

These days given red trusts may be generally accurate, but on my short research I found at least one,  who is also flagged as "third world shit poster" without spamming, who accidentally went into crossfire on bitcoin discussion. I didn't research many of the red tagged, but alone the kind of accusations and the fact, that participants of campaigns get paid for bashing posts against members (legit or not) makes me a bit confused.
There must be found a better solution.

They're merely guidelines not strict rules. The feedback system shouldn't really be used against signature spammers but I'm not exactly against it right now because how bad things have gotten. Signature spam is already out of control and it's because theymos won't act on doing something about it that people are using the trust system to fight against it because it's the only thing they can do. I actually hope people do keep leaving negative for the worst posters and I people also keep complaining about it because it might force theymos to actually think about what he can do to curb spam because it got out of control a long time ago and it isn't going to magically get any better.

I didn't find it. A member in reputation thread pointed it out. At least DT members should know the guidelines. If there is a need to change the rules they should discuss with theymos on the right thread, before the whole stuff will get out of control.

I do not have posts in English, the pharmacist clean his negative assessment, this is racism.

I'm pretty sure Blazed put The Pharmacist on DT2 because of the way he's fighting spam. He just gave his red trust a much stronger taste.
I see he added actmyname too, congratulations on the promotion! I see you're already collecing retaliation feedback too.

Your level of English seems okay in this topic.

You often take less than a minute to respond to a thread with 100+ posts. No matter what your level of English is, you're not contributing any value this way.
If you would have put half as much effort into all your posts as you do now in this thread, you wouldn't have been tagged.

Good find! But, although his post is older than my account, I think it's safe to say spam wasn't such a big problem 4 years ago.

LOL. Welcome to the Club. As one of the persons who has been tagged, it doesn't really matter. Shitposting or how you may call it is something that should be addressed with but not on a certain level that is too obvious to see racism. If I am one of them "the shitposters", I don't care, coz joining any campaign is not on my mind right now. I am here to join the discussion and learn more about BTC and that's all.

Ps. I am not commenting here to change my trust rating. I just wanted to reply since this has been "Trending" this week. 

Everyone hate shitposters btw 

---

This is pretty much not a big deal .  If you only post to get paid, This becomes a big deal because you wont be able to participate in the signature campaign anymore.

Getting red tag will not hinder you in participating in any discussion on the forum

---

Before someone else jump on me and started raging, I am one of those that got tagged as well but it is not a big deal for me though 

He only got complaints recently because he was only recently added to default trust so that's when his feedback started to carry weight, hence why people are now complaining as his feedback didn't mark them as scammers before. Often when I go to perma ban spammers posting exclusively in off topic half of the time I find he's already left them feedback so I agree with him in those cases.


They are worse than scammers in regards to being a cancer to the usability of this board and I explained why. I've never been scammed by anyone because I'm not an idiot who gives my money away, but I have to read and deal with the utter drivel written by people like you every day which has ruined the ENTIRE forum because you can't have a decent discussion here any more and that's why spammers are a far more pressing issue than a few scammers that you shouldn't be giving your money away to anyway.

Pardon for another quote but this to address your first point.

If I do not need to "master" English to post as a regular user then who going to decide which users have good English and not? The Pharmacist? Then want to ask if he was an expert in assert English or just a racist over the internet with his own standard of what was "good English" and what was"3rd world garbage English".

Look at how many complaints he got up in recent day and don't tell me you could easily dismiss all of that cause "They are just bunch of haters because they receive negative trust from him" or "He did nothing wrong". If you could say that then I will call this broad is governed by a bunch of elitists that so detach from the community.

Just this could show how your blind hatred over for a bunch of shitposters to consider them worst than a scammer. Lucky that is your own opinion anyway. If you want to save the "perfectly English" in here so much then step up the game, hired an English Nazi squad, wear a badge and going around abuse the trust system for your own selfish way of hatred over shitposters or 3rd world English garbage.

You don't need to write a thesis for every post but you don't need to force yourself to just write a hollow sentence of nothingness either. It's clear that you don't actually care about contributing anything here because you don't seem to have made a single constructive post nor one that is more than a sentence. In fact, they're barely more than a handful of words. Why is that? Because you don't need to write anything else so why bother. I'm betting the only reason you post here like 99% of the other users who sign up now is just to earn and in the laziest way possible without putting any thought or effort into their posts whatsoever. This forum has become useless for any sort of discussion as it has been taken over by shitposters and crapcoin ICOs churning out posts just to rank up and/or claim payment and that's why people are fighting back by using the trust system because it's the only weapon they have until theymos finally decides to do something about this issue.

And shitposters are far worse to this community than scammers. Scammers don't pollute every sub board like a cancer spreading. They stick to the Marketplace and if people are stupid enough to send them their money then it's very likely their own fault in 99% of cases.


Bitcointalk is an English-speaking board. It's also stated in rule number 9:


Anyone who isn't fluent should stick to their local boards.

Is this constructive? 

Well, better make a sticky banner at the top of bitcointalk say 'English Only' then. Did you know a language in the end just a way to communicate with each person? I feel very disgusted at the sign of a person that takes proud of his English and consider everyone else are inferior to him when his English was his mother tongue language.

In my opinion, trust system is a great tool to make this forum better. To make people realize this is a great forum, and a great forum deserves great people in it, but there are many new people which don't care about that right now. We can see it from the quality of their posts, and their language.

I agree with all the replies (up until now) in this topic. And for author, I used to think it was a faulty system too like you do, but that was in the past. Now I just want to learn, make better post, and engage with others.

It most certainly is not. The word 'master' is very vague and you most certainly do not need to "master" English to post as a regular user.

Here's a simpler and more elegant solution: Do not post in a language which you do not know well enough.

I see all of your posts were about "much English". Do tell, speak any other language other than your mother tongue language, English?

I know that I shouldn't use this as an excuse or try to justify for my poor grasp of my English but really, able to master one language is very difficult.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not going to personally attack but you should chill down a bit. This is an online forum, not an academic broad where everyone has to post a long wall of text. What are you doing right now only make the trust system lower its standard for the shitposters and not scammers or illegal activity.

Is there any chance to remove my red trust??

Boss please understand that we are adjusting in our common currency, English. We are not native speakers of that certain language but I consider myself as excellent for we tend to cope base on your strength, you don't even have a problem about that because you just express yourself normally; doest concern on expressing your thoughts unconsciously. Unlike you, native speakers, we tend to analyze and review first our opinion before starting it.

I believe that you have a wide range of understanding why we consider ourselves as excellent compared to native speaker.

I send you a pm about that and you even didn't reply. Its not hard to hit reply and write a message. You gave me trust 2 years ago when i was pretty newbie. now it turns red cause of your dt. Btw on that bid there is lots of people bid but you just gave red trust on couple people. I just bid once.

The former is true but the latter is false. Here's the reason. If it is known that shitposting is bad then we won't see any shitposting. Negative trust is what you call a deterrent. If people actually CAN post properly then they don't really need signature campaigns to do so however in this day and age, it seems that signature campaigns are all that people really care about.

If post quality increases after a tag then it may be warranted to be changed to a neutral "Was a shitposter but has since then changed." feedback.

If I leave unfair and unjust negative feedback, those that trust me enough to vouch for my words will remove me.

The system is simple, and fair. 

What you think has absolutely no value.

Which is just pure bullshit. There is absolutely nothing that the sender will personally gain from spending hours and hours of their life tagging 3rd world cancer.

Yes.
And idiots are ranking up as fast as possible by making bitcointalk a joke of a forum.  Pick any new topic and 75% of it are padded shitposts made for financial gain.
Um, no.  Neutral trust does nothing, and these people are too manipulative and way outnumber the good guys.  The only way to stamp them out is to 1) Ban them, 2) Nix sig campaigns altogether, or 3) Prevent them from joining campaigns. 
Negative trust might help a little with the #3 solution.
Not with people who can't speak English, sorry to say.
Yes, if the bidders fear negative trust from DT members.  Change isn't always comfortable.

The trust system isn't moderated, you're better off addressing this to Blazed (assuming you're talking about who I think you're talking about). Also, if you think their feedback is so bad, you are free to exclude them from your trust list. The initial intent of the system was for people to make their own trust lists, not solely rely on DT.

Is it really necessary to put an immediate decision upon putting some negative trust on one's account? Remember its hard to rank here and those newly one abuse this system. And although i understand what they want to impose their but I think neutral trust will be the best way to put before putting some neg trust among those user who got red trust.

Shit posting can be change so this offense deserves some warning.
Bidding on account sales can be corrected also so deserves neutral trust unless the user continuously doing the same action.

Scamming this one deserves real red trust since it involves illegal activities.

So don't be one sided and bubble headed guys you don't own a place to put some immediate judgement.

Theymos should address this, since this furom has been by jackals for their self-interest.