Pages:
Author

Topic: Trust flags - page 26. (Read 12963 times)

administrator
Activity: 5222
Merit: 13032
June 11, 2019, 10:35:28 PM
#4
I am wondering will users be able to remove a scammer flag early in the spirit of forgiveness. Do users in your trust network automatically support flags or do they need to take action?

The original accuser can withdraw their support, but they can't delete the flag. So other users could take it up even if they withdraw.

Flags need to be actively supported.

Here's a user with a flag that you could support/oppose:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=157669
And if you log out or use a newbie account, you can see the banner on their topic:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/bounty-globatalentcom-1105000-to-share-sport-blockchain-revolution-2690003

Can we use a community thread for flagging potential scammers? I ask because it says you can create 1 thread if you tag flag many users, or can this be a simple thread that states I flag people for these reasons and leave it at that.

Yes, but make sure that if someone goes there, it's clear what the flag is about.

Scammer flags should usually each have distinct topics.
legendary
Activity: 1568
Merit: 2037
June 11, 2019, 10:28:05 PM
#3
I think this is a great tweak to the system. I am glad to see that Neutral will now have a place beside the other 2 ratings. Going to take a while to get used to the flag system but I'm glad to see Newbies were given a grace period to be given extra guidance and warnings.

A new scammer flag should be created for each separate alleged incident. In the spirit of forgiveness/redemption, scammer flags expire 3 years after the incident if the contract was casual/implied, and 10 years after the incident if the contract was written. These expiration times might be administratively changed in specific cases.

I am wondering will users be able to remove a scammer flag early in the spirit of forgiveness. Do users in your trust network automatically support flags or do they need to take action?
Quote
Creating or supporting a scammer flag is actively affirming a set of pretty clear fact-statements. If someone knowingly supports a flag containing incorrect fact-statements, then that is crystal-clear abuse, and I will seek to have such people removed from DT ASAP. People who are habitually wrong, even not knowingly, should also be removed.

I think the actively seeking to have abuse removed from DT is the deterrent people finally needed to hear to make changes to how the system was working.

Edit: Got my neutral ratings, which I was asking about again shortly before this lol. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.51435817




Edit: I see now that flags can't be removed.

I'm curious now about the having to create a topic before leaving a flag. I understand it for the contracts because there should be a scam accusation. Can we use a community thread for flagging potential scammers? I ask because it says you can create 1 thread if you tag flag many users, or can this be a simple thread that states I flag people for these reasons and leave it at that.
sr. member
Activity: 1372
Merit: 322
June 11, 2019, 10:27:24 PM
#2
Just noticed the changes.
Trust score of The-one-above-all is zero now although he has 11 negative feedback.

Changes-
1. Trust score removed (Not a good idea in my opinion but I wish it help the overall system.)
2. Risked BTC removed (Good step since no use of it at all)
3. Neutral are visible. (Best change since in the previous system, neutral has no usage without clicking on the trust page.)

I am still confused about the flag   Huh

Got it. A valid link can create a flag.
administrator
Activity: 5222
Merit: 13032
June 11, 2019, 10:13:36 PM
#1
I think that several of the problems with Trust were because three different goals were being jammed into one system:
 1. Getting a general idea of someone's trade history and trustworthiness in one convenient location, sort of like reviews on sites like EBay.
 2. Warning newbies/guests who don't know how to research properly about high-risk people.
 3. Deterring scams by creating a cost to scamming (ie. you'll "lose" a veteran account).
 
To improve this, I've split up these use-cases:

Use-case #1 is the old trust system, but I made the descriptions on the rating types a bit more general and removed the concept of a trust score. The numbers are now "distinct positive raters / distinct neutral raters / distinct negative raters". You should give these ratings for anything which you think would impact someone's willingness to trade with the person, but you should not use trust ratings to attack a person's opinions or otherwise talk about things which would not be relevant to reasonable prospective traders.

Use-cases 2 and 3 will be handled by a new system of flags. You can create a flag using a link on a person's trust page.

A newbie-warning flag is active if there are more people supporting such a flag than opposing it. It shows a banner on topics started by the flagged user for guests and for users with less than 7 days of login time. For all users, a "#" is shown next to their trust scores.

For contractual violations only, a scammer flag can be created. This is the only thing which causes the "Warning: trade with extreme caution" warning to return. It also triggers a banner similar to the newbie-warning banner which is visible to all users. A scammer flag requires 3 more supporting users than opposing users to become active.

A new scammer flag should be created for each separate alleged incident. In the spirit of forgiveness/redemption, scammer flags expire 3 years after the incident if the contract was casual/implied, and 10 years after the incident if the contract was written. These expiration times might be administratively changed in specific cases.

Creating or supporting a scammer flag is actively affirming a set of pretty clear fact-statements. If someone knowingly supports a flag containing incorrect fact-statements, then that is crystal-clear abuse, and I will seek to have such people removed from DT ASAP. People who are habitually wrong, even not knowingly, should also be removed.

Only users in your trust network count as supporting or opposing flags. For guests, the default trust network is used.

Also, a few miscellaneous changes:
 - All of the sections on users' trust pages are now paginated, so the page doesn't expand to massive size anymore.
 - The ordering of sent feedback is now consistent with the other sections.
 - "Risked BTC" is removed.

PM me if you find bugs.
Pages:
Jump to: