Trust improvements | Bitcointalksearch.org

Grand_Voyageur

sr. member

Activity: 322

Merit: 250

https://dadice.com | Click my signature to join!

Quote from: erikalui on March 09, 2015, 11:03:16 AM

Quote from: hilariousandco on March 09, 2015, 10:22:40 AM

There could be but I doubt it will happen because as Quick said the trust system isn't moderated and it is also very hard to enforce or police. Trusted feedback is from those who have been put on the default trust list by someone already on there and therefor their feedback is considered 'trusted' and holds more weight.

@black: Is it that the mods cannot delete any feedback from the user's account? I have seen mods of other forums able to do that and hence I asked.

@green: OK just got the logic now and I added the users who send me feedback in my trusted list. I guess they have sent me neutral trust and hence the trust is shown as 0.

You did it the wrong way. Trust lists are not a way to say thank you for your green feedback to me; they're to include members whose judgments on others you trust since you value their opinion about other users.

redsn0w

legendary

Activity: 1778

Merit: 1043

#Free market

Quote from: Muhammed Zakir on March 13, 2015, 12:38:33 AM

Quote from: kingscrown on March 13, 2015, 12:35:10 AM

trust list update with current active users would fix everything imo

In DefaultTrust trust list, only Sirius is inactive. All others are active. If you meant something else, please clarify.

The default trust list is the list with all the username that you are seeing (lev. 2). I think that kingscrown wanted to say "only the users in the level 1 of depth".

Muhammed Zakir

hero member

Activity: 560

Merit: 509

I prefer Zakir over Muhammed when mentioning me!

Quote from: kingscrown on March 13, 2015, 12:35:10 AM

trust list update with current active users would fix everything imo

In DefaultTrust trust list, only Sirius is inactive. All others are active. If you meant something else, please clarify.

kingscrown

hero member

Activity: 672

Merit: 500

http://fuk.io - check it out!

trust list update with current active users would fix everything imo

Muhammed Zakir

hero member

Activity: 560

Merit: 509

I prefer Zakir over Muhammed when mentioning me!

Quote from: SaltySpitoon on March 09, 2015, 04:58:15 PM

If you add XScammurzUrMoniesX to your trust list, you will see feedback they leave as "Trusted" feedback, but no one else will.

Only if the trust level depth is 0.

Quote from: kuusj98 on March 09, 2015, 05:07:49 PM

So you are saying trust given to someone by you will be "trusted' by default?

I don't think there any healthy person who don't trust himself!

Quote from: kuusj98 on March 09, 2015, 05:07:49 PM

So removing yourself from the "default trust" should solve the problem? Gotta try that then..

No, it won't.

Quote from: kuusj98 on March 09, 2015, 05:07:49 PM

Edit: excluding myself from the list doesn't seem to work. I add "~kuusj98" in that text-box, click on the button, page refreshes and nothing changed.
Guess that's something I have to learn live with then, would sure be nice though.

AFAIK there is no option to exclude you from your own trust list.

-MZ

uki

legendary

Activity: 1358

Merit: 1000

cryptojunk bag holder

Quote from: Quickseller on March 09, 2015, 06:56:33 PM

Quote from: uki on March 09, 2015, 06:50:04 PM

Quote from: Quickseller on March 09, 2015, 01:24:23 PM

If someone used tor then their location would appear to change every 10 minutes. I imagine many people use VPNs to connect to the forum as well and not only would it be trivial to make it look like an account was not purchased you would get more false positives.

I would really appreciate some constructive criticism, meaning not only saying 'this doesn't work, it's not a good idea', but rather 'this doesn't work, but this and that may be done instead'. That would bring the discussion further, because I believe we agree, that in the current shape due to account trading, the trust rank is not of any help.

I do not agree with that statement as I have indicated above.

The fact that there is value to positive trust means that anyone who buys an account with positive trust is going to pay a premium over an account with neutral trust. This means that anyone who buys a positive trust account with the intention of trying to scam is going to have to risk their initial investment to try to scam. It is not a guarantee that someone is going to be able to be successful in pulling off a scam, especially if their potential trading partners are able to use appropriate precautions (and I am not referring to using escrow)

Well, following your way of thinking we end up with the null significance of the trust ranking, as one who wants to make any business with a 'trusted member' has to use 'appropriate precautions' despite the trust ranking, not knowing whether the 'trusted member' is who he/she actually was in his/her trust history, or someone who just bought this account. Which is also my point, btw. That leaves me with the following final questions:
- what is the trust ranking supposed to mean, other than some random, completely non-significant number?
- what can be the reason for selling a 'trustworthy' account of high level and whether that is ethically fine with the rules of this forum (and whether it is fine to not include such event in that 'trust ranking')?

Quickseller

copper member

Activity: 2996

Merit: 2374

Quote from: uki on March 09, 2015, 06:50:04 PM

Quote from: Quickseller on March 09, 2015, 01:24:23 PM

If someone used tor then their location would appear to change every 10 minutes. I imagine many people use VPNs to connect to the forum as well and not only would it be trivial to make it look like an account was not purchased you would get more false positives.

I would really appreciate some constructive criticism, meaning not only saying 'this doesn't work, it's not a good idea', but rather 'this doesn't work, but this and that may be done instead'. That would bring the discussion further, because I believe we agree, that in the current shape due to account trading, the trust rank is not of any help.

I do not agree with that statement as I have indicated above.

The fact that there is value to positive trust means that anyone who buys an account with positive trust is going to pay a premium over an account with neutral trust. This means that anyone who buys a positive trust account with the intention of trying to scam is going to have to risk their initial investment to try to scam. It is not a guarantee that someone is going to be able to be successful in pulling off a scam, especially if their potential trading partners are able to use appropriate precautions (and I am not referring to using escrow)

uki

legendary

Activity: 1358

Merit: 1000

cryptojunk bag holder

Quote from: Quickseller on March 09, 2015, 01:24:23 PM

If someone used tor then their location would appear to change every 10 minutes. I imagine many people use VPNs to connect to the forum as well and not only would it be trivial to make it look like an account was not purchased you would get more false positives.

I would really appreciate some constructive criticism, meaning not only saying 'this doesn't work, it's not a good idea', but rather 'this doesn't work, but this and that may be done instead'. That would bring the discussion further, because I believe we agree, that in the current shape due to account trading, the trust rank is not of any help.

kuusj98

hero member

Activity: 812

Merit: 1000

I <3 VW Beetles

Quote from: SaltySpitoon on March 09, 2015, 04:58:15 PM

Quote from: kuusj98 on March 09, 2015, 04:46:53 PM

Ok, and now I want to know:
I appear absolutely nowhere on the default-trust page (not even at level 4 depth) but to every member I leave a trust rating (be it positive or negative) the trust is still counted as "default trust" on my account at least.
Is that because I am green? I really don't freaking get it. I made an account (not going to do anything with it: sjefsjaak) to see it from other users perspective and there I see that I have a 4: -0 / +3(3) rating instead of the 3: -0 / +2 (2) I see on myself on my own account. On that new account, all trust I gave is untrusted on those users profiles.

Why can't I see my trust exactly the same as everyone else, this gives me false impressions...

There isn't a universal trust score for people, you are exactly right. On your personal trust list, you trust feedback from Default Trust, and yourself (Assuming you haven't made any modifications to your trust list) however, one can modify their trust list however they like to modify how they see trust. If you remove default trust from your trust settings, you won't see feedback left by default trust members as "Trusted". If you add XScammurzUrMoniesX to your trust list, you will see feedback they leave as "Trusted" feedback, but no one else will.

So you are saying trust given to someone by you will be "trusted' by default? So removing yourself from the "default trust" should solve the problem? Gotta try that then..

Edit: excluding myself from the list doesn't seem to work. I add "~kuusj98" in that text-box, click on the button, page refreshes and nothing changed.
Guess that's something I have to learn live with then, would sure be nice though.

SaltySpitoon

legendary

Activity: 2590

Merit: 2156

Welcome to the SaltySpitoon, how Tough are ya?

Quote from: kuusj98 on March 09, 2015, 04:46:53 PM

Ok, and now I want to know:
I appear absolutely nowhere on the default-trust page (not even at level 4 depth) but to every member I leave a trust rating (be it positive or negative) the trust is still counted as "default trust" on my account at least.
Is that because I am green? I really don't freaking get it. I made an account (not going to do anything with it: sjefsjaak) to see it from other users perspective and there I see that I have a 4: -0 / +3(3) rating instead of the 3: -0 / +2 (2) I see on myself on my own account. On that new account, all trust I gave is untrusted on those users profiles.

Why can't I see my trust exactly the same as everyone else, this gives me false impressions...

There isn't a universal trust score for people, you are exactly right. On your personal trust list, you trust feedback from Default Trust, and yourself (Assuming you haven't made any modifications to your trust list) however, one can modify their trust list however they like to modify how they see trust. If you remove default trust from your trust settings, you won't see feedback left by default trust members as "Trusted". If you add XScammurzUrMoniesX to your trust list, you will see feedback they leave as "Trusted" feedback, but no one else will.

kuusj98

hero member

Activity: 812

Merit: 1000

I <3 VW Beetles

Ok, and now I want to know:
I appear absolutely nowhere on the default-trust page (not even at level 4 depth) but to every member I leave a trust rating (be it positive or negative) the trust is still counted as "default trust" on my account at least.
Is that because I am green? I really don't freaking get it. I made an account (not going to do anything with it: sjefsjaak) to see it from other users perspective and there I see that I have a 4: -0 / +3(3) rating instead of the 3: -0 / +2 (2) I see on myself on my own account. On that new account, all trust I gave is untrusted on those users profiles.

Why can't I see my trust exactly the same as everyone else, this gives me false impressions...

Quickseller

copper member

Activity: 2996

Merit: 2374

Quote from: uki on March 09, 2015, 01:04:44 PM

Quote from: hilariousandco on March 09, 2015, 08:25:06 AM

Quote from: uki link=topic=851380.msg10711286#msg10711286 dateuser5904676

The problem with the current rating is that upon trading the "old" trust becomes irrelevant, as the new user has nothing to do with the old one. This can be abused by scammers who want to invest in buying such trust-positive high status accounts. Here is my proposal on how to further improve this current trust ranking, and bring it a bit closer to significance in such cases. I know that it is impossible to ban trading accounts, but how about adding -50000 to the trust, if there is clear evidence that the account has been traded, e.g., unusual IP address and device and location should trigger a mail to the original email address that the account was registered - upon no response, we may have already solid evidence (if someone is unhappy with this criteria we may discuss how to improve them). That way trading for trust could be significantly reduced.

Account selling is allowed and it's unfair to suddenly make them look like the biggest scammer on the forum just because an account is suspected of trading hands, plus the way you is describe is unenforceable and can lead to false positives as many people change IPs/computers or use tor/proxies. It's also not the admin's job to investigate such infractions and they certainly don't have the time or desire to investigate every case and that's one of the main reasons why scams, trust and account sales etc are not moderated. Besides, you're still putting too much faith into the trust system as it is far from foolproof and scammers can just as easily abuse it with fake accounts and trades then scam when they've built up enough confidence anyway.

Additional work for forum admins that is indeed the only weak point of my proposal. I agree it is a substantial one. Although, I think it would limit to writing a proper script to monitor per user: range of IP addresses, devices and locations. that would suffice to filter out most of the false positives you mentioned. There are not many users in this forum moving, e.g., between Germany and China on a permanent basis and changing all three mentioned parameters.

Last but not least, current system that allows for trading of accounts with high status and high trust (that takes a long time to achieve) is already unfair and my proposal wouldn't make it more unfair.

If someone used tor then their location would appear to change every 10 minutes. I imagine many people use VPNs to connect to the forum as well and not only would it be trivial to make it look like an account was not purchased you would get more false positives.

uki

legendary

Activity: 1358

Merit: 1000

cryptojunk bag holder

Quote from: hilariousandco on March 09, 2015, 08:25:06 AM

Quote from: uki link=topic=851380.msg10711286#msg10711286 dateuser5904676

The problem with the current rating is that upon trading the "old" trust becomes irrelevant, as the new user has nothing to do with the old one. This can be abused by scammers who want to invest in buying such trust-positive high status accounts. Here is my proposal on how to further improve this current trust ranking, and bring it a bit closer to significance in such cases. I know that it is impossible to ban trading accounts, but how about adding -50000 to the trust, if there is clear evidence that the account has been traded, e.g., unusual IP address and device and location should trigger a mail to the original email address that the account was registered - upon no response, we may have already solid evidence (if someone is unhappy with this criteria we may discuss how to improve them). That way trading for trust could be significantly reduced.

Account selling is allowed and it's unfair to suddenly make them look like the biggest scammer on the forum just because an account is suspected of trading hands, plus the way you is describe is unenforceable and can lead to false positives as many people change IPs/computers or use tor/proxies. It's also not the admin's job to investigate such infractions and they certainly don't have the time or desire to investigate every case and that's one of the main reasons why scams, trust and account sales etc are not moderated. Besides, you're still putting too much faith into the trust system as it is far from foolproof and scammers can just as easily abuse it with fake accounts and trades then scam when they've built up enough confidence anyway.

Additional work for forum admins that is indeed the only weak point of my proposal. I agree it is a substantial one. Although, I think it would limit to writing a proper script to monitor per user: range of IP addresses, devices and locations. that would suffice to filter out most of the false positives you mentioned. There are not many users in this forum moving, e.g., between Germany and China on a permanent basis and changing all three mentioned parameters.

Last but not least, current system that allows for trading of accounts with high status and high trust (that takes a long time to achieve) is already unfair and my proposal wouldn't make it more unfair.

hilariousandco

global moderator

Activity: 3990

Merit: 2717

Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!

Quote from: erikalui on March 09, 2015, 11:03:16 AM

Quote from: hilariousandco on March 09, 2015, 10:22:40 AM

There could be but I doubt it will happen because as Quick said the trust system isn't moderated and it is also very hard to enforce or police. Trusted feedback is from those who have been put on the default trust list by someone already on there and therefor their feedback is considered 'trusted' and holds more weight.

@black: Is it that the mods cannot delete any feedback from the user's account? I have seen mods of other forums able to do that and hence I asked.

Mods can't, admins can but they do not unless in exceptional circumstances. I think it works best this way though obviously people don't like it when they get unjust feedback, but this is yet another point why the system is just a guide to help others make their own mind up and you can choose to disregard or trust their ratings if you wish

Quote from: erikalui on March 09, 2015, 11:03:16 AM

@green: OK just got the logic now and I added the users who send me feedback in my trusted list. I guess they have sent me neutral trust and hence the trust is shown as 0.

You have three positives but they're from 'untrusted' users. If they ever get added to default trust then those three feedbacks would become trusted.

erikalui

legendary

Activity: 2632

Merit: 1094

Quote from: hilariousandco on March 09, 2015, 10:22:40 AM

There could be but I doubt it will happen because as Quick said the trust system isn't moderated and it is also very hard to enforce or police. Trusted feedback is from those who have been put on the default trust list by someone already on there and therefor their feedback is considered 'trusted' and holds more weight.

@black: Is it that the mods cannot delete any feedback from the user's account? I have seen mods of other forums able to do that and hence I asked.

@green: OK just got the logic now and I added the users who send me feedback in my trusted list. I guess they have sent me neutral trust and hence the trust is shown as 0.

hilariousandco

global moderator

Activity: 3990

Merit: 2717

Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!

Quote from: erikalui on March 09, 2015, 09:59:40 AM

Can there be a rule implemented where members selling their accounts with a green trust made to remove their trust from the account before selling it? The trust is given to the member who sells the account and not the one who buys it but members sell it with the trust as well.

Also, what is the difference between untrusted feedback and trusted feedback? Is the feedback given by newbies considered untrusted here?

There could be but I doubt it will happen because as Quick said the trust system isn't moderated and it is also very hard to enforce or police. Trusted feedback is from those who have been put on the default trust list by someone already on there and therefor their feedback is considered 'trusted' and holds more weight.

Quickseller

copper member

Activity: 2996

Merit: 2374

Quote from: erikalui on March 09, 2015, 09:59:40 AM

Can there be a rule implemented where members selling their accounts with a green trust made to remove their trust from the account before selling it? The trust is given to the member who sells the account and not the one who buys it but members sell it with the trust as well.

Also, what is the difference between untrusted feedback and trusted feedback? Is the feedback given by newbies considered untrusted here?

the trust system is not moderated. The person receiving trust has zero control over if trust remains on their profile, it is up to the person sending the trust.

Trusted trust is generally people in the default trust network (although it is actually from anyone in your trust network)

erikalui

legendary

Activity: 2632

Merit: 1094

Can there be a rule implemented where members selling their accounts with a green trust made to remove their trust from the account before selling it? The trust is given to the member who sells the account and not the one who buys it but members sell it with the trust as well.

Also, what is the difference between untrusted feedback and trusted feedback? Is the feedback given by newbies considered untrusted here?

hilariousandco

global moderator

Activity: 3990

Merit: 2717

Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!

Quote from: uki on March 09, 2015, 07:37:56 AM

The problem with the current rating is that upon trading the account the "old" trust becomes irrelevant, as the new user has nothing to do with the old one. This can be abused by scammers who want to invest in buying such trust-positive high status accounts. Here is my proposal on how to further improve this current trust ranking, and bring it a bit closer to significance in such cases. I know that it is impossible to ban trading accounts, but how about adding -50000 to the trust, if there is clear evidence that the account has been traded, e.g., unusual IP address and device and location should trigger a mail to the original email address that the account was registered - upon no response, we may have already solid evidence (if someone is unhappy with this criteria we may discuss how to improve them). That way trading for trust could be significantly reduced.

Account selling is allowed and it's unfair to suddenly make them look like the biggest scammer on the forum just because an account is suspected of trading hands, plus the way you is describe is unenforceable and can lead to false positives as many people change IPs/computers or use tor/proxies. It's also not the admin's job to investigate such infractions and they certainly don't have the time or desire to investigate every case and that's one of the main reasons why scams, trust and account sales etc are not moderated. Besides, you're still putting too much faith into the trust system as it is far from foolproof and scammers can just as easily abuse it with fake accounts and trades then scam when they've built up enough confidence anyway.

abyrnes81

hero member

Activity: 714

Merit: 500

Quote from: uki on March 09, 2015, 07:37:56 AM

The problem with the current rating is that upon trading the account the "old" trust becomes irrelevant, as the new user has nothing to do with the old one. This can be abused by scammers who want to invest in buying such trust-positive high status accounts. Here is my proposal on how to further improve this current trust ranking, and bring it a bit closer to significance in such cases. I know that it is impossible to ban trading accounts, but how about adding -50000 to the trust, if there is clear evidence that the account has been traded, e.g., unusual IP address and device and location should trigger a mail to the original email address that the account was registered - upon no response, we may have already solid evidence (if someone is unhappy with this criteria we may discuss how to improve them). That way trading for trust could be significantly reduced.

The other question is that the buying/selling of forum accounts is not moderated, the staff interfere only if the account is stolen/hacked.

Topic: Trust improvements (Read 5910 times)