Topic: Trust System - page 2. (Read 557 times)

Here's my insights


We do not encourage tagging users with such reasons. As much as possible, people must only tag others with legitimate claim and supporting evidence that must be referenced on the flag. Also, once a user tag others unreasonably, it would also be shown on that user's sent feedback -- in which if was pure non-sense feedback, would then just soon backfire onto that user. And on a stronger point, tags with those unnecessary reasons often tend to not be taken into consideration for campaign restrictions and/or by campaign managers. Lastly, some people never tend to investigate nor do their own research first before investing on projects. Instead, they read whitepaper, see if it has potential just by their own reasoning, then invest right after.


Highlighted the text that they don't understand how it works. And yes, it is not really the fault nor the shortcomings of the community once a user had been scammed in his investments. You already mentioned it, they don't understand. Hence, some users tend to be attracted with a good project idea and sees it as an opportunity for an easy money, plus the fake reviews that adds to his hopes up and FOMOing the user. Right now, all the users that were active in scam busting is passionate in taking down scam projects ASAP, and it would be the investor's initiative if he will investigate and research first or not.

Hope this clears out your questions. 

Half the forum is probably well organized.

Well, I don't know about that. Several big, big projects have no presence here at all; nor do countless little ones. Sometimes Bitcointalk comes up in search results and that's how ANN threads drive clicks, and I don't think people would keep paying bounties / advertising signatures if there was no profit in it (but who knows really... its a mystery).

I believe theymos would intervene if a project and/or account owner had clearly broken laws and been convicted of it. Up to that point, well, there's a few other ways in which threads can be locked or nuked (spamming, linking to malware)... probably more if you asked around.

Don't hold your breath waiting for scam threads to be locked in the meanwhile.

All of the points you mentioned here were already discussed multiple times. If you spend more few times and read related topics then you should get all of your desired answers. It's easy to ask why the forum doesn't moderate an obvious scam or a potential scam. The question is who will determine the scam and what is the perfect way? If the forum takes the responsibility to prevent scams and if after happening any scam in the case then users will blindly blam to the forum administration. On the other hand who will prevent potential abuse scam moderation. That's the reason why the trust system has been implemented. Listen, any system in the world isn't perfect, but you have to compare if the system is useful or not. Perhaps there is a few stupid feedback, but it doesn't mean the whole trust system is broken. But often I have seen other DT members exclude if discover such as DT members. So, also you may help the trust system by detecting such stupid feedback. You may realize the case, so other DT members would take action if they think it's reasonable.

This forum does not moderate scams (for a number of reasons, bias and false sense of security among them) and I don't think it ever will. But if it comes to that... since most scams tend to be shitcoin-related just getting rid of altcoin boards would probably reduce scams by 99%.

Consequently red (or any) trust ratings are not moderated either. And yes, some users will post red trust for stupid reasons. Technically they should not be included in trust lists of other users therefore rendering their sent ratings appear under "untrusted" feedback but the system is not perfect.

It is wrong, and not advisable. Red tags are for people that are obviously scammers or encouraging scammers, or that did anything wrong to cheat on this forum.

Check the quote below. But, the negative feedback is enough to avoid such users.


Your English is good. If an ICO is noticed to be scam, there are a lot of users that will red tag the company's user account on this forum and also the reason can be seen in the feedback which is enough for us to know to back off such projects. But, some might not be detected early.

Hi there.
First of all I do not know is this subject belongs to reputation thread. Correct me if I'm wrong so I can move it to appropriate thread. I was reading about the trust system and as I understood you must be s potential or real scammer to be tagged. Administrator theymos said that DT members can't tag anyone for something stupid. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.47119519 Well he was talking about merits but as I understoot that refers not only to merits but to all stupid tags in gemeral.

I saw a lot of of tags from DT members with feedbacks like "Idiot" "Mentally sick" "Shitty person" "Meritted a scammer" e.t.c. I checked that profiles and found nothing that was related to any type of scam. So my question is if it is allowed to tag a person just because you don't like him? Is it allowed to tag someone because of your vendetta or something? Also I would like to to know why obvious scam threads were not closed before they scammed out millions of dollars out of the gullible people's pockets?    

Bitconnect - Biggest ponzi in crypto history. Slole around $ 1biilion - the thread was not closed despite many warnings. After it's collapse many people left homeless and some of them commited a suicide.

Ethconnect - Obvious scam that just stole around $ 4 million and vanished without giving out a single token - The thread was closed by topic starter to avoid uncomfortable questions.

Bankera - Collected 140 million dollars via ICO. - After the listing and now the token cost and trading volume are almost zero. The thread was closed by topic starter to avoid uncomfortable questions.

Bitcoin gold - hard fork with a hidden 200 000 premine which was sold on exchanges within first days of listing for $150-200 that equals $ 40 millions. - The thread is open and alive. (Well here they did not steel anything but the people who bought BTC gold on early stages lost 80% of their investments)

There are so many more. Sorry but it will take a long time to name all of them. Generally speaking 99% of all ICO's was nothing but a scam.

I read that scams are not moderate because it is not our business. That is the statement of bitcointalk.  But I am sorry... 99% of potential private investors (not institutional ones) are coming here on this forum to find some crypto investment opportunities. Many of them do not understand how it really works. So closing the scam threads on early stages or forcing suspicious projects to escrow investments can save a lot of people a lot of money and maybe someone's life as well. Please let me know what do you think about this and sorry for my bad english (I'm Russian)
Thank you in advance.