im totally disagree to DT member. they can easily give negative trust even if the reason is personal and not scam or illegal accuse. i hope that admin will change the rule about trust feedback. maybe it is to have a reference proof before the trust feedback occur..
Half of the time, there is reference. Yeah. For the ones with no reference or proper reference, something should be done. 
Topic: Trust system is abused. (Read 1838 times)
im totally disagree to DT member. they can easily give negative trust even if the reason is personal and not scam or illegal accuse. i hope that admin will change the rule about trust feedback. maybe it is to have a reference proof before the trust feedback occur..
I got negative feedback from a user who refused escrow and a random user I never saw. There should be a way to apply to get feedback removed
Hi there! Just so you know, there is indeed a way to get feedback removed, just as you had requested! http://archive.is/mohqY
It's been already explained to you that BadBear changed his/her own feedback and doesn't possess any magic powers to change another user's feedback. Why do you keep repeating this bad advice?
I got negative feedback from a user who refused escrow and a random user I never saw. There should be a way to apply to get feedback removed
Hi there! Just so you know, there is indeed a way to get feedback removed, just as you had requested! http://archive.is/mohqY
Oh yeah, you're right. I apologize. I worded myself incorrectly. By change, I meant make it neutral or lower in that sense.
I apologize.
http://archive.is/mohqY
But still, I was on the right path. What I meant was to inform people that the moderators can do something about a rating if you just plead your case like this person did. Indicating that ratings are indeed monitored.
Congratulations. You have successfully proved that moderators, just like any other user here, can change their own trust ratings to neutral/negative.I apologize.
http://archive.is/mohqY
But still, I was on the right path. What I meant was to inform people that the moderators can do something about a rating if you just plead your case like this person did. Indicating that ratings are indeed monitored.
AFAIK, the trust rating that BadBear removed was one that BadBear himself added to the user. Someone can feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
There is a way. It's called messaging a moderator and pleading your case.
He can't. Trust feedbacks are not moderated that is why most people do as what they will with it. If you appeal their response will be of that it is their own trust feedbacks and opinion and you can't change it because that is how their mind works.I apologize.
http://archive.is/mohqY
But still, I was on the right path. What I meant was to inform people that the moderators can do something about a rating if you just plead your case like this person did. Indicating that ratings are indeed monitored.
There is a way. It's called messaging a moderator and pleading your case.
He can't. Trust feedbacks are not moderated that is why most people do as what they will with it. If you appeal their response will be of that it is their own trust feedbacks and opinion and you can't change it because that is how their mind works.Also whining publicly about untrusted feedback can only make it worse.
People frequently send negative trust based on "untrusted" feedback that others have left. Someone who cares about their reputation will want to prevent any kind of negative feedback from appearing on their profile whenever possible. Your post makes it sound as if you are arguing that it is okay to scam someone as long as they are not in the DT network and as long as they do not understand the importance of opening a scam accusation, and that all trust that is "untrusted" should be ignored.
There is also the possibility that someone will get added to the DT network in the future.
All this is just your speculation. I didn't mean any of that. Try reading or smth.
There is a way. It's called messaging a moderator and pleading your case.
He can't. Trust feedbacks are not moderated that is why most people do as what they will with it. If you appeal their response will be of that it is their own trust feedbacks and opinion and you can't change it because that is how their mind works.There is a way. It's called messaging a moderator and pleading your case.
Moderators can't do anything about trust ratings. Sig spamming on the other hand...
There is a way. It's called messaging a moderator and pleading your case.
To which the moderator will say "Trust is not moderated, sorry". Especially considering that the negative feedback was given due to the user doing something discouraged by the forum.I wonder if your account has been sold again, since I'm sure you've had this explained to you in the past.
There is a way. It's called messaging a moderator and pleading your case.
He can't. Trust feedbacks are not moderated that is why most people do as what they will with it. If you appeal their response will be of that it is their own trust feedbacks and opinion and you can't change it because that is how their mind works.
There is a way. It's called messaging a moderator and pleading your case.
Also whining publicly about untrusted feedback can only make it worse.
People frequently send negative trust based on "untrusted" feedback that others have left. Someone who cares about their reputation will want to prevent any kind of negative feedback from appearing on their profile whenever possible. Your post makes it sound as if you are arguing that it is okay to scam someone as long as they are not in the DT network and as long as they do not understand the importance of opening a scam accusation, and that all trust that is "untrusted" should be ignored.
There is also the possibility that someone will get added to the DT network in the future.
All this is just your speculation. I didn't mean any of that. Try reading or smth.
No, what I said - exactly - is here:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.15564826
Not even close to what you're blabbering about. I think it's safe to say that I probably know better whether my post needed some creative "way to put it" or not. Hint: it didn't. So don't.
Also whining publicly about untrusted feedback can only make it worse.
People frequently send negative trust based on "untrusted" feedback that others have left. Someone who cares about their reputation will want to prevent any kind of negative feedback from appearing on their profile whenever possible. Your post makes it sound as if you are arguing that it is okay to scam someone as long as they are not in the DT network and as long as they do not understand the importance of opening a scam accusation, and that all trust that is "untrusted" should be ignored.
There is also the possibility that someone will get added to the DT network in the future.
All this is just your speculation. I didn't mean any of that. Try reading or smth.
So how about this one The Pharmacist is that not count as spam too?
No, he is not spamming feedback.
An example can be seen on my feedback page:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=30747
Do a search on that page for "ecorox". You will find 52 identical feedback posts. That is spam.
The mods dont have any time to moderate the trust system, after a while, the trust system balances itself out.
Also whining publicly about untrusted feedback can only make it worse.
People frequently send negative trust based on "untrusted" feedback that others have left. Someone who cares about their reputation will want to prevent any kind of negative feedback from appearing on their profile whenever possible. Your post makes it sound as if you are arguing that it is okay to scam someone as long as they are not in the DT network and as long as they do not understand the importance of opening a scam accusation, and that all trust that is "untrusted" should be ignored.
There is also the possibility that someone will get added to the DT network in the future.
All this is just your speculation. I didn't mean any of that. Try reading or smth.
Also whining publicly about untrusted feedback can only make it worse.
People frequently send negative trust based on "untrusted" feedback that others have left. Someone who cares about their reputation will want to prevent any kind of negative feedback from appearing on their profile whenever possible. Your post makes it sound as if you are arguing that it is okay to scam someone as long as they are not in the DT network and as long as they do not understand the importance of opening a scam accusation, and that all trust that is "untrusted" should be ignored.
There is also the possibility that someone will get added to the DT network in the future.
I can see that you can get negative trust easily with one report, and after that no one give a damn if your negative trust gets removed or not
So how does one gets negative trust removed if you are not trading on forums, then how? by creating accounts and giving your self feed back?
So how does one gets negative trust removed if you are not trading on forums, then how? by creating accounts and giving your self feed back?
Do that and you'll likely get negged even more. There are very few things despised more that the myriads of scams and scam enablers here - and trust manipulation would be one of them.
Also whining publicly about untrusted feedback can only make it worse. I think we are lucky though that all you penny scammers aren't very bright and keep wasting your time on rubbish like this.
Jump to: