Topic: "Trust" system is shit !!! "Trust me !!!" - page 3. (Read 2522 times)

You know what I see here? Looks like you feel like you were shit on and now you cannot earn a load of money from campaigns.

Your activity is barely over 500 making you a low hero member at best as far as activity goes. Most ppl do not hit legendary til near 1000 activity, although it was possible to hit Legendary in the 700s I believe.

The 500 rules have nothing to do with the fact that before doing a shady activity, you didn't take the time to read the forum and actually see what may or may not be legal. According to number 1 above you engaged in offering to trade merit with a user. What legitimate reason would you have for doing this? The only thing that comes to mind is shady activity. You wanted to cheat a system that was set in place to try and push users to make better posts so that you and your buddy could earn more money. Why shouldn't that be viewed as shady?

Users earn merits based mostly on quality posts they have made. It doesn't matter if you have negative trust or not, you can still earn merit and make legendary rank at some point. If you're only worried about having a clean profile so you can earn more bitcoin, then you're likely not doing much to help the forum anyways.(I could be wrong, I haven't looked at your post history)

Now on your point of getting neg trust because someone doesn't like you, I don't agree with tagging someone because I don't like them. I get retaliatory tags from ppl I have tagged with bs reasons why they don't trust me all the time. Users should be able to appeal to the admins on their trust ratings from certain people. The reference should show proof if negging someone or something.

The problem with asking admins to overrule a users rating is it centralizes the forum and makes the default trust system worthless. They would also get a billion messages from idiots who deserved the neg and waste a ton of time on worthless reports.

Sometimes I feel like this damn place is full of 12 year olds who just can't fucking get along. Some of you need to grow up

i heard the cryptosection in redit has become big

Hey hey, the new forum is coming out in 3018^TM. Have high hopes. 

I think for last 2 years, no DT1 member has been added. Only people have been removed. DeaDTerra was one, and escrow.ms was two, that I vaguely recall.

You'll get used to it. Don't be surprised if people call you mod/dev/admin/god/satoshi.   

Trust system is supposed to make individuals look trustworthy, that's why people get added to DT, and that's why the ratings are visible. New members have no clue on how this system works, so if they see someone trustworthy, then they'll most likely trade with them. Newbies even deal with scammers and other fake newbies, and end up getting scammed, so dealing with a trusted member would make more sense. We know who to deal with and who not to deal with, after being here for months if not years.

This forum has complicated internals. For example, account sales isn't against the rules, but you get a scammer tag if you are revealed to be buying accounts. Most people don't even know the rules. Not all new members come here and search for things like: "Why do people get red trust?" "Why is account sales discouraged?" Things like this should be pinned in the spam-fest Discussion boards.

jes it is shit it permanently punishes users for mistakes they didnt knew about the absurd 500 sites long forums rules and bitcoin sects inquisition.

also critical point of view is being punished

just look at my mistrust.

1. i got mistrust because i wanted to trade merit with someone else to support each other, otherwise this forums consits only of gay bitcoin sectists that constantly merit each other

2. i got mistrust because someone from the bitcoin sect didn't like me personally and just wanted to punish me somehow, because he had mod powers he punished me

without that i would have been a legendary member of this forum already, with my high merit my over 4k posts, my project development and my high activity.

but i am optimistic that this forum will die together with bitcoin its cult, its sect, bitcoin gold and bitcoin cash, and we will get a more diversified and best of all "decentralised" cryptoindustry in the future and we all can continue on redit the post bitcoin cryptocurrency economy

@CoolWave jes positive trust people are also huge scammers, because

1. postive trust is tendenciously powered on the bitcoin sectists, that merit each other, and put positive trust to each other, distrusting everyone that is not a obeying bitcoin fanatic.

2. bitcoin cultists with positive trusts are no humanist people that care for others, remember everyone who was able to create an anonymous pow cryptcurrency knowing the huge pow waste and damages to also working banking systems in the world hesitated to create one, the bitcoin cult, still created one because the people here are also special, regarding their economic point of view.

i give you merit for this topic

regards

Every system has a flaws and I'm sure that 100% of it are not secure, it just follows the process how systematic approach (step-by-step) into our forum. It doesn't mean you have the good identity, you can be considered as one of the kings here in the forum, No. Even the higher-ups have some suspicious things, not all of them but there are possibilities that they have some. You can relate it to your government system, even though you have a good president in your country if there are corrupt officials and the system is broken af, it's non-sense.

If you want to solve your case, there are some good people/DTs will help you to recover your money, just post your case with eligible evidences.

Oooooo made the experienced list.

---

Anyone who relies on the trust system is making a flawed assessment of their situation. I look at it for what it was originally intended( I assume), assessing the person I'm trading with. I will generally still use escrow regardless but it's always there as a supplementary tool.

Most people also often fail in using it properly by reviewing untrusted feedback. I usually disregard most that font have a proper reference.

I personally don't get involved in the I fighting of DT members, usually just grab some popcorn and enjoy the show. I also rarely find those feedbacks carry much weight, except in getting people excluded from signature campaigns

Soon? I doubt it will ever happen just like migrating completely to the new forum.

Well, that's what happens if you give control over to an individual/group of individuals. Either way, I don't really want to complain. I have catered my trust-settings to trust like 2 people and don't even judge anybody by the random DT ratings left on their profile.

We are relying on it because replacing default trust isn't going to happen soon.

And yeah, the Trust System here sucks balls, its not the system but some *people* that caused it to be bad. They make the system be so bad. A lot of people have ego issues here, on a forum. So if you call "X" DT member, a dog, you might get tagged for that  . Some people act as if its decentralized, but its more centralized than it being decentralized. Wonder how many people are pissed at me for saying this. Don't deal with any body based on their trust, it might not be the best idea for you.

Just quoting a few replies from the experienced members,


I wonder why are we ever relying on a broken system so much that we think it's the only cure for all the problems on the forum. I shouldn't complain though, for I don't have a better alternative to suggest.

This forum's trust doesn't offer 100% guaranteed trustworthy of any user, it only shows facts/deals. You can see reference/comments on any user's profile if he has given any trust and judge yourself what to do. Forum can't offer 100% guarantee, requirement of KYC documents, as you say, will be shittiest action because no forum in this world does this and now in situation where bitcoin is for anonimity, it's a shame.
Can you link the profile of that person you had a deal?

You might just have contradicted what you are saying in your OP, him being tagged with what he did you means that the trust system still works as he paid for the consequences even if the transaction was a "small amount". Remember trading/transacting with a trusted member does not mean you can always be comfortable or carefree with him, you can always add your own precautionary measures (e.g. escrow) when you want to trade with him. Trust system might have its flaws but I am glad that it is here because it is useful in identifying the scammers and preventing the shitposters in joining most of the signature campaigns.

Do you really think that moderators have the time to be leaving everybody trust? How would they know which deals people were involved in, and hence deserving of trust, or will people need to post a trust application thread for every successful deal or transaction? Moderators have to deal with the hordes of bots, shitposters and trolls here on this forum, I really don't think such a minor feature of the forum should be handled by the moderators. If anything, there should just be more DT members, allowing trust to be spread more efficiently, rather than having the select few who interact with DT members be seen as trustworthy.

I would like to shared my thoughts about this case. While reading this whole thread, I feeled like it's someone having red trust got scammed by green trusted hypothetical member ( since OP didn't provide any evidence for what and by whom he got scammed). Then suddenly he is getting angried with the trust system and even started a thread by questioning the trust system, but not starting a thread under scam accusation. I think OP is now feeling the bitterness of getting scammed. Imagine what would be the feeling of other members when they realized that they got scammed by you. (I don't know you scammed or not, but I expressed based on what your trust exhibit to other members)

"The man who sows wrong thoughts and deeds and prays that God will bless him is in the position of a farmer who, having sown tares, asks God to bring forth for him a harvest of wheat". - James Allen

To be honest, I'm also believed that current system to be tweaked, but until then this "trust" is a good indication for others to get a idea about who you're going to deal with. It's not giving you the licence or seal of verified to deal with others. Do your business with your own risk and there is no system that can be implemented having zero scammed policy. Because it depends on person to person. A person is always labelled as trusted until he/she scammed another person, and how the hell are we  knowing any perticular member is a scammer or not by looking only at his/her posting behavior in the forum.

It's not me who uses it. It is other idiots who abuse it .

Not justified . Well there are lots of examples all over the forum if you look for it .


Disagree . No limitation would mean negative tagging on the basis of doubt or stupid researches

Sorry but if you can't use the trust system properly, it's hard to give your complaint any weight. You should have left the user with negative feedback, then opened a scam accusation with proof. Doing this would have likely resulted in the account having an up to date negative.

The trust system isn't perfect but is a good tool if used properly. It in no way removes your need to perform due diligence.
You need to look for a consistent pattern not just 1 trade, even recently. Some people try to trade with DT members just for a green feedback. Same as a few trades several years old.  I also suggest people look into untrusted feedback.

Then there is also escrow. So really to trade in this forum we have the tools necessary to trade safely.

Anyone, reading this thread, would ask only one thing after reading this sentence of yours, and that is "Who was he??" and if you answer that question with
Of course it does. Maybe not all the time, as Jet Cash said already, that if a green trusted account can be sold, then obviously the trust system is going to be abused, but that doesn't happen very often. And the trust system is the only reason for thousands of users leaving the forum because they were negative tagged for spamming or something and felt they cannot continue this anymore with the red sign on their profile.


I don't agree with that. Introduction of Merit System is itself a very big example of what you are saying is wrong.


No. Moderators are already too burdened with the reports and all. They should not be burdened with managing the trust issues as well.


Anyone doing anything suspicious or is involved in anything that can harm the forum or its users deserve a negative trust, and there should be no limitations to that.


That shitty negative look on your profile is a warning for others, and that is what the trust system does - it warns people to be careful if a profile is red tagged. Besides, if you don't want your profile to look shitty, you should simply stay away from anything that can cause that to happen. Just have a clean record and no one would ever touch your profile or spoil it. Simple as that.


I don't really understand how that would work for trust system.

A member with a green trust doesn't mean you can trust him blindly. The system isn't designed to work like this. It's just a parameter that you can use to make your own opinion. There are not a lot of people here that you can trust without any worry (green, purple, or rainbow trust doesn't matter). Maybe a dozen... Personally, I see 6 or 7 members who I know I can send money and come back in a month, I know they won't disappear. However, I know there are members with no shame to scam you for 5 bucks lol.

If only the moderators handled the trust system members would start yelling about centralization or whatever excuse looks good to give the opportunity to complain

Now this is what I call a waste of post . Whatever you have posted is pure shit . Read before you say something . Those guys are just ass lickers of corrupt people .

Lol, bullshit. You are outraged enough at getting scammed by a green trust member to post about it here, but can't remember who that member was? 

It seems much more likely that what you are really butthurt over is getting negged for offering a paid ICO bumping service. See: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.24494659

That's not a solution kid .I don't know if LBTC was ever hacked . A strong protection can be added . The "Worst" part about red trust is that , it becomes dead hard to get your dignity back . While a mod can at least be communicated to .

I definitely do not want to "pass" ponzies, I have already indicated that a warning message could be allotted to such users instead of those irritating negative tags .

This ofcourse should be verified if a guy is supportive to the forum or not . Definitely I've got that and that too because of stupid reasons or business rivalry . Those who were helped know what I mean to them .