10 merit is difficult enough IMO. I don't want it to be too difficult. Any other suggestions? We could just keep an eye on it and respond reactively to cases like this.
Edit:
Perhaps some kind of additional RANK or ACTIVITY requirement could help? It would increase the cost of failure considerably. I mean who knows who they can trust after being here 5 mins? having a broad knowledge of a lot of peoples pasts and their relationships with others here is going to put you in a far better position to start vouching for how trustworthy they are isn't it?
Trust (real trust) is something very important to the board. Not just for trading but also for even more important reasons that I won't go off topic with now.
These accounts if you decide require nuking.. are not substantial loss since they are mostly new and can be replaced in a short amount of time. You can easily buy merits for around 4 bucks ( so I have heard) even if you do not have the required alts to gradually power them up. Or friends whom are merit sources.
I would have thought a DT1 would need to have years of history to look over and analyse to install any real trust in those people and of course the cost of losing something that takes a minimum of 4- 5years to replace is quite a risk to play around with. Perhaps also some trading experience? I mean it may be slightly more manual but it is better that DT1 actually represents trust. With perhaps review every 3 months and any untrustworthy actions mean immediate removal. Gradual careful additions may be added.
There seemed to be far LESS trouble and the board seemed to provide a far more optimal environment in many ways when you just picked the DT1 that you were familiar with and trusted yourself.
On top of this you may not have considered the psychological impact of allowing those KNOWN to have committed openly very untrustworthy actions to actually punish others for lesser evils is going to fuel persons to really rebel against the system that allows that to take place. Causing a lot of friction and motivate people to game the systems and not use them in the way that you have stated they should be used.
In some instances (like an anonymous forum) I think broadly centralised control works better than experimenting with decentralised control. Especially as generally it will allow for more consistent and fairer treatment of all members. This will lead to less friction, easier/less appeals since there will be more accountability.
So in short I think some mix of activity and trading history (manual analysis) with some merit requirement mixed in could make it harder to game and make the cost of failure far higher. But even then I think DT1 should really be a solid and observably trustworthy bunch that really denotes TRUST. Any observable dirt REAL DIRT in financial terms of a DT1 invalidates them to most of the board. This will always come up and make the entire system look corrupt and misleading when they dish scam tags on anyone else.
These are my honest tips for improving the system. I would like to see the same thing as you. Free of scammers and ico pumpers, sig spammers without leaving free speech vulnerable . A real meritocracy.
I could be as simple though as leaving it how it is and offering kudos to anyone that finds any financially motivated untrustworthy deeds committed by anyone on dt1 and instantly blacklisting them. Keeping then a fresh batch of observably spotless DT1.
If those people went to all that trouble to install someone (many others do trust) who observably didn't trust 2 persons that are not spotless ? does this not tell you something theymos?
anyway those are my ideas to help get trust back into the trust system. If this is off topic here then do not delete it since theymos asked for ways to improve it, simply let me know and I will delete it and copy it to another thread.
(result from my analysis so you can benefit from this)
