Perhaps the trust system should allow DT1 users to trust someone without adding them to DT2?
There is, if any DT1/DT2 trust you they are free to leave positive feedback's on your profile and some day it will green trust if you not get any negative feedback's from other DT. I trust someone it doesn't mean I have to add them on my custom trust list. We should add them whom feedback's we trust. If any DT1 add someone on his custom trust list that means added user will be DT2. If DT1 left you positive feedback that means he only trust you, and he doesn't trust your feedback's. 
Topic: Users should be notified when being put on DT (Read 664 times)
@LoyceV
If you able to find the archive copy of that OP when it first published
It's too old, I don't have it.If you able to find the archive copy of that OP when it first published
Quote
I remember in first copy ,it was paid service and it look like same as newbie asking loan without collateral.
It's the services section, if it's free and not related to Bitcoin it shouldn't even be on that board.Quote
Ok, I also do not want to involve in religion but I do not think Idiot Coder is wrong on that feedback because it was paid service which cannot be measured (so I can say it is some kind of scammy/shady deal)
That's the problem with trusts without Reference. It literally says: "offering religious services.", which isn't against any rules.Of course you can argue it's scammy/shady, but you can argue that for any religion. Praying can't be measured, but I don't think that's the point of prayers. It's more like selling a dream, and if it makes someone happy to pay someone to pray for him, by all means, let them use Bitcoin for it!
This is a great example of why this forum is special and why people should be left the fuck alone unless they are directly harming other people. Some 3rd party idiot is ALWAYS going to have SOME KIND of objection to something people decide to do of their own free will. Unless there is a victim, I don't think it is any of their fucking business to begin with, and furthermore this mentality of getting into everyone's business is itself repugnant and antithetical to Bitcoin itself.
Bitcoin was created to serve as a person to person method of exchange in order to prevent 3rd parties from dictating to others what they can trade and how. Of course immediately people demand to be able to dictate to others once again regardless if it is hurting anyone or not... This is why I advocate a standard of evidence of theft, violation of contractual agreement, or violation of applicable laws as a standard for rating, so that unless there is a victim and physical evidence of some kind, people get left the fuck alone and are not subject to this weird Stalinesque regime where the trust cops pick a target then find the crime.
I've deleted the feedback.
Never put me on DT again, please. I'm never sending another rating again.
Never put me on DT again, please. I'm never sending another rating again.
I would have kept my opinion to myself in the praying example if I knew I was DT. It's kind of like kicking someone when they're sleeping.
Why would being DT have anything to do with how civil or friendly you behave? That's like a cop saying he wouldn't have given you a speeding ticket if he knew the judge was going to charge you a fine. This is exactly why I decided to remove you from my trust network.
Here's a little tip that may help you throughout your existence, not just on the forum: Behave as if someone whom you truly respect is always watching you. The test of true character is how we behave when no one is watching.
I would have kept my opinion to myself in the praying example if I knew I was DT. It's kind of like kicking someone when they're sleeping.
I don't want to give away too many personal details but I'm a borderline paranoid schizophrenic and I do have a mood problem. I never wanted to be DT because of this.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizotypal_personality_disorder
I don't want to give away too many personal details but I'm a borderline paranoid schizophrenic and I do have a mood problem. I never wanted to be DT because of this.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizotypal_personality_disorder
it was paid service which cannot be measured (so I can say it is some kind of scammy/shady deal)
There is nothing to measure. The service is free (donation optional) and is literally based on faith, not pretending to be anything else: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/i-will-pray-for-you-literally-4632723
I will admit I am an atheist, and perhaps I shouldn't let my religious views affect my ratings, but this is a science and technology forum. As I said, religion has no place here.
I'm not religious either, and I totally agree. But: this forum supports freedom of speech more than any other forum I know, and that's a valuable thing to cherish.
I will admit I am an atheist, and perhaps I shouldn't let my religious views affect my ratings, but this is a science and technology forum. As I said, religion has no place here.
@LoyceV
If you able to find the archive copy of that OP when it first published
It's too old, I don't have it.If you able to find the archive copy of that OP when it first published
Quote
I remember in first copy ,it was paid service and it look like same as newbie asking loan without collateral.
It's the services section, if it's free and not related to Bitcoin it shouldn't even be on that board.Quote
Ok, I also do not want to involve in religion but I do not think Idiot Coder is wrong on that feedback because it was paid service which cannot be measured (so I can say it is some kind of scammy/shady deal)
That's the problem with trusts without Reference. It literally says: "offering religious services.", which isn't against any rules.Of course you can argue it's scammy/shady, but you can argue that for any religion. Praying can't be measured, but I don't think that's the point of prayers. It's more like selling a dream, and if it makes someone happy to pay someone to pray for him, by all means, let them use Bitcoin for it!
I can make a weekly list of changes to DT2. It will be too much to PM them all, but it could be used to review their trust.
) users shouldn't be tagged for their believes, "offering religious services" or their opinion in general.
I made a mistake "Bank transfer" I thought was irreversible and I mistook "irreversible" for PayPal.
Bank transfers can be reversed too, given the right circumstances. That's not why I excluded you, and this tag was removed before I even saw it. But you seem to think that's the only incorrect feedback you left. This one is much worse:3- look at this rating > https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=2270050 ,he gave a negative rating for someone who offers to pray for people, whether you believe in prayers/God or not, you should not tag someone for that, specially that the accused member does not even ask for money in return for his "prayers".
I don't like any religion, but I do believe (pun intended ) users shouldn't be tagged for their believes, "offering religious services" or their opinion in general.@LoyceV
If you able to find the archive copy of that OP when it first published because I guess that thread is changed now (after the -ve feedback by idiot coder).
I remember in first copy ,it was paid service and it look like same as newbie asking loan without collateral.
Ok, I also do not want to involve in religion but I do not think Idiot Coder is wrong on that feedback because it was paid service which cannot be measured (so I can say it is some kind of scammy/shady deal)
Perhaps the trust system should allow DT1 users to trust someone without adding them to DT2?
Thats just sending someone feedback. Leave a note in their feedback that says that you trust them if you personally trust them to do business, but don't want them as a representative of you when leaving others feedback.
Perhaps the trust system should allow DT1 users to trust someone without adding them to DT2?
I didn't really see the intent of this thread as having to do with people being wrongfully added to DT, just that someone added might not be aware that they are on DT. Years ago, I added someone without letting them know, only to get a PM a week later when some drama erupted over nothing, and they wanted no part of it. After that I always asked people's permission, but again two other people asked to be removed shortly after being added, as they began getting dragged into forum drama. It is absolutely something that at the very least a user should know about. An opt out option would be useful as well.
Don't worry about it, many members keep an open eye on new DT members, and once they are proven to not fit for this kind of task, they get excluded, you are a perfect example for this.
As long as the feedback is relative or accurate and not opinionated, feel free to do so, just don't abuse that prowess you have to harm members.
I agree with you, OP. There was a time in 2017 when hilariousandco actually started a thread in Meta about adding some new members to DT2 via his inclusion(s). It was a big enough deal that he wanted to solicit the opinions of the community, and I do think that any new DT members ought to be made aware of that fact at the very least.
I get that Theymos wants to have a fairly broad DT pool, but there are still some do's and don'ts that members should abide by. I'm not sure how many members end up on DT2 without knowing about it, but OP is one example of that. It probably isn't a huge issue, but OP should have been made aware that he was going to end up on DT.
I get that Theymos wants to have a fairly broad DT pool, but there are still some do's and don'ts that members should abide by. I'm not sure how many members end up on DT2 without knowing about it, but OP is one example of that. It probably isn't a huge issue, but OP should have been made aware that he was going to end up on DT.
If the picture is unclear to some of these members
Why not be educated in a simple way
It can be in the form of instructions to align the performance of members with what is required of them
It seems senseless to expect people to uphold an agreement they didn't know they made.
It's not an agreement, though it should be and it was in my case when I got added to DT2 in 2018. There should be standards of behavior for DT members, but there really isn't. There never was, and it's even worse now because there are so many new DT2 members. It is about as much of an agreement as a 500 page terms of service and a button you check to say you have read and agree to it, except you are held to the agreement and they don't even bother showing you the 500 pages you agreed to.
Where I can get the main tasks of DT1, and DT2 members?
What are main differences between tasks of DT1 and DT2 members?
I known that DT1 members have higher level on DT1, but not sure exactly what are main differences between them?
DT1 members are voted on by the community as explained here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/defaulttrust-changes-5095156What are main differences between tasks of DT1 and DT2 members?
I known that DT1 members have higher level on DT1, but not sure exactly what are main differences between them?
DT2 members are selected and de-selected by DT1 members adding, removing or excluding them from their individual trust lists.
DT members have no set "tasks", they are simply users who are generally trusted by the community to leave both accurate and helpful feedback about other members.
The only difference between DT1 and DT2 is that DT1 users get to choose DT2 users. If your trust depth is set to 2 (the default), then there is no difference in the appearance of the ratings they leave. If you continue to use Default Trust but change your trust depth to 1, the ratings of DT2 users will move from the "Trusted feedback" to the "Untrusted feedback" section.
Where I can get the main tasks of DT1, and DT2 members?
What are main differences between tasks of DT1 and DT2 members?
I known that DT1 members have higher level on DT1, but not sure exactly what are main differences between them?
It does not mention there:
DefaultTrust changes
What are main differences between tasks of DT1 and DT2 members?
I known that DT1 members have higher level on DT1, but not sure exactly what are main differences between them?
It does not mention there:
DefaultTrust changes
I really don't like being the centre of attention on this forum - especially when I have work to do. I have spent less time programming and more time checking this forum regarding my latest controversy. It's stressful, to say the least.
If with great power comes great responsibility, you should at least know of your power.
If with great power comes great responsibility, you should at least know of your power.
I hope that this is indeed a new feature in the new forum, along with a shite-load of other notification options (when someone quotes you, "tags" you, etc.)
The fact that the only thing i get a notification from on this forum is when someone PM's me (and that only works 50/50 for me???) is driving me absolutely nuts.
Some features on this forum are also so esoteric (DT, the entire trust debacle...) that i really don't see how any outsiders/newcomers can get a grip on the system in a relatively short amount of time/ at all, especially compared to other forums, (Nulled, HF). The forum could definitely be made much more user-friendly..
The fact that the only thing i get a notification from on this forum is when someone PM's me (and that only works 50/50 for me???) is driving me absolutely nuts.
Some features on this forum are also so esoteric (DT, the entire trust debacle...) that i really don't see how any outsiders/newcomers can get a grip on the system in a relatively short amount of time/ at all, especially compared to other forums, (Nulled, HF). The forum could definitely be made much more user-friendly..
Perhaps someone should already have a history of leaving accurate ratings before being added to DT....
I definitely agree with this, which is why it used to be kind of a big deal to add new DT2 members. DT1 folks need to be pretty careful about who they include in their trust lists, and I do think only those members who've shown good judgement themselves in leaving feedback should be added to DT2. On the other hand, it seems like the system will correct "errors" fairly quickly, as evidenced by what happened with OP.It seems senseless to expect people to uphold an agreement they didn't know they made.
It's not an agreement, though it should be and it was in my case when I got added to DT2 in 2018. There should be standards of behavior for DT members, but there really isn't. There never was, and it's even worse now because there are so many new DT2 members. I don't like any religion, but I do believe (pun intended ) users shouldn't be tagged for their believes, "offering religious services" or their opinion in general.
) users shouldn't be tagged for their believes, "offering religious services" or their opinion in general.This is a science forum - religion has no place here.
I only have around 150 posts to my name. I am still relatively new. I had no idea whatsoever I was on DT so I was a little more liberal when I left negative feedback - I thought my opinion didn't matter. I found out I WAS DT after I left false feedback (my mistake I removed it). since I am only a member I think it was a little unfair gmaxwell didn't inform me he was putting me on DT, and in the future, people should be informed via PM that they have been put on the list.
Thoughts?
Thoughts?
Whether you're on DT or not, be confident and accurate in the feedback you leave for others. If you are unsure it's better to not leave the feedback at all. If you're going to call someone a scammer, be prepared to defend your accusation. Pretend you're the one who will be put on trial to prove the accusation. If you aren't 100% confident the evidence that you or others have presented supports your claims then don't make those claims.
The amount of posts you have should have nothing to do with it, use better judgement and you'll be fine.
I can make a weekly list of changes to DT2. It will be too much to PM them all, but it could be used to review their trust.
) users shouldn't be tagged for their believes, "offering religious services" or their opinion in general.
I made a mistake "Bank transfer" I thought was irreversible and I mistook "irreversible" for PayPal.
Bank transfers can be reversed too, given the right circumstances. That's not why I excluded you, and this tag was removed before I even saw it. But you seem to think that's the only incorrect feedback you left. This one is much worse:3- look at this rating > https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=2270050 ,he gave a negative rating for someone who offers to pray for people, whether you believe in prayers/God or not, you should not tag someone for that, specially that the accused member does not even ask for money in return for his "prayers".
I don't like any religion, but I do believe (pun intended ) users shouldn't be tagged for their believes, "offering religious services" or their opinion in general. Perhaps someone should already have a history of leaving accurate ratings before being added to DT....
And several years of history here to look at before being "trusted"
First thing is, you shouldn't left false feedback or retaliatory feedback even you are not on DT network. Notify or send PM to DT members possible if add new. Most likely you are added on his custom list before he become DT1. Usually if I add someone my custom list now(after become DT1) then obviously I sent PM. Because perhaps his all feedback's are not accurate of something wrong. But I never add someone whom feedback's I don't trust.
However, don't left feedback if you can't stand strongly against them. Because if you left false rating then they will open thread against you. So you have to prepare yourself to defend it.
However, don't left feedback if you can't stand strongly against them. Because if you left false rating then they will open thread against you. So you have to prepare yourself to defend it.
Perhaps someone should already have a history of leaving accurate ratings before being added to DT....
I agree, as people rank up in the trust they are considered to have slightly more stringent responsibilities to the forum. It seems senseless to expect people to uphold an agreement they didn't know they made. I think a feature of being able to exclude yourself from the default trust would also be useful for those that do not want to participate, like some have manually asked others to do.
I only have around 150 posts to my name. I am still relatively new. I had no idea whatsoever I was on DT so I was a little more liberal when I left negative feedback - I thought my opinion didn't matter. I found out I WAS DT after I left false feedback (my mistake I removed it). since I am only a member I think it was a little unfair gmaxwell didn't inform me he was putting me on DT, and in the future, people should be informed via PM that they have been put on the list.
Thoughts?
Thoughts?
I think you used to be DT3 member from a long time, (I know that because I used to keep depth at 4 and your feedback come as trusted for me.) I guess now with new system gmaxwell become DT1 and you become DT2 due to this reason.
It does not make any sense that every week I(any user) sent PM to people explaining that why they are included and why they are excluded.
I agree with you, OP. There was a time in 2017 when hilariousandco actually started a thread in Meta about adding some new members to DT2 via his inclusion(s). It was a big enough deal that he wanted to solicit the opinions of the community, and I do think that any new DT members ought to be made aware of that fact at the very least.
I get that Theymos wants to have a fairly broad DT pool, but there are still some do's and don'ts that members should abide by. I'm not sure how many members end up on DT2 without knowing about it, but OP is one example of that. It probably isn't a huge issue, but OP should have been made aware that he was going to end up on DT.
I get that Theymos wants to have a fairly broad DT pool, but there are still some do's and don'ts that members should abide by. I'm not sure how many members end up on DT2 without knowing about it, but OP is one example of that. It probably isn't a huge issue, but OP should have been made aware that he was going to end up on DT.
You shouldn’t be leaving false feedbacks to people regardless of whether or not you are on DT, don’t you agree?
I made a mistake "Bank transfer" I thought was irreversible and I mistook "irreversible" for PayPal. I was on my phone during film class. I was listening to the instructor and leaving feedback at the same time. I'll make sure I have full attention to what I am doing when leaving negative feedback.
You shouldn’t be leaving false feedbacks to people regardless of whether or not you are on DT, don’t you agree?
I only have around 150 posts to my name. I am still relatively new. I had no idea whatsoever I was on DT so I was a little more liberal when I left negative feedback - I thought my opinion didn't matter. I found out I WAS DT after I left false feedback (my mistake I removed it). since I am only a member I think it was a little unfair gmaxwell didn't inform me he was putting me on DT, and in the future, people should be informed via PM that they have been put on the list.
Thoughts?
Thoughts?
Jump to: