Topic: Viewing TRUST when not logged in - page 3. (Read 1721 times)

So you're afraid users with positive trust will start scamming guests because those guests see them as green and therefore trusted?
How many times do you think that can happen? 1? 2? After that there will be a scam accusation and they will be red. Every guest will see them as red and it will be nearly impossible for that ex-green member to scam again with that account.

Now, if we don't show anything. How many times can a known scammer scam? At least tens of times. So what's the better option?

There's also a third option: shown only negative trust to guests and not the positive. That would be enough to stop most known scammers.

Why do you think the simple act of registering makes a newbie able to understand the trust system, something he didn't understand at all a minute before when he was a guest?
Why do you want to show trust to brand new users and not guests?

So a known scammer creates several other accounts that leave positive trust to themselves and negative trust to every "scam hunter"?
Then guests would have no idea whom to trust and no good would be made. You can't shown trust left by scammers to users who don't understand the trust system.


If your main argument against this idea is you don't want guests to see as green/trusted any users then let's just show to them negative trust left by DT.

what we asking for is more like selling him a grow tent rather than asking to him to stay under the rain until he learns how to build a house.

this whole argument goes down to the accuracy of the feedback on the most active members and scammers on the market place,  as i mentioned earlier, the feedback on the market place is very accurate and mainly only based on trade related matters and the results and experience of other members, yet you want guests to reinvent the wheel rather than making use of data that has been worked on for years.

anyhow, this is like beating a dead horse, let's just agree to disagree and call it a day.

That isn't what we are talking about here. We are talking about whether they see someones +1, +10, -5 trade with caution, or nothing at all. A +1 for "helping me with my homework" is worth less than a +1 for "completed successful deal for 1 BTC" but when going in blind, they are the same.

my whimsical example:

A fella walks into your hardware store and says, I've never done any sort of work in fabrication, and can't handle any tools, but I've decided to build a house. What tool would you recommend? You hand him a saw. He may be able to cut the timbers and pound nails in with the handle, it might keep him out of the rain for a bit, but when the house falls down, it'd sure be better to be in the rain than under a collapsed house.

I'm not against helping guests, I am however not for making it worse by giving them half of the required tools to help or hurt themselves with. I'd rather they hurt themselves all on their own and learn from it if they are so determined to do so, or realize that they don't have a full set of tools, so do some research into what they need.

To evaluate feedback left, you need to be a member here. Without evaluating feedback, its useless and potentially harmful. The solution is to become a member here. If you don't want to become a member here, my argument is that you are better off without potentially misleading information, and we begin around the circle again.


If we really must come to some solution, as I said, I'd be in support of a custom trust list with no separation between Trusted and Untrusted feedback, no Red/Green or numbers involved. Just a list of feedback that would still require someone to investigate reference links, determine credibility of sources, etc.

Exactly, then allow guests to read and judge for themselves.

I would agree with that. I've been critical of the calculated "trustworthiness" score since the beginning, but because there was plenty of information about it posted, people here were free to interpret it as they liked, so it didn't hit my radar to the same extent as showing this score to people who are blind going into it.


As a newbie, if you see a green number that was earned because you had someones back in a fight in Meta, does that not have the same weight as a green number earned from a valid trade of a related item? Or how about a green number earned from a 0.005 BTC sale, and now you are doing a 0.1 BTC trade? Your first instinct as a person who has been around on the internet during the era of Craigslist scams and all sorts of others, is to not trade someone unless you have that gut feeling that tells you that you will be safe.

By forum community consensus, it is fine to give someone negative feedback for account selling. Thats fine, as a member of this forum, I understand and accept the rationale, but does that apply to someone who is not a member of the forum? People give each other positive feedback for being helpful at scambusting, again in the context of the forums thats fine, but at least to me, that doesn't register as anything noteworthy when deciding if someone is trustworthy with money I'm about to send them. The best most trustworthy account seller, someone that a guest user might be here looking for, might have far more negative trust than the guy who hasn't been caught yet. Outside of the contexts of the forum feedback system rules, a lot of things are at the very best misleading. By not giving people the crutch of misleading numbers, they trade with people using the same rules they learned to avoid internet scams. If you give people a number that says, yeah this guy is safe to trade with, its like giving them a stick with notches in it and no further explanation. Why do I trust a guy who is always friendly and answered my mining questions with my BTC?


I have zero faith in the trust system if you have no other information available. I've been active in the marketplace here since 2012, and involved in the trust system since its creation. I'm not being a jerk about it because I have something against the systems in place, I just don't think its the right tool for the job. We are trying to drive a nail with a wrench. The number of people's feedback that I'd trust here at face value I could count with one hand. Thats not to say I don't value a lot of member's opinions, its just that I'd have to read why trust is given and what support is given before considering it.


A $10 life lesson isn't a very expensive one. I hate to say that people deserve to be scammed, but sometimes a small mistake like that is worth far more than you'd think when a similar situation comes up with higher stakes.


And why are those threads not moderated and removed? One reason is because the most dangerous thing is telling people that scams don't happen, and then they get scammed when they let their guards down by the ones that slip through the cracks. Give guest users a half functional tool, and there is more potential for damage. See a green +1, and maybe the $10 that they are willing to gamble with despite alarm bells going off becomes $100.



Again, I disagree, as long as feedback that isn't solely related to trading its value as a trading tool is not definitive, you need to read each case and judge for yourself.

I think you are really underestimating the accuracy of the trust system, have a look at this > https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/a-list-of-top-scammers-on-the-digital-goods-market-3486346

this is a list of confirmed scammers , i am willing to bet a horse on each of them, and am sure most active members on the market place board would be willing to do the same , we as members here, know those guys are scammers, we tag them and we don't deal with them. 99% of those feedback are accurate.

those scammers know for sure that nobody on the forum would send them money first, yet every single day they bump their old threads that have a dozen of fake reviews, and many guests keep falling for them everyday and the reason does not matter ( greed, stupidity , low IQ or even bad luck) the results matter.

and even if you were to argue about my figures,  i still think that protecting a single person  hard-earned 10$ is worth the effort, not everybody is as intelligent as need be.

you can also have a look at this random screenshot of mine.




11 out of 13 topics on the first page of digital goods are scammers, this is almost 90% scam . i am willing to be held responsible for my claims, every topic on this screenshot is made by a confirmed scammer except for pinned topic and the last 2 topics (neutral)

and this 1st page doesn't look much different at any given time.

---

I am not trying to force my logic here, but i am pretty sure there is a major point which you don't seem to understand, while i agree with you that many ratings are B.S based on nothing related to trading ( which is why i have always opposed giving such ratting that are not directly related to trade based stuff) The main point that you need to realize that the trust system on the market place is tremendously accurate, it's the result of members including myself who have been observing those scammers for YEARS and all the ratings are based on trading facts and not some meaningless feedback which is based on political b.s or trolling, while there may be a few members who participate there being tagged for a silly reason, i am pretty sure that the majority of tagged frequent users there (over 99%) are scammers.


these are FACTS , if you wish , you can deny them, but if you think that they can be even a little accurate then i see no reason why wouldn't you want them to be shared with other poor souls who get scammed on a daily bases by those scammers.

The problem is that guests who land in scam threads from Google have no idea that trust ratings exist and that you have to register to see them. I disagree that showing scores would be harmful. It would at least give them an indication that something like that exists and they would be able to access more information about the seller. How they use or misuse that information is another story, but that's no different from a freshly-registered newbie so again, I don't see how it's harmful to show the score to guests if we're showing it to newbies.

Let them fend for themselves but let's not force them to do so blindfolded with hands tied behind their backs.

Fair point. Would you at least concede that we should be allowing guests to see individual trust pages and ratings, even if they don't see a calculated score? Whether those ratings are broken down in to "trusted" and "untrusted" based on DT, or whether they are all just placed under "untrusted", is another argument.

The system where people fend for themselves is in place here. I'd hope that no one fully relies on the numerical scored of the feedback system. Its a tool to help you make your own informed decision, which relies on your own ability to wade through noise, and validate the legitimacy of any positive or negative claims someone makes against another. Seeing a number is not useful in the slightest, and I'd argue incredibly misleading and dangerous to someone who makes any assumptions about the feedback system.

The act of tagging scammers is an act by members to leave notes to other members that a user is potentially untrustworthy. It is then up for the member who originally wished to do business with the alleged scammer to read through any relevant proof and claims, and make their own informed decision whether to trade with that person. If you see a red -1 and don't look any further, you could be missing out on a trade because of a difference of political view between two members, or a petty fight. In reverse, you see someone with a green +1 and immediately they are vetted by the site, and you have no qualms with throwing money at them.

In this case, I feel that showing guests feedback scores is irresponsible and more harmful than not. If they don't want to take the time to register, I hope they get a valuable lesson for the $10 they lose, and hopefully its just that. Everyone born in the last 60 years knows what a shady internet deal is. Leave it to their intuition rather than interfering with that.

I have some suggestion which I believe will somehow increase the safety and credibility of this forum user and people who are not. I think it will be nice if guest users can see the trust and reputable of this forum users because a guest user of this forum was scammed acouple of days back. Here is the link to the thread https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.49408386

same goes to member on the forum then, if they chose to conduct any business here, it's on them, so why bother tag scammers? let everybody try for themselves and take full responsibility of their actions.

unless you think it's okay for other people who are not members of the forum to get scammed then i do not see a reason why the feedback shouldn't be showing to everyone.

the feedback on the market place are pretty accurate, you can check them out yourself, i am someway active on that board and I know those feedback on most scammers are very-very accurate to say the least, and i see no point why shouldn't guests enjoy the benefit of these accurate feedback.

I do agree with your statement  it's 100% right

but it does not mean we should not  protect them, i can understand why someone couldn't be bothered about protecting those people, but i can't seem to understand why would someone  disagree on protecting other people's money from scammers.

I see where you are coming from, and I do agree with your points to an extent.

On the other hand, the forum obviously has a reputation as a good place to post these kind of scams, which is why we see so god damn many of them constantly popping up. I agree guests shouldn't be doing trades, but they fact is they are and we can't stop them unless we make more boards private, which I doubt very much is a route theymos would want to take. Making such a small change as showing Default Trust to guests would save some from being scammed, and if these were people who weren't going to make an account anyway, then I don't think their understanding of the trust system is really revelant beyond being able to read "Trade with extreme caution". In your eBay example, you can still see users' feedback ratings and read their individual feedbacks without an account.

None of this prevents them from making an account and learning more if they are interested/motivated to do so.

I agree that guests should not do business with people on this site. If they choose to, its on them. I find it weird to be requesting features to benefit people who aren't members of this site. If you can't put in the effort to make an account, you take the risk of being scammed. Ah, I don't have an Ebay account, so I'll just contact the seller by email and try to take it off site. Also, I'll pay with Western Union, it'll be fine.

A half baked understanding of the feedback system is more harmful than no understanding of the feedback system. Its a tool that I believe could be more easily misunderstood than used properly if you don't have any prior knowledge about Bitcointalk or the ecosystem around here.

why all the hustle for buying a 10$ or 20$ digital item?

check this out > https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/80-offegift-cardsituneswal-martnikeadidasbest-buyamazonebaymore-4835324

now log-out and check it again.

when a search engine sends you to such a topic and you find an autobuy link , and whats worse is that in self-moderated threads, these scammers self vouch to themselves with a dozen of positive comments, delete all legit comments  , and without being able to see that red paint, everything seems 100% legit.

simply because guests do not know what self-moderated thread is, they see a topic that has been there for a year, only positive comments, everyone and their grandmother will trust that scammer.

In the first place it would be wrong to be a guest and do deal with a user of the forum. If you are one that is security conscious you would join the forum first and even take time to understand it before any transcation

Lots of promising benefits. There are crypto investors, who simply visit the forum to get news/ updates/ information/ reports of projects they interested in. Those guys don't have need to communicate with forum community, projects' communities, and so on. However, they should see the trust points of core team's developers to have clearer and more general on what's going on with those projects.

This guy just got scammed $45 dollars because you can't see trust without being logged in.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5101897.msg49408123;topicseen#msg49408123


Yes, this here ^^^^^^^^^^

Why not make it just show users' overall trust scores under their name in threads/posts, but keep individual profile pages the same as they are now. A guest would be able to see whether a seller has green trust, neutral trust, or red trust, but wouldn't be able to see each individual feedback until they make an account themselves.

Fair, I'll concede the point at least partially. If I'm not mistaken, you need to be logged in to view anything from the Reputation section. I don't believe google searches discover posts from the reputation board, but I could be wrong about that. That doesn't help against threads elsewhere though.


This is kind of what I was talking about. Any user who has been here for a week knows that there are users with feedback about them being pedos/pill abusers/ etc, and I dare to say that 99.9% of that feedback is false. Thats not to say that someone on Bitcointalk couldn't be fired or not hired in the first place because of claims like that. But I suppose if the information is out their regardless, allowing guests a consolidated place to view all claims probably isn't worse than having to scour the board looking for them.

+1 and exactly as I suggested a couple times in this thread.  I'm sure a "seen only by non-registered users rule" banner message could be created and put on as a banner message ESPECIALLY in the areas that involve sales of anything.