Here we go again with the fucktarded debate about trust because people just look at useless colored/formatted numbers & are too lazy or stupid to click a hyperlink called Trust:, then read text and the numbers that actually matter:
What is the purpose with entering "Risked BTC amount"? To weight the rating, whether positive, negative, or neutral. What "Risked BTC amount"/weight did I place on the "or had a successful trade" positives for email forwarding? That's right, zero, zilch, zip, nil, nought, nothing, nix, diddly-squat, BECAUSE THEY SENT FIRST - no BTC or theft of services was risked on my end, because their contracts only came into force as soon as they paid & I saw at least 1 confirm.
When I do fill the "Risked BTC amount" involving a contract, it's because it was already in force, and the person either deserved the weight of +/- trust for breaking or not breaking contract, or a neutral if the trade was successful in less than every sense of the word.
Would you prefer dishonesty; not categorizing successful trades as successful trades, as the feedback page instructs us all to do?
You're using the feedback system as intended, but this isn't really an issue with anything you are doing, but (arguably) others just buying things merely for the default trust feedback (which like it or not people obviously want to help make them look more trusted/established) for whatever reason, hence why some people are likely just buying things they very probably don't need, want or use.
Nope. My problem is when someone does a trade, just for that number. That number holds a disgusting amount of weight around here. And it just ends up with people looking for others who can give it to them easily.
Basically people looking for another CanaryInTheMine.
I've either forgotten or wasn't fully briefed on CITM. Are the feedback instructions the same now as they were back then? Was CITM putting down risked
BTC to add undeserved weight to those who sent first/before contracts were in force?
If I recall correctly CITM was leaving feedback for anyone who did a trade with him then adding them to his trust list so he was artificially inflating his own score and people would then be only trading with him for the inevitable feedback and the inclusion onto default trust (thus essentially just buying their way onto it).