Quote from: PowerGlove on November 02, 2024, 11:13:12 PM

To be clear: I'm not in the habit of telling people to fuck off (or even thinking it), especially when they're just asking questions (even irritating/uncomfortable/exhausting ones).

Me neither. But I love the fact that I'm allowed to do so, if I ever feel like it.

Quote

But, what gets me to see red pretty quickly is when I realize that I'm not being asked questions from a completely innocent and harmlessly-inquisitive place. (Honestly, when I consider users like Vod, my thinking is: besides interrogatees being on the wrong end of an often unjustifiable and unfair power gradient, I don't see how some people on DT don't routinely find themselves being impolitely told to go and take a long walk off a short pier. That is, before they've done their damage, I mean: obviously, they're used to getting an earful after they've painted an account.)

I wouldn't always call it "damage" done by DT. Many scammers only get tagged after they scammed someone. When you say "questions", I think about all the obvious scam-waiting-to-happen cases I've seen. Like this one: calling me a troll after pointing out the slightest thing wrong with his website. The next year, he finally caught a big fish and pulled an exit scam.

Quote from: LoyceV on June 14, 2018, 06:10:20 AM

Side Note:
I didn't trust them from the start, but there was no evidence yet Sad

No tags without victims. In this case the victim lost 16 Bitcoins. It's a fine line between questioning good users for no reason, and pointing out the obvious scammers.

Quote from: PowerGlove on November 02, 2024, 11:13:12 PM

if I turn off maximum-tolerance mode (as in, I abandon the philosophy that “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”), then I wouldn't even mess around with any of this "split" user base stuff: I'd just scrap the whole trust system

But ... The Trust system doesn't take away anyone's ability to express their opinion. They can still type whatever they want. It just discourages most people from doing so for the sake of earning money.

Quote

Quote from: PowerGlove

One really nice thing about scrapping DefaultTrust would be that a lot of what confuses people about how the trust system works would immediately disappear (voting, DT status/levels, etc.) and what remains would be much easier for most people to get their heads around.

Even if you exclude DefaultTrust, the DT-levels still exist. Have you seen my Trust Depth viewer? The last update was 3 years ago. If you want to see your data, I can dust off my old script to run an update (it takes a few days to process all data). Even without DT, you're probably already trusting users who's posts you haven't seen.

Quote

Quote

Without voting, there'd also be no transparency-wise need for trust lists to be publicly visible (via data dumps), which would make a ton of drama simply evaporate.

Hey, don't take away my Trust list viewer Tongue

It's my proudest work here Tongue

Nobody else ever created one.
Seriously though, the Trust Depth viewer shows why you'll still need to see this. Now that I think about it: Trust settings even mentions it: "List the users who you trust to have good trust ratings and good trust lists". One could argue it's weird the forum doesn't show trust lists if you need to see them before you can create your own trust list.

Quote from: LoyceV on November 02, 2024, 05:45:12 PM

Like the units of evil: would you have paid to post here?

I wouldn't have. In fact, it's unlikely that I even would have applied to be whitelisted if I hadn't by that point read some of your posts and thought: "Okay, now here's a dude that speaks my language!".

[/quote]
Thanks

Quote

@logfiles: Sorry for messing up your topic. Cheesy

Sorry

But since OP's question seems to be answered and we're still in Meta, I figured it's okay Tongue