Quote from: Quickseller on October 25, 2018, 06:57:14 AM

Quote from: hilariousetc on October 24, 2018, 06:13:31 AM

Quote from: Quickseller on October 24, 2018, 05:57:49 AM

A select few people in power around here seem to be very power hungry.

[...] You tried your best to get numerous positions of power here starting with default trust and then escrowing

It is too bad that I never asked to be put on anyone's trust list, I resisted people who were suggesting that I ask to be put back on after I was removed the 1st time,

Anyone with an ounce of intelligence would know that actually asking to be included on DT is a big no-no. Just like it is with asking to become a staff member. It's too obvious and the wrong way to go about it and if it was a simple as just asking then everyone would do it, and the majority would probably be doing it for entirely the wrong reasons and crave that power for whatever reason or benefits it has. As with default trust, put in the work and if someone thinks you're doing a good job they'll likely include you eventually. That's how it's meant to work. Earn your right to be on there by showing you can use it efficiently and accurately. It works pretty well in most cases, and I'm sure you were fine with it and had no complaints right up until it turned on you, but when it does those people think it's a broken system and complain the most. Again, I'm not saying it's perfect but usually works well the vast majority of times.

Quote from: Quickseller on October 25, 2018, 06:57:14 AM

and resisted requests from multiple people to create alts to be added to their DT1 trust list.

It wouldn't surprise me at all if you already had another account on DT back then or still even do now. You know how to work the system and it's not terribly difficult to get onto if you stick at it enough and leave accurate ratings.

Quote from: Quickseller on October 25, 2018, 06:57:14 AM

It is also too bad that I initially resisted escrowing any transactions when I first started receiving requests to do so, and did not open an escrow thread until I completed dozens of escrow transactions resulting from unsolicited requests from others to me.

Well that's something you can easily and conveniently say now and all we have is your word for it, but again, anyone with an ounce of intelligence wouldn't offer to start escrowing straight away and build up confidence slowly and over time, but most escrowers naturally fall into it due to being asked repeatedly and I think that's how it should be.

Quote from: Quickseller on October 24, 2018, 05:57:49 AM

Quote from: hilariousetc on October 24, 2018, 06:13:31 AM

Quote from: Quickseller on October 24, 2018, 05:57:49 AM

Further, many on both Blazed's and hilariousandco's trust lists have little to no trading experience (yet interestingly have a decent amounts of trust ratings Roll Eyes

),

I don't usually look for people who have lots of trading experience, but for people who can leave what I believe to be accurate ratings.

That is the problem. Those who lack trading experience lack the incentives to maintain a healthy marketplace, and have nothing to lose when they handle a rating unfairly, or unprofessionally.

I disagree. You don't have to be involved with trading to want to maintain a healthy environment. That's like saying people who don't drive don't want or care about speed limits or safety systems put in place to protect everyone. It's not always about the money to be made from trading either. Some people just don't want a scam-rife marketplace and want to do the right thing. There is also a lot to lose. If you leave inaccurate ratings then you can either be removed from default trust or get negative yourself if you abuse the system and that can cause loss of earnings from signature campaigns etc. Being on DT is probably more hassle than it's worth, especially when you use it to try prevent scams because all it does it cause you headaches via the abuse and hassle you get.

Quote from: Quickseller on October 24, 2018, 05:57:49 AM

One could argue there is not even any basis to say they have or can leave accurate ratings.

Again, I would disagree. Someone can be very good at preventing scams without having much trades here. Also, most people probably do have some trading history, but I don't think we should be exclusively looking for people who have done hundreds of trades before they can be considered for inclusion. Those people will get on there also, but there needs to be a mix. A system full of people just patting each other on the back and giving themselves positive feedback for trades isn't much good either, especially if they care little about trades or scams that don't involve them.