First: in general, most of the users who complain about the trust system, are the ones who got tagged. I agree with the large majority of all red DT-tags.
You're talking about the few that are debated. In general, I think the DT system serves a purpose, and some "collateral damage" can't be avoided.
I think every DT member uses the trust system they way they "see fit"
This goes for all users, not only DT.
you can clearly see in a few cases where DT memebers disagree to one another decision and counter it by giving a positive feedback.
For a while I thought it's a bad thing that DT can't agree on tags, but then I realized it's actually a good thing. It proves DT is not a "gang", but it are individual users with an individual opinion.
There's another thing that got me thinking: the amount of DT-trust is largely based on being a "high profile" user, and not on the amount scammed.
Example:
alia is at
-2048, but
BITMIXCOIN.IO is "only" at
-64 after scamming more than 16
BTC.
I personally do not think it is right to give a negative feedback for someone that is not a scammer no matter how much of an a**hole they are, this goes also for giving a positive feedback for someone just because you like them or because they have been "helpful".
I'd say it depends on the situation. I've received some positive trust for being helpful. I don't think that's "worse" than someone who receives positive trust after a few small trades with DT-members. In fact, it took me many years to get this (and I appreciate the appreciation), while it's quite easy to gain trust by doing a few trades.
This is a very important matter as a feedback from a DT member could be a "life changer" for someone who spent years building a good reputation only to get tagged for disagreeing to some DT member's point of view.
Although I agree with this, I can also see why some users tag them anyway.
here is what i think the trust system is meant to be used for
1- positive > you had a successful trade/trades with this guy, you send them money first, they kept their end of the deal and sent the goods > trustful.
2- negative > this person scammed you , by either not sending you the money/goods he promised to, or they arrived in bad shape > can't be trusted
I think this is too limited. If you have to wait for a DT-member to be scammed before a scammer can be tagged, many innocent Newbies will be scammed too, while doing a small deal to work on a long con doesn't mean someone can be trusted either.
As an example, look at the red trust I left. Before I was on DT, it was mainly for users who cheated my giveaways, or (the first one) a non-paying faucet). After I was put on DT (around March this year), I've tagged a couple dozen users, and none of them scammed me. Since scams aren't moderated, DT is the only protection this forum has.
If you don't like the trust system, set your own trust list. I still haven't done it, because I prefer to see users as most people see them. But feel free to start promoting custom trust lists, if enough people agree, DT will become less powerful.
How about opening a board opened to only DT members, or also staff members. And when a member is considering tagging a members (positive or negative), the issue is brought to the board and the entire active DT members can brainstorm and decide if it's what leaving a feedback.
I've tagged several spamming scammers while waiting for them to be nuked. Spam relies on large numbers, and without a quick warning, they will eventually make victims. Delaying those warnings doesn't do the community any good.
If it is going to be "regulated" (which I doubt it is going to happen any time soon), any tag without a reference should be concidered as neutral even if it comes from a DT member or simply any tag must come with reference..
I've only received positive DT-trust without reference link, and about half my "untrusted" feedback doesn't have a link either. Basically, those are opinions, and it's up to the reader to decide whether or not he trusts the source.
I try to always (exception: the very first feedback I left) create a reference link.
~ it need to be make sure that a single DT rating should not impact an individual.
I would agree, if this is only valid for high-ranking accounts. A Newbie scammer should be red at first tag because he can and probably will just create another account, a Legendary has much more to lose.