Quote from: JayJuanGee on January 29, 2019, 09:49:20 PM

I am not sure if I understand the 4chan reference, at all.

Is there some kind of implication that 4chan is an out of control (or wild and unwieldy) place in part due to its size? And therefore the changes to this forum's trust system has moved this forum in that chaotic and wild direction?

At this point, I see the changes in DT to be causing: 1) more input from regular members regarding which members might get on DT1 (specifically through the weighted merit voting), which thereafter affects DT2 and subsequent DT layers and 2) a likely expansion to the number of members who are on DT1 (and by implication increasing the number of members on DT2 and subsequent DT layers - moving more members up to higher levels of DT).

So, in that regard, if I am correct in my above guess about what OgNasty and you mean to imply by the 4chan comment, then there could be some truth to your statement that this forum is moving more in a direction of a more dispersed power structure, yet there seems to be some attempts at systemizing this place in a kind of way that attempts to organize the chaos and therefore the changes to DT may not go so far as having the level of chaos that is implied by OgNasty's above quoted (and seemingly exaggerated) attempted comparison about the current situation.

By the way, to me, it seems that sometimes strong comments and perhaps harsh language might be needed and useful in order to clearly and unambiguously make certain points.

Calling it chaos is a bit out of touch. If the DT member fills this criteria :

Quote

I will periodically (maybe every month) be reconstructing the default trust list to include everyone who matches these criteria:
- If rank was determined solely using earned merit, then you must be of at least Member rank.
- You must have been online sometime within the last 3 days.
- Your trust list must include at least 10 users, not including ~distrust entries.
- You must not be banned or manually blacklisted from selection.
- You must have posted sometime within the last 30 days.
- You must have at least 10 people directly trusting you each with an earned merit of at least 10, not including merit you yourself sent. These "votes" are limited.
- You must have at least 2 people directly trusting you with an earned merit of at least 250, not including merit you yourself sent. These "votes" are limited.

Then it's safe to say that the included users at least have some basic understanding of the forum rules, etiquette, and the fact that they are trusted by a handful of others means they at least managed to convince a small group to include them.

Let's say that this list includes 50 users, the fact that they fill the criteria means they won't think in the detriment of the forums to purposely create chaos, simply for their own sake. They ARE trusted members after all.

So in the end, disagreements will only come out of conflicting subjective opinions on other users. Is it chaos? No. It's decentralization. If half the default trust or more agrees that X is good or bad, and IF all their opinions are their own, then the trust system is working great, and that user is objectively judged by the network.

Any attempt at monitoring, investigating, modifying, or judging a DT member's choices by other members, creates room for manipulation. It's not an attempt at organizing it, it's an attempt at centralizing it.