Quote from: Quickseller on May 06, 2019, 07:28:39 PM

Quote from: Theb on May 06, 2019, 07:00:47 PM

Quote from: tranthidung on May 06, 2019, 02:48:51 PM

- It might be good if you can make a list of only DT2 member whom did not earn a signed merit so far, rather than a mixture like current list. It is ridiculous when a real DT2 member has not been able to earn a single merit so far, especially if still being actively in the forum last year.

~snip~

Having merit means you have made good posts, while being on DT means you can generally be trusted, specifically to give good/fair/appropriate ratings. Or at least this is what these should mean.

I met someone a year or two ago who created his account *solely* to trade with others in the forum and that is quite literally all he did (I assume he also read some threads). He created his account, got locked out, and created an alt account to recover his first one, and his second account had total active time of several days and had a fair amount of positive trust from trades done on the second account. I believe I met him prior to the merit system being implemented, however he would obviously have no merit (he had zero posts) but appeared to be generally trustworthy. ETA - it was this guy https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=515678 and his first account was https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=406863

Thanks for giving another example on why merits cannot be directly related to being trusted in the forum. I just got disturbed a little on why tranthidung got suspicious about a lot of DT members not having merits. Yes maybe detecting unworthy DT members who have slipped through the cracks by looking at their merits might be a start but criticizing them solely because of not receiving or having any merits at all is an entirely wrong way to look at DT members and the DT system as a whole.