Re: THE TRUST SYSTEM: Are Counter-Feedbacks Counter Productive?

I agree with what you wrote but the problem going forward in that situation is that you wrote: "If Sally excludes Sam from her trust list, the impartiality of the situation may be called into question and she may find herself excluded by other forum members"

If that is the case then those members backing Sally could be inclined to exclude all the members that excluded Sally as well as those that left positive counter-feedback.

After reading the posts here I understand several perspectives and points of views. What came from the debate in this thread is that the disparity between opinions of members on this issue is probably too big to find a mutually acceptable solution.

There are cases where deserved or not, negative trust has been left for a user. Then another user comes along and deems that negative trust as wrong/unfair/inappropriate or as a breach of the trust system and decides to leave positive trust for the same recipient stating it is to counter previous feedback.

I think it is an inappropriate use of the trust system for anybody to give positive trust ratings to users just because they received negative trust that was (or could debatably be deemed as being) in breach of the trust system.

I disagree with this premise.

If there is no fact dispute, but Sally believes Bob is "high risk", Sally will leave a negative rating against Bob. Sally gives a lot of "good" ratings, and the rating does not appear to be in bad faith, so it would not make much sense to exclude Sally from the DT network. However there is still an "injustice" against Bob. Sam wants to correct this injustice and asks Sally to remove the negative rating, but Sally refuses. The only option is for Sam to leave a positive rating on Bob's trust profile with a note saying he does not agree with Sally's rating.

Anyone doing due diligence prior to trading with Bob will see both ratings, and can act accordingly. If Sally subsequently removes her negative rating, but for some reason Sam does not remove his counter rating, someone conducting due diligence would ignore Sam's rating.

This is an excellent scenario but what happens if Sally decides to take further action against Bob to counter what Sam wrote and then took action against Sam too by leaving negative trust and adding Sam to her distrust list? In your scenario it is quite probable that Sam will take action against Sally by reciprocating the negative trust and the whole cycle could theoretically continue with more DT members getting involved...

Now seems more apt to conclude what The Pharmacist said about it being pointless to debate issues like this, is spot on.

If Sally leaves a second rating, it will have no effect on Bon’s trust score. If he removes the rating and adds it back on, it would be an abuse of the trust system and he should be excluded. If Sally excludes Sam from her trust list, the impartiality of the situation may be called into question and she may find herself excluded by other forum members.

What I described above is not ideal, however in my view it is the only way to correct the injustice of Bob receiving a unfair negative rating.

Everyone will not always agree on when someone is “high risk” and the above is an effective way to settle this question. Someone conducting due diligence on Bob can weigh their options of the judgements of both Sally and Sam and act accordingly.