Re: [BPIP] Bitcointalk Public Information Project [Back in Action]
It's sorted by time, but when multiple records have the same timestamp the sort order within that group is undefined so it can be kinda random. I'd like to say I'll fix it but this might take a while 
I can try to work this into the development site over the next few weeks, should just be a secondary sort that needs to be added into the query.I assume it makes sense to use the username, alphabetical, as the secondary sort.
Is it really necessary to restate information that could be months, if not years old? By restating that a user trusts/distrusts another user all you are doing is filling your own logfiles with endless pages of repetitive information.
Surely stating a person has been made, or removed from, DT1 should be enough information, otherwise it's going to appear as though DT1 users can't make up their minds repeatedly trusting/distrusting when in fact it didn't happen.