Quote from: yahoo62278 on Today at 11:01:45 AM

Quote from: JollyGood on Today at 10:53:25 AM

he should have known better.

In your opinion should the negative tag remain or should I replace it with a neutral?

Iv4n just messaged me and what I bolded here is exactly what I told him. Even though he should have known better, I think it's a bit harsh for a neg tag. Give everyone in that review thread a neutral IMO as all that really happened was those that were paid hurt the scam sites pocket. Noone pays attention to those reviews, least I wouldn't think so.

It's your decision but I personally think a neutral is fine.

I appreciate the views, thank you.

Yes iv4n should have known better but the fact he continues to play ignorant and does not own up to what his real intention was when choosing those words in the so-called Honest review thread also does not help the situation. It was him that put himself in a position where his integrity could be doubted - just for the sake of a one-off $30 payment from a scam website that has too many allegations against it in this very forum. What he failed to grasp was, at that stage all those that posted were paid so for him to stoop to a low level of ambiguity (hoping it would ensure he got paid) was a tactic that was simply not necessary. He really should have posted an honest review rather than the semi-promotion of a scam website.

Quote from: The Pharmacist on Today at 11:19:06 AM

Quote from: yahoo62278 on Today at 11:01:45 AM

Noone pays attention to those reviews, least I wouldn't think so.

I don't know about that, I really don't. I'm pretty sure a thread like the one OP linked to wouldn't show up on any Google result (at least not in the first few pages), there is a non-negligible chance that someone could find it and base their decision to visit 1xbit and deposit money there on it.

I also think a negative trust is a bit harsh. I have mixed feelings about tagging 1xbit campaign participants and won't do it personally, much less tagging someone voicing his opinion on that casino in a thread that asks for opinions. That's being overzealous IMO....but JollyGood, I'll tell you: I won't complain for a minute if you keep the tag in place, because his idiotic opinion and that begging for bitcoin deem him a complete parasite in my eyes, and it'd be better if that negative trust inhibited him from joining sig campaigns/bounties in the future.

The trust system is yet again being used to control the shitposter/moron problem, just like it was prior to 2018. I don't know if the merit system has lost effectiveness or what, but if it's not keeping the problem in check then I think we need a better solution than tagging members like this. Anyway, I'm fine if you don't remove that feedback, JollyGood.

Thank you for your feedback. As you pointed out the manner in which he virtually begged for the money along with the words used in the post, it was clear to see what his intention was.

Sadly I find myself in that situation again where the line between an out-and-out promotion of a scam vs somewhat ambiguous promotion - are not that blurred and applying a tag can be deemed harsh in some quarters. As you said, if the problem is not being kept in check and there is no other alternative then another solution is needed.

Quote from: borovichok on Today at 11:23:45 AM

To be honest, no one deserves a red tag for a personal review, promoters and people giving out personal reviews are two different things. If I play on the site and am able to withdraw, I can boldly come out and give my honest opinion without minding the scam accusations against them, but does that mean I should be red tagged for telling my experience on the site? No, I don't believe so.

If you prefer to tag people for offering honest ratings, you may start here. These users were also paid for their honest reviews, so why is iv4n claiming sole responsibility?

Code:

notblox1
woodie
iv4n
slow death
direwolfm14
text
stadus
robelneo
yayayo
worldofcoins
bitbollo
ebede
bitcoinaccepted

theymos needs to explain why DT was implemented it's becoming a weapon tbh.

I agree with your view entirely about people should not be tagged for giving honest opinions therefore I think you are somewhat misguided because in the OP I stated I went through just the first 2 pages of that thread and there are another 10 or so pages remaining and I stated all those that deserve a tag (not giving honest reviews) will be tagged.

Some of those members you listed have already been tagged by me and are on my ignore list so if I decided to skip past them knowing I have already tagged them - I do not think that is a pressing matter. Having said that if you can provide me a link to show where other members have posted a tag worthy promotion or semi-promotion of the 1xbit scammers in the first 2 pages of that thread (because that is how far I have made it so far), I will tag them. Kindly allow me some time to go through the remaining 10 or so pages, I will look forward to reading your views in this thread after.

Is DT really becoming a weapon? In my opinion DT members have a responsibility to ensure they do their utmost to protect the wider members of this community and I cannot apologise for try to contribute a little amount of my time trying to lessen the number of new victims.

Quote from: Csmiami on Today at 11:26:35 AM

I don't really see the point of creating a thread to repeat what has already been said... Just in case I'll copy-quote my reply over there:

The point of creating this thread was to avoid the other thread being overrun with comments about whether a tag was deemed valid or not. It was mentioned in the firsts two paragraphs of the first post in this thread.