⭐ Merited by Welsh (5) ,DireWolfM14 (4) ,LoyceV (4) ,Poker Player (1) ,1miau (1) ,JayJuanGee (1) ,DdmrDdmr (1)
Any such forum "system" is about as good as its members make it. theymos wanted wider representation in DT and he's probably unlikely to make it more restrictive, but with or without such change its ultimately up to the members, mainly DT1 members, to make the best use of the system.
Back at the start of this new vote-based DT system I used to think that the level of personal responsibility (for including/excluding DT2 members) exhibited by the old DT1 would improve in the new one but that obviously didn't happen. There is a huge passive majority of DT1 members who don't seem to care whom they include or how the trust system is used. And even if the more active minority tries to mitigate some of the garbage (e.g. by excluding self-scratchers) it doesn't really work that well due to the lottery.
Don't get me wrong, I support the idea of making it more difficult to get into DT (DT2 in particular) but I think it's a band aid for a broken leg.
^This!
@yahoo62278 and @dkbit98, I really hope both of you will reconsider. I understand your rationale, and often I think being in DT1 is not worth the headache. But that headache is exactly why we need people like you; rational, thoughtful, restrained individuals to counter balance those who revel in the power. If more people like you quit DT you'll be leaving the trust system to the abusers.
@suchmoon, we need you back too!
I ain't gone nowhere
As for "protesting", I'd argue that if someone doesn't have time and/or interest to keep up with the trust system or fundamentally disagrees with how the system is used, then getting blacklisted or otherwise removed from it is better that just leaving their trust lists unmaintained or going against the flow a huge red trail of drama.
Back at the start of this new vote-based DT system I used to think that the level of personal responsibility (for including/excluding DT2 members) exhibited by the old DT1 would improve in the new one but that obviously didn't happen. There is a huge passive majority of DT1 members who don't seem to care whom they include or how the trust system is used. And even if the more active minority tries to mitigate some of the garbage (e.g. by excluding self-scratchers) it doesn't really work that well due to the lottery.
Don't get me wrong, I support the idea of making it more difficult to get into DT (DT2 in particular) but I think it's a band aid for a broken leg.
I still think "protesting" against DefaultTrust by emptying your Trust list is counter-effective.
^This!
@yahoo62278 and @dkbit98, I really hope both of you will reconsider. I understand your rationale, and often I think being in DT1 is not worth the headache. But that headache is exactly why we need people like you; rational, thoughtful, restrained individuals to counter balance those who revel in the power. If more people like you quit DT you'll be leaving the trust system to the abusers.
@suchmoon, we need you back too!
I ain't gone nowhere
As for "protesting", I'd argue that if someone doesn't have time and/or interest to keep up with the trust system or fundamentally disagrees with how the system is used, then getting blacklisted or otherwise removed from it is better that just leaving their trust lists unmaintained or going against the flow a huge red trail of drama.