Quote from: theymos on February 11, 2025, 11:52:06 PM

Thinking of the two "voter" criteria...

Quote from: theymos on January 09, 2019, 06:03:26 PM

- You must have at least 10 people directly trusting you each with an earned merit of at least 10, not including merit you yourself sent. These "votes" are limited.
- You must have at least 2 people directly trusting you with an earned merit of at least 250, not including merit you yourself sent. These "votes" are limited.

Somebody PMed me pointing out an example of someone included in DT1 only because they were trusted by a permabanned member. I was aware that permabanned members were allowed to be voters, but I thought it'd be too rare to matter. But now I'm leaning toward excluding them.

Also, I've increasingly been feeling that something should be done about inactive voters. Currently, a user can be inactive for years, but still contribute toward those two criteria. The specific way I'm leaning toward addressing this is to require that voters must have received merit from at least 2 distinct users in the last 3 years.

I did a pretend reshuffle, and compared to the 136 users who were eligible for DT1 last time, with the above 2 changes, these users were no longer eligible: bavicrypto, be.open, Best_Change, comit, digicoinuser, ekiller, ezeminer, finaleshot2016, Gunthar, Harkorede, Heisenberg_Hunter, hybridsole, joniboini, Koal-84, Lachrymose, mandown, and witcher_sense. (Some of these users may have become ineligible for reasons other than the above two changes; I just compared the output today after the changes to the output on Feb 1.)

If instead it was "voters must have received merit from at least 3 distinct users in the last 3 years", then these users would also become ineligible: Baofeng, MinoRaiola, and Russlenat. I'm leaning toward 2, mainly just on the principle of preferring a larger list generally.

What do people think of these two changes?

Receiving merit means that you are making high quality posts (according to the intentions of the merit system), while being included in someone's trust list means that you give accurate trust ratings (according to the intentions of the trust system). The two will generally contain the same people, however, they might not always. An old user might come online occasionally to trade, while not make any posts.

I do agree that with age, the DT system needs to be modified to prevent, for example, someone who is included by 50 inactive users from staying on DT after deciding to scam their trading partners after a history of honest trading.

Over time, people devote less and less time to the forum, and some are difficult to get in touch with.

One possible option would be to modify the trust system such that ratings decay over time. Users could have the option to specify a date of a transaction (with a blank date defaulting to the date of the rating), and older ratings could be semi-hidden and/or have a lessor effect on a user's trust score.

PrimeNumber7

Posts

Merits

Most active boards