[Trusted]

New members do not know that there is a "Trusted" rank and the tags that are being used are not using "Trusted" in such a way to imply a rank. They are implying only that they are trusted and nothing more. There is no point to not have a sticky stating that you are not allowed to use tags that are based on opinion. Example: Trusted, opinion, not allowed. 700+ Vouches, fact, allowed.

 

I've been seeing it more and more often. That's why I brought this up. I think I saw four in ten minutes, or something.

 

That is a perfect example as to why an official rule is needed.

 

I think these tags; [Trusted], [100+ Posts] [15+ Vouches], etc are fine. Why? They're marketing gimmicks. You don't go into a shop nowadays and say "Remove the sign saying you have some of the best quality items on earth", so why this? Of course, instances such as [Highly Trusted] [Moderator] and other tags which are untrue should certainly be removed and be a punishable offence. But these regular tags, just use common sense and take regular safety precautions.

 

"Highly trusted" and "trusted" imply the same thing, and to a new member they're both equally misleading. And as SuF said above, # of vouches is quantitative, trustworthiness is qualitative

 

This.
I see the issue with [Highly Trusted] though because it's a rank, but most people with that in their title probably aren't aware it's a rank / aren't trying to imply a rank they don't have - maybe the title should just be edited and them informed why, although it doesn't seem like that big an issue.

 

This was denied for "Trusted' titles and the like before because it is literally, over moderation and control. Virtually uneeded censorship.

 

I agree with this. Censorship is only okay to an extent. Why should we block [Trusted] but not something else like [50+ Vouches]. Although one is easy to prove, [Trusted] isn't necessarily false, nor is it only used for deceit. Look at Hahanerd's MM thread title... he's one of the most [Trusted!] members on Sythe. He puts it there because it's easier to do that then [Hundreds of vouches!][Thousands of hours slaved moderating you sorry kiddos!], which is how he earned his trust.

Plus, where do we draw the line? If we say "You can only do it if you have 'x' vouches or 'y' posts or 'z' months since you joined", then why don't we go all-out and just make a "Trusted" rank? :huh: Which, btw, I think would be just as pointless as kids putting [Trusted] in their title.

Usually, when I see [Trusted!], I subtract "trust points" from the seller because it gives me a strong indication they are 10. I have a feeling most of Sythe does this, so why would we get rid of it? It's one of the biggest indicators that the person is a scammer or incompetent. ^_^

 

The issue revolves around new members who can be tricked by these titles. If people ignore the titles anyways, then there is no point to even allow them.

That is extremely ironic and humerus. Disallowing certain tags in titles is not censorship, it is simply denying users the ability to post misleading titles. Tags that are of number of vouches, or money handled can be counted. There is a way to compare them. A trusted tag is not like that. I do not trust Hahanerd, and thus his trusted tag is misleading. Allowing trusted tags is just promoting scamming of new users for no reason other than it is common sense to not listen to the tags. New users do not have common sense and should be protected.

Trusted means nothing. You can count and compare vouches. You can not compare trustworthiness. I do not trust Hahanerd just because he puts a tag in his thread title. I ignore the title. It is simply a ploy to get new users to use his service, by manipulating them. That is not right.

It is pointless, and should not happen.

Right, because you have common sense. New users do not have common sense, and thus are much more likely to be scammed if there are trusted tags.

 

So in order for someone to use the trusted tag, they have to be trusted by every single user on Sythe, right? That's what you're saying. Your biased opinion of his trustworthyness shouldn't influence the fact that he IS trusted, and letting people know it.

Trust means everything. If Sythe didn't trust the staff to keep the forums running, there wouldn't be any staff, let alone the forums. Also, how is putting a fact in your title manipulation? Rank and vouches are literally the only way a user can tell if another user is trusted - it's the internet - what else can you do?

 

He believes he is trusted. That does not mean that he is. Same applies to everyone who uses the tag. He is not special.

You misread my post. "Trusted" as a tag means absolutely nothing. It is simply a user stating that they believe that they are trusted. For new users, this presents a problem as they will be drawn into these threads who may just be scammers. That is a form of manipulation, but so is all advertising. However, this is not okay as it could result in new members being scammed and not coming back to Sythe. Vouches and ranks are comparable. Someone's own belief that they are trusted is not comparable.

 

But you just stated you don't trust HN, therefor he shouldn't be able to put [Trusted] in his thread title. But in Sythe-standards, he IS trusted. Any moderator on this forum is trusted, so why shouldn't he be able to?

EDIT: pardon my previous misread, I was running out the door.

 

http://sythe.org/showthread.php?p=7557846#post7557846

See this thread for an example of what I consider to be a blatant abuse of the decision to allow members to put [trusted] in titles.

I personally believe that trusted should be an earned rank, earned by x amount of dollars traded and/or x amount of vouches. I do not believe that someone who has 5 vouches should be allowed to put trusted in his title.

Only possible solutions:
1. Nobody should be allowed to put [trusted] in the thread title.
2. Only people who have reached a quantifiable amount of vouches should be allowed to put [trusted] in the thread title.

3. Any random person can put [trusted] in the thread title.
The above should definitely not be allowed.

 

As for the first part, I would like to respectfully disagree. It is censorship to disallow/limit the type of tags people put in their title. In my opinion, it's really only a flashy term to throw in there to catch attention. [Trusted] is more or less the same as saying "Selling PRO Pker" when it's really only a mediocre PKer. Should we ban the use of PRO unless it's certainly a PRO account? After all, it's just as pointless to put PRO in the title as it is to put [Trusted!].

As for the second point (in response to my post), I do agree that new users lack the experience that has taught me that [Trusted] is more of a load of garbage than anything. However, I do not doubt their common sense so much that I think they'll dive headfirst to an obviously risky sale just because it says Trusted.

I don't think he's blatantly abusing it at all. The only scam he can commit as a buyer is a PayPal charge back, provided a seller insists on a MM or him going first (like any seller should). I'd say he's more than likely [Trusted!] enough to not charge back his Paypal transfer. I wouldn't go first to him, but he wants to use an OMM anyway so that shouldn't even be an issue.

As for the quantifiable amount of vouches, I think the problem with this has been established. Someone can have hundreds of vouches giving out free 76ks or leveling 1-30 on fresh accounts, which in general means almost nothing. A person with hundreds of these vouches as never once proved that he can be trusted with the password of a high-valued account---or that hecan be trusted to fulfill his end of any valuable trade. It'd be nice to devise a method of determining trust other than the current method of buyer's discretion, but it's highly infeasible.

Honestly, I think [Trusted!] is harmless enough to warrant it to continue to be glossed over as something that makes us chuckle (as Nate said) or roll our eyes. Scams happen a hundredfold times more often using other methods of deviousness than this. [Trusted] is virtually harmless.

 

In the end it's up to the person buying/using the service to determine if they're trusted or not. If you disagree, don't use them. It's really that simple.

 

So can I put [Highly Trustable]?

It's not a rank; [Ex-Owner], even?

I mean, I don't really have to be specific.

 

I know, I put Trustable. And I could put [Ex-Owner], it doesn't say [Ex-Owner of Sythe.org]. Suppose I'm not really breaking a rule.