[LEGIT], [TRUSTED], etc.

[Bladestar]

Those "thread tags" or whatever they're called should be either banned or have a requirement for use (200+ vouches, or something). I realize most people know that they mean nothing, but to a newcomer they could be confusing.

Then again, maybe I'm just stupid. Post your opinions, obviously.

 

[Sanctuary]

Simply decide for yourself if you think they're legit/trusted. If a leacher with 2 posts and 0 vouches says [Trusted], you can assume he's most likely not. Simply use common sense.

 

[Bladestar]

I realize most people know that they mean nothing, but to a newcomer they could be confusing.

10characters

 

[Kabal]

It can be kind of annoying to see people with Feb 2011 join dates and 10 post count throw up a [TRUSTED] tag. But if we get into this then there needs to be a precise line drawn and a list of what is acceptable or isn't.

I don't think it's THAT big of an issue to cause the fuss over at this point in time anyway

 

[tiger9110]

Simply decide for yourself if you think they're legit/trusted. If a leacher with 2 posts and 0 vouches says [Trusted], you can assume he's most likely not. Simply use common sense.

Exactly as Sanctuary said, it is dead obvious to determine if they are being truthful in placing those tags with no vouches and a recent join date. It would only create more work for mods trying to edit and fix these kinds of threads.

 

[ChristmasCracker]

I can vouch you 200 times for 2$ trades.
Or you can take 5minutes to go through their vouches and see the 200 vouches for 2$ ea.
Or the 100 vouches for 100$ ea.

It's your choice, nothing will be done about this.

 

[n4n0]

A thread similar to this was just recently made. If you see someone using [trusted] in their title, and they obviously aren't, PM Me and I'll remove it personally. I understand and have no problem with people using it (if they are obviously "trusted"[that of course, falls into the "eye of the beholder" category]) but people with 10 vouches, half of them for training, use "trusted" or something along the lines of that in their title, I do not hesitate to edit it out when I see it.

 

[cosrob97]

A thread similar to this was just recently made. If you see someone using [trusted] in their title, and they obviously aren't, PM Me and I'll remove it personally. I understand and have no problem with people using it (if they are obviously "trusted"[that of course, falls into the "eye of the beholder" category]) but people with 10 vouches, half of them for training, use "trusted" or something along the lines of that in their title, I do not hesitate to edit it out when I see it.

The problem is if they have 10 vouches and only 1 for the other person going first (they only need at least one), that person was trusted. You may not trust them, but they have been trusted with the other person going first to them.

 

[JohnK]

This has been debated time and time again and the conclusion is always the same: it's up to you to decide whether you believe in what they have tagged themselves as, it's a simple market tactic and you shouldn't feel inclined to believe.

 

[wackywamba]

This has been debated time and time again and the conclusion is always the same: it's up to you to decide whether you believe in what they have tagged themselves as, it's a simple market tactic and you shouldn't feel inclined to believe.

I fully agree with JohnK, it is totally the buyers opinion.

But, on the other hand - I personally do sometimes jump to threads with a [trusted] tag as generally you don't get intermediate players with the audacity to use it (it's either someone you could likely trust or it's a newcomer).

In this situation I think it is best to remove it where necessary - as suggested by n4no.

 

[colorfull]

I fully agree with JohnK, it is totally the buyers opinion.

 

[n4n0]

Closed.