are architects of this project familiar with gpg web of trust approach,
particularly as applied to bitcoin otc?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=110861.msg1227871#msg1227871

is a good overview.
On Mar 17, 2014 3:44 AM, "Manfred Karrer" <mk@???> wrote:

> Hi Jaume,
>
> I did not want to say it has not value, often it matches well with the
> real expectation.
>
> But I think those reputation systems only have a limited validity from the
> data from where the reputation is derived. Like in bitcointalk its the
> number of posts and the activity (post over period of time, so regular long
> time posters has more value), and to fake that with sock puppets means a
> certain amount of work have to be spent, so sock puppets with "Hero Member"
> attribute are probably very rare.
> Of course it is not easy from a usability point of view to present the
> user a more complex reputation algorithm as pure data, so they tend to make
> easy to understand categories like "Hero Member", but at the end those are
> misleading. If the user only gets presented the naked facts, he need to
> derive in his brain a high level attribute from that (> 500 posts ->
> experienced user,....) and he would be more aware of the relation and
> limitations of that process.
>
> Back to the exchange project, I assume that reputation manipulation with
> self-trades cannot be prevented, so I am wondering if it is better to avoid
> reputation completely, as providing no data seems better than providing
> (possibly) false data (due sybil). And in the exchange project the
> reputation would only serve for punishing scammers who do bank
> chargebacksor use stolen bank accounts, as the rest is covered by
> arbitrators.
> But for those kind of scams a blacklisting by an arbitrator with a proof
> of the scam is justified, and then reputation is not needed as well.
>
> For other use cases a more soft approach might be justified also because
> often there are no hard facts available, so human intelligence/judgements
> is needed to derive meaningful conclusions. Like with "upvoting", "+1" or
> "like" its fine to have those tools which does not imply a precise
> valuation and have no critical consequences (other as in an exchange when
> you trust a sock puppet and can be a victim of a scam).
> But I guess all of us know how limited those approaches are as well. See
> how poor the reddit scoring works in realitiy. Gossiping outrival content
> too often....
>
> br,
> Manfred
>
>
> Am 17.03.2014 um 08:36 schrieb jaume <jaume@???>:
>
> >
> >> To provide measurable data is one thing, to derive from that data
> >> qualitative statements is problematic.
> >> As example see the bitcointalk "reputation" categories like "Hero
> Member",
> >> etc...
> >> It does not mean really much that one is categorized as "Hero Membe". It
> >> only means he has posted a lot. So better to display only that naked
> data
> >> and not derive any unprovable statements.
> >
> > Even though there is a history of "hero members" that were scammers,
> being
> > a hero member provides some kind of "proof of work". As the posts are
> > public, it is possible to evaluate the quality of such posts. A member
> > that has posted a large number of high quality posts over the years
> > deserves some "reputation" as it has contributed to the community. As
> this
> > reputation has a "value", the user has some incentive to preserve that
> > reputation by being legit. I have the feeling that the number of scammers
> > is higher in the ranks of "junior members" than it is in the ranks of
> > "hero members".
> >
> > My belief is that we are moving towards a "reputation economy" in which
> > what is important is what we contribute to the community and not what we
> > have.
> >
> > Peace :)
> > Jaum
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
> > https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>
>