Silk Road forums

Discussion => Silk Road discussion => Topic started by: BenJesuit on August 21, 2013, 06:34 pm

Title: New SR Discussion Feature - needs options or needs to be scrapped.
Post by: BenJesuit on August 21, 2013, 06:34 pm
DPR,

I'll keep it short and sweet. The new discussion system was implemented without adequate prior community input and as a result is problematic and goes against Libertarian principles of self-determination and freedom.

Two ways to fix it.

1. Scrap it. It's redundant, unnecessary, unreliable and posses a security and business risk to buyers and vendors.

or

2. Improve it by allowing security minded people options with regard to the system beyond a mere "alias."

***For Buyers: ***

Allow buyers the option of posting with a system generated randomized name. The Alias feature is not the least bit useful since a buyer's full stats are exposed.

Allow buyers to post with the option of concealing their stats.
Very easy to figure out who posted what when the following metrics accompany a post: (Hypothetical)

buyer stats:   
spent   $49,052.00
orders   99
vendors   52
user age   1y 7m

This poses a security risk and is not in keeping with Libertarian values of self determination.  Vendors who recently dealt with this poster will figure out who they are or might mistake them for the wrong person and that person may suffer a consequence meant for another.

The list of issues that could result from this are numerous. But I'm trying to keep this short.

----------------------------------------------------------------

**** For Vendors: *****

Simple - allow vendors the ability to opt out of discussions. I don't think they should be given moderation powers to selectively delete posts since they would obviously delete anything remotely unfavorable.

So the best option is to allow a vendor the ability to turn off discussions for their account. That would apply to discussions on their profile and on their listings.

Old, disgruntled buyers are going to post negative information on vendor profiles.
Rival vendors will post negative information on rival vendor profiles.
Posts that jeopardize security will be posted and a vendor cannot rely on SR staff to remove it in a timely fashion. That's just a fact.
New vendors will be either abused or lauded unnaturally.
The list of other maladies that could result from this new system are numerous.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Some people think the new discussion system feature is "innovative." I bet those are the same people who don't use PGP.



Title: Re: Discussion update - needs options or needs to be scrapped.
Post by: Cork1Screw on August 21, 2013, 06:47 pm
+1.

We need to make it so buyers can leave real feedback without ruining a vendor's score before we worry about trying to put bandaids like the "discussion" business on the problem. The potential negative impact from this feature has not yet even been fully realized, but I have a feeling it may quickly turn out to be more trouble than it's worth (which is very little).



I explain my thoughts on the issue more here:


Hi guys, i haven't readen all the 18 pages of this topic, i don't have too much time to do that.
There is a problem on my account,

for example here:  http://silkroadvb5piz3r.onion/silkroad/item/be4526b340

i have only 5/5 feedbacks, but the stats bar shows bad stats. the 5/5 feedbacks are displayed as 1/5....
there is a bug? or something that i'm missing?
thank you :)

CASE IN POINT!!

DPR you need to look at this guy's profile immediately, 'cause what the system is doing to him is bullshit. His first page of feedback is all 5/5, yet somehow his AVERAGE FEEDBACK is only 1.4/5????????

That makes zero sense, and this is why vendors will blacklist people who leave less than 5/5 feedback regardless of whether or not we have buyer feedback which we desperately need for other reasons.

His average feedback should not be anywhere near that low. This needs to be fixed. In addition, the bar graph is CLEARLY BROKEN.

His bar graph shows a tiny bar for 5/5s and a huge bar for 1/5s and NOTHING else...yet I have to go back three pages in his feedback to find anything less than a 5/5, and what do I find but a 2/5 and a 1/5. And do I see that reflected in the bar chart? No I do not. If I went by the bar chart, it seems this guy gets 90% 1/5 feedback and 10% 5/5 feedback and never anything else.

If you can't figure out how to implement the bars properly please just remove them until you can. Misinformation like that is just not cool.

BAD DATA is WORSE than NO DATA!!!

Decided to look into his feedback some more, and I'd like to share what I found because I think it highlights the problem very well.

I looked through ten pages of this guy's feedback. 10 entries per page, 100 total.

Of those 100: 97 were 5/5s. One was a 2/5. And two were 1/5s.

Yet his average rating is now 1.4/5.0. Does that seem fair? Does that not make it incredibly obvious why there is a culture of "leave 5/5 or you're blacklisted forever" ?

I think it does. If out of 100 transactions, 97 are 5/5s, one is a 2/5, and two are 1/5s, I would personally think his average would be 4.89/5.00.

However the weird formula that is used that no one actually knows means his rating is 1.4/5.0. Pretty big disparity.

We need to address this issue before addressing ANY OTHER PART of the feedback system imo.

To reiterate: I just don't think this discussion area is needed if the rating function was able to function properly. Remove the culture of "5/5 feedback or blacklist and I'll never sell to you again" that is created by the shitty formula you are using, and see if that solves the problem. If it doesn't then at that point we can revisit this discussion business.
Title: Re: Discussion update - needs options or needs to be scrapped.
Post by: missbliss on August 21, 2013, 07:09 pm
hi hi

+1 for the both of you!  i dont want to beat a dead horse with a stick, as i have very similar feelings and have posted quite a bit about it already.

well said. i am personally not a fan of the new discussion features AT ALL.

xoxo
-mb
Title: Re: Discussion update - needs options or needs to be scrapped.
Post by: CHROOT on August 21, 2013, 07:25 pm
The potential negative impact from this feature has not yet even been fully realized

It's a nightmare. How would it ever be moderated? What's to stop a rival vendor from trashing someones listings? How long would it take for support to fix the slander, and how badly would the vendor be hurt in the meantime.

Support will be overrun with requests from vendors asking to moderate their listing discussions, when it should be done in here instead. Just force vendors to paste a review thread on their homepage, that way the discussion can be moderated.

This was ill-conceived and not much thought went into this feature. It needs to be scrapped immediately.
Title: Re: New SR Discussion Feature - needs options or needs to be scrapped.
Post by: BenJesuit on August 21, 2013, 07:42 pm
Ill-conceived is right.

To add insult to injury, all aliases have been reset. So instead of showing aliases, it's showing actual SR usernames. So much for the anonymity that people were relying on to make "honest" posts in discussion.

Vendors check your discussion pages. Save a copy before the aliases get reset back to actually displaying aliases.


Here's the initial thread that reported it: http://dkn255hz262ypmii.onion/index.php?topic=205577.0
Title: Re: New SR Discussion Feature - needs options or needs to be scrapped.
Post by: Trappy on August 21, 2013, 08:33 pm
Why not offer vendors the option to add dedicated forums links in the place where the "discussions" button is located? Lazy SR buyers don't have to make an account to VIEW the forums, only to comment.
Title: Re: New SR Discussion Feature - needs options or needs to be scrapped.
Post by: CHROOT on August 21, 2013, 09:08 pm
Why not offer vendors the option to add dedicated forums links in the place where the "discussions" button is located? Lazy SR buyers don't have to make an account to VIEW the forums, only to comment.

This is exactly what I was suggesting. With this new feature, the admins are now going to have to run all over the place to moderate the inevitable trash that winds up on discussion pages.

DPR seems to think that because so few buyers use the forums let's just move them onto the listings. In theory it sounds good, but in practice it will go down in flames.

Why don't buyers use the forums? Well, if you read all the gripes, most people hate the 50 post bullshit, the fact that vendors need a review page in both the newbie section and elsewhere, and with all the subforums in here there isn't a subforum dedicated for vendor reviews. This is why buyers are confused and don't use the forums.
Title: Re: New SR Discussion Feature - needs options or needs to be scrapped.
Post by: phunky on August 22, 2013, 02:23 am
Sometimes less is more.  The feedback system is not perfect, but let's not try to make this an Amazon-like shopping experience.  The most important thing to everyone here is primarily anonymity, right?  So any new features should not create more risk exposure than which previously existed.  This needs to be the bottom line. 

As the discussion feature is optional, I feel it will be those who are decidedly more risky putting up most of the discussion threads.  Which means it's not a true picture of the entire customer base as it's intended to be, it's from a certain type of customer, perhaps the riskier or less intelligent bunch and that's not really ideal.
Title: Re: New SR Discussion Feature - needs options or needs to be scrapped.
Post by: Cimicon-Rep on August 22, 2013, 03:44 am
Because of the bug that occurred which reset the aliases and revealed the real buyer names, vendors know exactly who posted the comments in discussion. But guess what? It was no surprise really because the stats were there and some were unique enough to easily guess who they were before the reveal.

This discussion feature IS a step in the wrong direction as it is currently.

- Buyers can opt out of it by simply choosing not to use it. But Vendors can't opt out if it unless they go into stealth mode. Fair?
- Buyers who use it, are forced to have their stats publicly displayed. They can't opt out of that unless they simply don't post. Fair?
- What constitutes a security breach, trash talk, or "impolite" speech is left up to the sole discretion of SR staff. Fair?

I hope SR admins, DPR, come to their senses and just implement opt out options for everyone.

Phunky is absolutely correct. This is a black market for illegal items. It is not Amazon nor should it be painted as such as that would only serve to lower the defenses and security practices of many participants. Less is indeed more as "less" heightens the senses. More dulls them.