Label assets owned by 'known scammers' as scam assets

[grctest]

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe. I want to be warned of scam tokens when using the BTS DEX, I don't want to fall victim to them.

Describe the solution you'd like If an asset is owned/issued by a known scammer (or perhaps even null-account owned but previously owned by a 'known scammer') then I want to be warned of this similar to how you're warned in the 'send' modal if you type in a known scammer account.

Would need to establish appropriate warnings for when the 'scam asset' is shown within the wallet.

• Within portfolio a subtle warning icon ⚠ perhaps, which links to a harm reduction text snippet.
• Within asset page, large bold text, highlight known scammer account text.
• Within markets, perhaps a warning prompt upon trying to trade it?
• Default hide from 'asset search', toggle to show hidden 'untrustworthy assets'.

Describe alternatives you've considered Hide asset from my local wallet's market/portfolio, but this does nothing to prevent other BTS users from falling victim to these scam tokens.

Additional context Only confirmed known scam accounts, not suspected nor based on a 'trust score'.

[CryptickCryptick1]

This is a complex, issue that can quickly become weighted down in corruption, paid ratings, and bickering. It will require a careful well-thought out response.

I think a trust based score or reputation ranking based would be best. Let's look at examples that have worked elsewhere.

Some crypto exchanges currently have a score ranking by each asset.

• S&P stock research reports have worked well in the Stock Market
• bulletin boards have a number of postings next to the name
• wikipedia has a reputation system based on contributions.

We also want to encourage new coins to come. We can make this easy by creating freindly new coin questionaries (basic white paper stuff) that a coin creator voluntarily fills out that provides and information resource to the community.

We can then have a publicly available test, audit, ranking score system that could compare numerous metrics. This could be as simple as a one page report in the beginning with questions about the number of people involved, volume of trading, comparison to other projects, and more.

From here that score, based on 1 to 10, could be put next to the asset on the UI.

I have done some things like this in the past Rating of all coins. https://steemit.com/bitshares/@cryptick/bitshares-coin-rankings Survey https://whaleshares.io/bitshares/@cryptick1/shining-light-crypto-survey-1-results-part-2 Ultimately, I think this score, should be done by multiple people and judge hundred of characteristics, but that should be the long term plan. Intially, we need something simple and quick. -Cryptick1

[gibbsfromncis]

@CryptickCryptick1 Your suggestion looks interesting but requires changes not only on front-end side. It is more difficult for implementation.

@grctest your vision is cool. Let's wait for other team members to post their thoughts.

@sschiessl-bcp what do you think about @grctest suggestion? Also can I ask you to clarify please how we define scam/not scam accounts for now. Is there some algorithm on backend or we use some hardcoded list of accounts?

[CryptickCryptick1]

@gibbsfromncis You make a great, point. I believe any solution implemented today, is far better than a great solution implemented a long way in the future. How about about the following?

Cryptick1: Ribbons Plan Simplified

I could provide a manual list in a spreadsheet, rating everything into three groups.

Blue Ribbon: Top (100?) Traded Assets Blank Ribbon: Unrated (blank) Red Ribbon: Scam Coins

This list, a manual spreadsheet would be updated whenever convenient (monthly?) (developers discretion?).

In order to avoid drama allow me out outline a way to keep this simple fast and avoid controversy.

There will be several people -(You, core team, ect), will review the list and have ability to change ratings (flag scam coins). If there is a disagreement in the community. The coin goes to unrated. (quickly ending drama.)

To get a blue ribbon rating the coin would need to be a top 50. This top 50 list might become top 125 top 200 ect whatever number we want. We will use volume, number of holders, market capitalization, and months on top 100 list and analyst ranking to determine top ranking. Almost all of that data is here. https://www.cryptofresh.com/assets) https://bitsharescan.com/assets (I should note some scam coins, send a bunch of coins out to various accounts and do wash trading, these rarely stay at the top of the list for multiple months. Analyst ranking is basically a way to correct anything that we don’t think should be on the list. We have all looked at the top 100 lists and been like -what is that? To see a scam coin on there.)

Yellow Ribbon Speciality Coin If people desire an alternative ranking (yellow ribbon?) might be speciality coin. This might be for a coin that has few, users, but is not a scam. (Such as a food bank token, or a russian android app, or a brazilian coffee shop -low volume project ect.) As soon as people see the rating system there may be a bunch of people that want their pet project given a blue ribbon rating. By keeping blue ribbon for top volume, we can offer a yellow ribbon rating as a conciliatory prize to avoid drama. (If this would be helpful.)

Gray Ribbon -Backed by an Established Bridge I suspect bridges, such as gdex, cryptobridge and openledger that have been open for 6 months or more would like to see all their coins rated highly. These bridges have established reputations. We are not concerned about them. We might offer a gray flag for coins they back. This would be a way of saying, hey, this new coin is backed by an established bridge which has a reputation. This would be a way of keeping everyone happy. When the volume gets high enough, they could move it to blue flag status.

Disputes: I think any dispute that comes up can quickly be settled by the team. A simple vote by the core team, witnesses or an independent group can settle disputes. If and when there are more people interesting in rating, this -rank my asset better- energy can be deflected into a work group where standards are worked out. In Version 2 -I would like to see a core group of people (say 10) reviewing all the coins based on various metrics. Once this team is established they could take over ratings (and any drama it entails.)

Drama reduction: In the meantime, by only giving the top assets good ratings and keeping some lower volume legitimate assets from getting good rankings we reduce drama. The answer, -it does not have enough volume, it has not been out for several months, or it is not a top 50 asset will be more accepted.

New Users: We need to get new users to the exchange, and we need it to be easy and friendly to use. A flag/ribbon system does this. To tell people trade the top asset, allows us experienced traders to dump all of our knowledge into which assets are legitimate, and which one are scams. The ultimate purpose is to a make it easy to say, only trade blue ribbon assets until you know what you are doing. Or never trade red ribbon assets. We know that the scammers will not like this. They do not add value to the exchange.

By keeping all work in or a google doc, only updating this list once or month or so and keeping it to a few ratings will make it simple easy to implement. One person can own it, keeping everything to a simple contact point. Then it is only the updating of the list monthly that needs to be done.

I -or someone else- could outline a complete list of the above factors- and allow it to be published on Github. Explaining a mentality, and reasoning and solid metrics behind the system. Anyone who want to make a suggestion can join that thread.

What do you think?

[sschiessl-bcp]

Is there some algorithm on backend or we use some hardcoded list of accounts?

https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-ui/blob/develop/app/lib/common/scamAccounts.js

[gibbsfromncis]

@CryptickCryptick1 I suppose we can make some script to prepare the list of required data each deploy to production. I suppose it would be fair.

@sschiessl-bcp got it. It is only UI responsibility :)

[gibbsfromncis]

@clockworkgr @startailcoon @wmbutler Guys, it would be great to hear your opinion about @CryptickCryptick1 proposal.

@CryptickCryptick1 Sounds interesting. Lets wait for feedback from other members

[grctest]

I feel that @CryptickCryptick1's proposal ventures towards investment advice and is opinion based, as opposed to the original proposal which just proposes to flag assets which are owned/issued by known scammer accounts of which there are 1300+

[CryptickCryptick1]

Appreciate everyone’s feedback.

Coming from a customer service background, I know that taking care of the customer is very important. If we don’t take care of the customer, someone else will! People can leave us and trade at other exchanges. For every unhappy customer, it is reported that they will tell between 9 and 15 people.

I could see where if a more advanced rating system were developed -as a result of a working group -it might be considered “investment advice,” but this basic level I think of it more as a general warning system. As a society, we expect warning signs, “slippery when wet,” caution sharp turn ahead, watch for fallen rocks, or “Parents: Sharp Clift watch your children.”

Certainly, I think the blue (top 100 assets), gray (all portal assets) and Red (all scam assets) flags can easily be implemented via a method that would not be considered advice. In my experience with data, I do think a manual review would be prudent, but any of us could do that.

While I think flagging all the scam assets is good, I just think-from a customer perspective- more categories make this feature much more valuable to the customer.

Many of us have called out these assets on telegram, bitsharestalk, steemit and other places, but the problem these methods have is they are not in front of the customer at the most critical time.

Long term, scams deeply detract from the BitShares ecosystem. While we may not be able to stop every scam, we can warn, educate and make it harder for these known scammers.

Anyway, looking forward to hearing everyone else’s thoughts. Cryptick1