Or, is the counter argument that it relies on numbers - the thought that honest users will outweigh dishonest users because the economics of dishonesty weight against it
Well. Let say old woman #1 buys 100 pies from old woman #2 just in order to access the rating. And rates everything with “1”. Because #1 is in competition with #2 and is going to destroy her business
Significant remark - 100 pies are 100 different transactions
In fact the problem you’re trying to solve is very close to the general core challenge of FreeTON - soft majority voting
The relevant data here is how often this happens on ebay or amazon. It rarely happens because its rarely economical. It might be economical to leave bad reviews, but this is not a reviews system. The vendors rating speaks to their delivery of product or service. As with any system some will cheat, some will game, but people know this and they can see through it. Plus marketplaces (discussed in my first comment) are centralized and can curate. They can kick back actors off their website.
The arguments all factor but it is the extent to which they are a) marginal and b) not addressed by weighted ratings and marketplace’s curation that we need to better understand. This is because ultimately if I want to transact outside of fiat rails and use Crystals then if I had the choice between dealing with a naked address or dealing with an address with a high rating based on 5000 sales of the thing I want to buy then I would choose the latter. Otherwise, I would probably choose Paypal right?
You partially answer your own questions ) Why somebody is going to use crypto for selling or buying something? There must be significant cause for use crypto instead of PayPal. One possible answer may be: anonymity.
I quote one guy, because I like it:
Anonymity is a magnifying glass for good as well as bad, because while anonymously done evil is more heinous, anonymously done good is more beautiful.
Remaining anonymous, people are more susceptible to temptation and are able to do nasty things that they would never do in public. Sad but true It is difficult to trust anonymous opponents and to distinguish a newbie with an “empty” reputation from a troll from a troll factory who has planned something unkind… But in good design your scheme may work and that was my second sentence here
And the debate is important because it brings us back to the question “why” do this? Because it cannot be censored or stopped or owned and monetised by one platform? But why does that matter? The answer might be context: a country that bans crypto; product or service that Paypal et al will not support. Or the answer might be choice. I already do most transacting in ETH or Bitcoin. I just do not want to go through banks. If solution proposed in this thread were cheaper and contained more utility than a typical fiat transaction then it could even be killer solution.