Quote from: Quickseller on May 16, 2015, 07:24:40 AM

Quote from: TheButterZone on May 16, 2015, 07:16:35 AM

Quote from: Quickseller on May 16, 2015, 07:08:45 AM

Someone that, over time, slanders others, will eventually make their way onto people's ignore list. If you really are as honest as others believe you to be (and as I believe you to be) (and as you present yourself to be) then no one will take such slander without proof.

Just because proof is an absolute defense to libel/slander does not mean that libel/slander lacking proof isn't a revocation of trust-worthy offense in any just society.

Well my point is that just because someone is libeling you does not make them a scammer. There are plenty of examples both here and in the real world when people have libeled others, could not back up their claims with facts and then lost credibility. (FWIW, you still appear in my trust list and I have not excluded you from my list- therefore I personally find your ratings credible)

And as I said back then...

Quote from: TheButterZone on November 15, 2014, 10:18:08 PM

If someone is willing to damage someone's reputation by lying about their commission of the ultimate individual crime of violence (second overall only to mass murder), that's far worse IMO than simply committing property crimes, aka scamming. Perhaps there should be a double negative rating that covers accusations and defenses of heinous violent crimes.

To make it absolutely clear...
Murder>Theft

Quote from: Vod on May 16, 2015, 07:29:42 AM

Quote from: Quickseller on May 16, 2015, 07:24:40 AM

Well my point is that just because someone is libeling you does not make them a scammer.

Maybe not a scammer, but certainly untrustworthy. TS for example, tried for months to damage my credibility with libel. In my mind, that makes him untrustworthy and I left the appropriate trust.

So as we can see here, Vod's general reasoning on libel and neg trust is functionally indistinguishable from mine. I wonder what would have happened if my libeler targeted Vod instead of or in addition to me? Would Vod, like me, have been wiped off the trust map entirely because 1) THAT libeler is special 2) no other libeler in Vod's opinion, appears to be special enough to wipe him 3) Vod doesn't believe himself to be "protected"?

this was my final edit, you can quote safely now