Now there I think you're going a bit too far.  I agree that everyone should evaluate the evidence I presented for themself and I'm not going back on that.  But I think if you say that it "proves nothing" then you're missing the fact that .5 million words of text is not easily come by, and statistical analysis of a corpus that size isn't something that you can just write off as irrelevant.

I also think it's in no way fair to suggest that I'm doing to him what he's done to me.  I'm not on default trust and I don't want to be put there.  I do think that people on default trust should not be using it to attack people for personal grudges.  QS has attacked me with 4 different account now and has repeatedly attempted to smear me off of the forum.  I've done nothing but to try to stand up for myself against a bully.

When it turns out that this bully is providing himself escrow services and I come across hard, quantitative evidence of it and I present it to the public, that's in no way the same thing as using some power that I have (I'm not on default trust, I have no power in the current system) to defame someone.  I have presented my evidence and I ask others to decide what to think.  QS has done quite the opposite to me, he neg-repped me without presenting any evidence and when he finally presented his "case" literally everyone is telling him to drop it.  He left a default trust rating on me and refuses to change it despite the consensus of his peers that he should do so.  I have no default trust rating to leave and I merely present some facts I uncovered and I ask you all to judge.  There's a big difference there.