So we have a topic about trust abuse and here we are going after a member because they do not want to disclose who they are.
No, dont be dishonest, the OP has failed to even make a coherent case for his claim about there being an abuse of the trust system. What we have instead is a rambling diatribe employing fallacious reasoning and ad hominem complaint about how the commercial issuers of gift cards are apparently fully aware they are open to abuse but don't care, as though that is a reasonable defense of dishonest behaviour, even if it were true, which is highly unlikely.
Then, when the sock-puppet's posts in this thread are challenged for being utterly void of merit and lacking in substance, we see him and other, equally vapid contributors to this discussion, try to claim there is a fucking 'cultural' issue and that they are being 'attacked'.
The only people being put 'on the defensive' here are the assholes who clearly don't like the trust system being used for the purpose it exists for, namely, communicating to other forum users the referenced proof of a user's dishonest behaviour.
How am I being dishonest? My perception may be off but you can not call me dishonest because you do not agree.
Since when is voicing a contrary opinion so bad in this forum? You can write me off as sock-puppet by I am still here and it does not change my view. Hopefully others can think for themselves,nor do I wish to sway them. Just want a open discussion.