Ideally, managers that accept negative trust members should receive negative trust themselves. :/
And for what charges? Trusting the not trusted?
Trust is too vague for that.
For these charges - Giving potential scammers/account traders/alt account ring enjoy the privilages of being in this forum (which includes campaigns)
And how about managers with negative trust managing bounty?
What about them?
If some company hires such a manager then its a red mark for that company. Not that they would care much if they are not interested in the affairs of this forum.
I think that no manager want to accept participants with negative trust. Maybe that they forgot to include it in their bounty rule.
I assume that they are just not bothered about trust ratings. Most campaigns are up to advertising only. They want more people to know about their product/service/project so they don't pay much attention to an account's reputation.
Like I said above the company might not be interested in the forum affairs and how trust works. They would be interested in promoting their project. However a DT-red trusted member is likely an alt account/sold account/loan defaulter or simply a scammer. If they promote a project then its going to get raised eyebrows from the public who view their posts.
Ideally DT-marked red trust members should not be allowed to participate. However managers should work on understanding which rating is BS and which one is valid.