My bad, you're right. I did
bring it up after I saw cabsav was ignored. I assumed TP would read it, since that whole thread was about him, but perhaps he didn't. TP was removed from DT shortly after, so I forgot about it until now.
Well, I took part in that thread and I don't remember reading your post either. Usually I find it better to directly (via PM) inform them before doing so publicly.
Cabsav both PMed TP about it and made that post, yet was ignored on both fronts.
It was most likely a whiny PM, which I don't answer anymore either. People bother me with useless nonsense quite often. I've learned that the simplest form of replying is to put them on the ignore list.
A lack of consistency in old ratings is completely understandable, but I think we both agree that these inconsistencies should be fixed. The thing is, when most people bring this up, they are dismissed as salty shitposting account farmers. While this is generally the correct reaction, I think there are a number of instances similar to the one I referenced where the issue is not so black and white.
If I was in cabsav's shoes and saw that there were (future) staff members doing the same thing in the same thread who got away with it, I'd be pretty upset too. All I'm saying is TP needs to address the selectivity of some of his ratings, when someone has a legitimate complaint he shouldn't completely ignore them.
Well, solving this is easier said than done. The thing is, some notable members that used to deal or attempt to deal in accounts in the past have not been tagged and won't be tagged (neither Cabsav nor OP are examples of notable members). The potential solutions are:
1) Tag the remaining users.
2) Remove the tags from the other users.
Both cause more questions (if you consider people with positive trust and/or people who are staff members notable members) and difficult edge-cases. Before you ask me what those might be, spend a minute or two thinking about the implications of going via either route. I'm sure you will figure out a few.