I know getting a negative rating does not mean you get excluded from DT, im not new here. It just seems counterproductive to have DT members with negative ratings from other DT members. If they can't trust each other why should we?
It seems that on mprep case almost no one really wanted to say anything because of fear.
I don't understand what this is about, people are free to express opinions on other people as they deem it fit based on the situations and circumstances at hand. DT members are not saint neither are they angels, they are individuals with different orientations, from different cultures as well as different levels of maturity. So you don't expect them to always agree on a particular issue.
I have seen threads were DT members have been accused of several things, some have been called alts of each others, others have been labelled clique to frustrate lower rank members just because they made it a responsibility to do what is right and you know the reason for this?
Because they only agree on one position.. Now when they have different opinions about situations, complain is still there.
In short what is the essence of decentralisation or freedom if people who matter cannot disagree on issues then agree afterwards?