Why would anyone agree with ratings that have proved lies as reason?
Also reminding you of this, as some people seem to skip over it: Vod asked me to change my rating, threatening to otherwise red-rate me. I refused. He rated me red. He also started claiming I'm a scammer and a liar, when I'm provably neither. His ratings to me are absolutely dishonest -- not just "poor". Why are some people still thinking his ratings have something to do with some >2yr old auction, that Vod earlier commented by saying "I decided what you did wasn't untrustworthy"?
Also, as you can see, reasons stated in his ratings towards me have nothing to do with what he claims
currently (in the quoted post below) to be the origin for the "distrust".
1) Where do I scam?
2) Where do I lie?
3) Where do I harass you?
4) What issues have I made up?
In your mind, you have done no wrong. That is why criminals do not haul themselves to jail.
Vod do answer this: Why did you change your feeback to Anduck from neutral to negative, is it because Anduck said he doesn't trust you, so you wanted to change it?
Anduck lies. :/
Read the PMs again. Notice where I type "ah, until this point'? That is when I lost trust for him. Around a week later, with no further communication from him, I changed my rating. If you choose a scammer's interpretation of those words over mine, then you will believe him over me.