I might remove ~ from some accounts but this is not possible if you have accounts with bad trust lists in your trust network.
I think a better approach would be to exclude those "accounts with bad trust lists" directly rather than exclude the person's "sponsor". I bet there are some questionable characters in many DT2 members' networks if we look two levels down (DT3/DT4 essentially).I think it would only be fair to also remove our red trust from users like taikuri13 and xenon131, in an effort to wipe the slate clean and start again constructively.
I think any red trust posted as a result of TMAN's thread needs to go. If there is another, legitimate reason for it - needs to be specified and referenced properly. "Collusion" is BS. We all "collude" in Meta all day long. I just "colluded" with marlboroza above on how I think a trust list can be built and he's probably gonna disagree with me anyway - that's pretty much exactly what was going on in that Russian thread that triggered most of those red trusts.Thanks. That's a nasty-ass typo to make in an important statement
That's the problem, of course. At least for the ones that have replied in the Meta thread about the Russian DT0 reforms, they have a strong distrust of several current-DT1 members.
Let's ignore them. Their exclusions mean nothing and they can do their DT0 thing but unless theymos applies it by default to all accounts it won't get anywhere. On the other hand, reasonable users advocating for custom trust lists should be respected and supported as long as we agree on what the purpose of the trust system is and how it should be used (e.g. no ratings/inclusions for merely "nice people").