I think you might have misinterpreted the sentence.

there is a difference between


and


the second one, would mean theymos think   " it's OK to post a rating about the person" being a troll or having an ugly avatar or uses the word lemon"

while the first "the original" does not mean that.

what I think it means is this ; your rating does not have to be based on a specific trade you personally had with that member you rating, for an example;  if someone proves that someone is a scam, you don't need to be scammed by that person in a trade to give him a negative feedback, same goes for the positive, you do not need to sell something to somebody in order to give them a positive feedback, so the rating does not have to be based on a SPECIFIC trade ,but the trade concept is still there.

of course this would also justify tagging account traders, as by default account switching hand from a real trusted person to an untrusted person represent a threat to the community should anybody TRADE with him.

tagging a ponzi shill could also be justifiable, as he might be the reason for someone trading in a ponzi scheme and then loses money.

but tagging someone for their religion,trolling or any other "funny" reason is a whole different story.

it's strange how theymos avoid touching on this topic, maybe the variety of opinions is what makes the system somehow efficient.  ?