He did; we discovered an unusual case of >2k ratings sent by a single user due to new features introducted to BPIP.
Right.
I still don't see a good enough reason for why one needs to give more than 5 legitimate feedbacks, let alone 10.
Really? why is that?
I see things going two ways:
- The trust mod abuses his power, and until things get resolved, the whole forum would be upside down.
- The trust mod does his job, and some people would just create a fucking myriad of accounts , try to defame him in every way possible, and one mod won't be able to handle every single scenario instantaneously,people will start raging. And besides, he'd act based on his opinions, and a lot of people won't like his judgement regardless of the fact that however fair he is in terms of trust moderation.
This is exactly why subjectivity can not be allowed to remain. There needs to be a drill down and down and down until you are left with a list of criteria that decides the action. You can not leave it up to one persons own subjective ideas because whether they like it or not they are prone to moods, and other human emotion that will at times lead them to make unfair and inconsistent judgements. For grey areas or special circumstances there will always need human intervention but for 99% of clear cases where criteria met/not met can be the deciding factor (which would eliminate most trust abuse and inconsistent action/inaction) then these criteria should be used.
I agree you would need more than 1 trust mod. If they have not done anything wrong then they will not be getting defamed. We need to stick to analysing facts and observable events not groundless hearsay and opinions.