In particular, in my view:
Just wanted to thank you for giving some guidance as far as feedback-giving goes. What I get from your input is that trust feedback really should be about
trust, but we've all got different standards on that. TECSHARE wants trust to be solely about documented trades and such, whereas I tend to not trust account sellers/buyers. The message I'm taking from this is that you don't approve of leaving negs for differences of opinion or politics, but I'm wondering whether you specifically disapprove of account dealers being tagged--not necessarily your opinion on the matter, but whether you'd consider that an inappropriate use of the trust system.
It's not a moderator issue since there's no rule for it, and it harms the forum overall so I'd argue that DT ought to be able to tag them.
If I were to give my best answer (this might not align with what theymos thinks), you should ask yourself the question : Does this person's action mean
I EVERYONE shouldn't trust him with money?
For the dude advocating users to remove Lauda from the truat list, it technically says nothing about his trustworthiness as a trade party. His hate for Lauda (not just his, it seems like a whole gang of people want to exclude her from DT..) is a very subjective opinion, and more of a "politicial" issue as theymos put it.
Account trading on the other hand, can objectively be considered as manipulation of trust. Since a high ranked account, possibly one with trust, being sold to someone else, means that account is not a reflection of the new owner's trust rating.
It kind of goes both ways when you think about it. Why is Lauda allowed to manipulate trust by advocating inclusion or exclusion of specific members, while if someone else advocates for HER exclusoon, it's neg-trust. That's some double standards for you guys.