I don't see this user explicitly asking for trust ratings do you? They are asking for a review. This is not uncommon. Perhaps it could have been worded better and people are reading into it too much. Maybe he is actually fishing for positive ratings. Maybe he is an 8 story tall crustacean from the protozoic era. I doubt we will ever know for sure.
This frankly is the kind of thing that demonstrates to me this forum is full of a bunch of busybodies that have nothing better to do than interfere in the lives of others over the most inconsequential things they SUSPECT MIGHT be happening. This is all lots of fun until it is your turn to have the forum crawl up your ass just because some one is bored. Good thing for them there are no penalties for wrongly rating people who have no influence within this system... so win win.
I thought discussions like this are what you are advocating for. I don't see that any DT member has given a neg rating to the OP or anyone else participating in that thread at this time.
You are right, I do want discussion before rating. Except you will note the distinct lack of a standard of evidence, substituted in its place is mere suspicion. Really even if he was up to what is suspected, how long do you think it would last before the people rating him would figure it out and notify everyone who rated him to remove them? My point is this is kind of a non-issue even if it was true.
Most of us here are not lawyers. What lawyer is bitcointalk going to hire to write out a detailed explanation of standards of evidence for idiots? (It would probably be preferable to write it in multiple languages too.)After all, I see in another thread you chiming in on negative trust given by someone not even on DT1 or DT2. Therefore, all members would need the standards explained to them. Also, what measure are we going to take for those members that leave inappropriate trust feedback? In my case, I have three comments claiming that I spread doomsday virus, suck ass the best, and am an alt of yogg.