I'm not following. Who is doing the selective enforcement if not Theymos? Why is it qualified to be selective if not from a position of implied authority?
The, now withdrawn, rating was selective enforcement. EFS has been long-term abusing his position. I'm not familiar with theymos selectively enforcing staff-related things himself, but this was a case of selective trust-enforcement. It happens on all levels as demonstrated (trust/staff/non-staff doesn't matter).
You are on DT, so your feedback matters more, therefor it was more pressing a matter to point out whatever you did rather than whatever Quickseller did in the case that you both did the exact same thing at the exact same time.
Leaving me negative rating does what about my flag? Nothing. Right.
I'm not a direct victim of Inaba, so Inaba is not a scammer and I can't flag him. Lovely system, priorities indeed.
You actually need even more people than ever before to get scammed in order to have a sufficient sub set of victims that are able to- and willing to come forward with credible "contract violations" before you can fully establish that the introduced system is garbage. Not enough contract violations = not enough victims able to speak out = silent scamming can and will continue. Incentivizes scamming, de-incentivizes flagging and flag-support. I'll leave you to process that.
Tl;dr: I welcome the idea of separation, but I am disgusted by this implementation which is really just scam-enabling. Have fun.