I've been the target of his finger for almost 5.5 years. I'd be curious what percentage of Techy's posts contain my name. :/
Thank you JaredKaragen for bring attention to my two negative trust entries against the OP. Is the general consensus they are valid?
I have stated who I trust, and I won't be making major changes soon. I have to finish a gift I think the community needs and will really enjoy.
I think in simplest forms for the recent neg trust that I analyzed:
If we hold Theymos to be on a pedistal of "my word is law"... then; TEC can not be on DT.
It was the easiest way for him to be removed back then, and since things are vastly different on the forum now;
Assuming the above about theymos is to be held as law: your action continue that state of status quo by giving him that flag could be interpreted as ok; even though the flag system itself is to warn people about being scammed, ripped off or mislead (on the same level) by the individual getting the flag. If I am misinterpreting what the flag system is for; please correct me now.... but this is how I see it to be used. My recent red flag was to warn of a developer of a project that has mass investment, only to ignore the investors and produce nothing except losses. I see this as a reason to give the trust hit... I admit, I need to go back, and do my own little but more of digging on it as well; but the facts stood up to him being connected to such a thing.
This is why; Its not a valid flag "prima face", but it is deemed necessary to return the status quo. IF the above is not correct... well.... You know my feelings by now I would think.
I'm not sure about the second trust flag; as I don't think I even looked into it.... I myself removed myself from default trust and only have people added that I have personally done transactions/personal dealings with; or have never steered me wrong.
As an outsider.... Its a tough thing to sort all of this out. But at least now I know; and TBH: I do feel for everyone involved in this.
Hopefully... something amicable can come around. It has been nearly 6 years... The odds are in your favor for things to change for the better.
But that isn't the "staus quo". This is exactly why Theymos made the trust system more decentralized, so he is not the ultimate arbiter of every little thing. Still, lets explore this avenue of reasoning...
You say if Theymos is of the opinion I shouldn't be on default trust, then Vod's claim is some how correct? First of all, that doesn't substantiate any of Vod's claims that is just the logical fallacy known as "appeal to authority".
I understand your reasoning, but that is now how the system is supposed to operate. Even assuming you do believe that is how the system is designed to operate, Theymos removed his exclusion of me, what, like a year ago or something, I think. Vod is currently excluded by Theymos. If Theymos is the ultimate arbiter of truth in your mind, he clearly is at least indifferent to my participation in the trust system, and judged Vod's use of it invalid based on his exclusion.
Again, none of this addresses the baseless nature of Vods accusations against me, or his well documented history of abusing the trust system against myself and others on the forum.