That is not true. The first part is irrelevant bordering raw ad hominem. There is no need for any single member to take responsibility for community determined  transparent objective standards which are applied equally to all members.

No, they can be objective standards that are scrutinized and debated by the entire community. Reason would dictate no single member.

Should I open a suitable thread where you can debate retaining the tagging system over a move to a transparent objective set of standards under the flagging system?

" I'm sorry" was sarcastic, please attempt to control this cathartic indulgence. We can discuss things cordially and in a sensible adult manner. You are not a scammer, there is no reason for us to be unpleasant to one another. Remain calm and rely upon your critcal reasoning to defeat my proposal.

I take it you also reject this red trust bartering is quite worrying and the prime driver was not the safety of the wider community?

Just before we move to our own thread?
I like you suchmoon. You have some principles. I want to investigate them thoroughly before adding you to my future trust inclusions list. I accept that you are not a scammer but is it more important for you to be seen as clever and funny than do what is best for this whole community. Ego is a prime concern. You and TS are like twin brothers actually, the more I observe you both. I hope that both sides realize that is quite a compliment.

You have a little more abrasive or as ch said 'caustic' style suchmoon. He was such an insightful member. I miss his posts dearly. I pray he returns daily.