nobody needs to fully accept the standards in the OP, nor include/exclude any of the people listed. i think that's one of the primary misconceptions naysayers are trying to promote here with cherry picked examples and personal attacks.
Trust abuse is cherry picked example now? Tagging someone for "trolling" is cherry picked example NOW
not sure what you're referring to specifically. i was largely talking about the examples and personal attacks that have been aimed at
me, which i've directly responded to.
It clearly says, "lets work on these standards, exclude trust abusers and include not-trust abusers". Do you see any other point of this lists? Lists are there for no reason? Hm, principle is also here for no reason?
TECSHARE and i are not the same person. i didn't create those lists. why are you directing this at me?
i agree with the stated principles of the Objective Standards Guild. i already strived to work towards them in my own feedback and trust list before this thread existed.
that doesn't mean i will automatically include/exclude people listed in the OP, nor will i endlessly defend them re their use of feedback. that's not my responsibility. i am responsible for
my use of the trust system.
you and suchmoon may be here to attack
people, but i am not. i am here to discuss the standards themselves, and what we can do to build a better system via consensus. i am perfectly fine with current DT members retaining their status---i'm just hoping we can pressure them towards more objective standards, and that the more abusive ones will be forced to rein in their abuse or be excluded.
everyone should do their own research and customize their own trust lists. what's important here is the standards (or lack thereof) the community builds consensus around.
If #1 and #2 doesn't exist, how many of #3 (regularly, repeatedly) is acceptable by these standards?
answered
here. tl;dr = "it depends. let's have a conversation about it because it's complicated." remember, those who employ no standards at all (frivolous or opinion-based tags) are at an inherent advantage since other people can't "stoop to their level". this creates a frustrating conundrum that i haven't quite figure out yet.