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.
That's the meat of it.
Its centered on how red trust was used and why. I believe it is for obvious or proven scammers, faulty devs, etc.... people whom are a detriment to your security in transaction, or to be mislead in such a manner.... not to change a persons status based on a personal belief or something not in line with the aforementioned.
was red trust misused? or did I mis interpret how its supposed to be used? because; if the concept of it being issued to continue theymos's removal from tecshare on DT is valid still; then is it ok to misuse red trust in this instance?
is theymos' old word/action still law with todays vastly different system and rule set??
*edit* added formatting to quote and more description