Quote from: Lauda on February 28, 2020, 08:55:19 PM

Quote from: suchmoon on February 28, 2020, 08:50:03 PM

So if someone attempts to enroll one account, gets rejected, then attempts to enroll another account - that calls for negative trust? Assuming the campaign doesn't allow alt accounts.

Most likely, yes. This is very deceptive behavior. The person behind the account is being rejected, not his imaginary identities nor tens nor hundreds of identities. If one, despite the rejection, tries to infiltrate the service provider again with another mask then they are actively trying to get around the rejection - thus deception, thus untrustworthy. Does this make sense? This is from my perspective as an (ex) campaign manager not as a DT member.

There's nothing deceptive about his campaign applications. He never attempted to enroll both accounts at the same time, and hasn't tried to enroll a second since being accepted with one. Regardless of the campaign rule's ambiguity, he never broke the rule because he never had two accounts enrolled. So, sorry to disagree with you Luada, but that's not justification for the red trust or a flag. Realistically, it's a non-issue.

But what really has me curious is this:

Quote from: Lauda on February 28, 2020, 05:46:56 PM

I gave you another chance here:

Quote from: Lauda on February 28, 2020, 03:15:12 PM

Quote from: hacker1001101001 on February 28, 2020, 02:17:36 PM

Lauda even after my multiple apologies to her

It does not work like that. You can apologize a million times to me, it does not matter. I do not need nor want your apologies. You can not expect forgiveness when you are involved in absolute bullshit like TECSHARE's Guild of Stupidity, send me apologies - yet seize every single opportunity to disagree with me (even when the disagreeing side has an opinion that is worse than the anti-vax club), seize every opportunity to to sneak in something bad about me or about people who share my views or support my flags. This is not remorse, this is not being sorry, this is worse - active deception under pretenses of being remorseful.

You claim to be giving Hacker another chance, but I don't see any chances being offered in this thread, and certainly not in the quote of yourself that you provided. In fact that quote only highlights what's wrong with this whole thread; i.e. that hacker disagrees with you and saddled up with the latest posse of folks who disagree with you. None of that is justification for tags and flags.

So far, I don't see where he's broken any rules, or tried to scam anyone. His behavior maybe tactless, and crude, but that's not a crime. Please stop all the pointless tags and flags based on opinions and disagreements. They have no place in the trust system.