So now you decide for me now what is a good reason to add people? This justifies the use of a negative rating how? Also, BTW, I never said those were the exclusive reasons I added them, I actually explained several reasons why I did which predate the flag event, but that doesn't work well with your accusation does it, so you have to accuse me again, this time of "manufacturing" reasons. I think you are "manufacturing" yourself, lots of bullshit to serve your personal vendettas. Also notice you totally ignored a neutral 3rd party, why is that Nutilduuuh? Is it because you can't simply just accuse them of things and pretend as if they are trying to cover something up as your sole form of argument?
P.S. - AMAZIN'!
TL;DR
"I got caught manipulating the trust system and then lying about it, so let me shift the argument to a personal one."
I actually explained several reasons why I did which predate the flag event
Where? From what I can see you had zero public interaction with them before Sept 6th. But I could be mistaken, so please feel free to point out what I missed.
but that doesn't work well with your accusation does it, so you have to accuse me again, this time of "manufacturing" reasons
I didn't accuse you of manufacturing "reasons," I accused you of manufacturing a timeline, which you did.
you totally ignored a neutral 3rd party
While I don't consider their tone to be "neutral," I did address their request in my following post.
In order to "manufacture timelines", one has to first operate on the assumption that your timeline means anything other than more assumptions on your part. You feel you have some kind of right to not only demand I explain why I included these people, but that it must be done in such a manner commensurate with your demands, or else I am "manufacturing timelines". It is not that you are making baseless assumptions, no, not at all, it is because I am "manufacturing timelines" that my replies don't meet the standards of your demands.
Not only that there were private communications as well, there is also the fact that I thought their trust lists were also positive additions.
Some of the users I added for the simple reason that I agreed with their trust list. Is this where you tell me again what is a valid reason for me deciding who I do or don't include based on your own personal preferences? Nothing you are accusing me of is anything that couldn't literally be applied to any other member actively using custom trust lists. Much like a fed uses process crimes to charge people with crimes when they have no evidence, you are using the idea that I don't meet your arbitrary standards in your interrogation as "proof" of my guilt. This is all just a game you are playing to pursue your own vendetta.