If you are free to add users who have left no ratings whatsoever except a single positive rating to you to default trust, then other users are equally free to exclude such users.
Quite honestly I was trying to avoid mixing myself up in another TS thread, but after he stated this:
That would make sense if they had any information whatsoever to judge them upon, other than the fact that I included them. You call me obsessive but Suchmoon is literally picking through my trust list canceling out additions for no other reason than the fact that I added them as if any inclusion needs Suchmoon's approval otherwise they get an exclusion automatically.
I couldn't help but think of this:
Even if it didn't benefit me personally, I would still be happy including them simply based on the fact that the resident clown car passengers excluded them. Given their history of abuse I would say anyone they are targeting is worth considering for inclusion.
He's doing the exact same thing with his inclusions that he is accusing suchmoon of doing with exclusions. The main difference is including people to the trust system out of spite is potentially much more damaging than excluding them.
They have earned my trust and I have had long standing interactions with them outside of the forum
That's fine -- then you should leave them a positive trust. AFAICT nobody disagrees with the ratings you left for them (well, except for leaving a trust for someone based on your assessment of their ability to "preserve Americas Constitutional rights"

)
Including them in your trust list means you trust not only their ability to leave correct trust ratings but that you trust their ability to use the trust system as well. You've added 2 of the 3 to your trust list for no discernible reason when a simple positive trust would suffice.