On a forum where some people are serious about privacy, uninvited interrogation of arbitrary users is bound to be unwelcome to somebody.

I myself may agree to be interviewed on condition that it be understood upfront, I will fictionalize answers so as to sow Impersonally Unidentifying Disinformation on the record about how I got into Bitcoin, what books I read, my exact reasons for anonymity, etc., etc.  Or perhaps I will simply answer every question with, “I’m a cat!”  Or it could be that I just don’t feel like being bothered with a bunch of questions.  Being interviewed would not feed my ego; and if I wanted to participate in this kind of thing, I would have social media accounts.

---

I myself would not issue negative trust feedback for the PM that was sent when I had been inactive and MIA for two months (!), which I politely ignored when I finally found it.  But then, I am not minerjones.  I would not presume to tell minerjones how to make his own decisions, or toss him the canard about the feedback being unrelated to trade risk—much less give him a n00b “how to” lecture with screenshots.  Um, yeah, thanks—I think that he probably knows how to use the trust system.

If you disagree with his feedback, maybe try understanding why he left it, and politely request for him to change it—and if he says no, back off and leave it alone.  I myself think it’s a bit disproportionate; but it’s not unreasonable.  I get why he left the feedback; do you?

And please, do not PM me asking me for explanations of how I decide to spend my merit.  Thank you.