Quote from: nutildah on Today at 09:59:29 AM

I've never heard anyone say that before. What is your rationalization for that statement?

Incoming; I'll try to make it short, I'm not a fan of text walls unlike some other people around here...

Quote from: nutildah on Today at 09:59:29 AM

Quote from: actmyname on May 07, 2018, 02:16:58 PM

If other DT members disagreed with BAC's rating, they could easily send mprep positive feedback to counter the rating.

Quote from: xtraelv on January 19, 2019, 05:22:58 AM

Unfair negative tags are discussed in reputation and sometimes removed, sometimes are countered by an opposite tag or increased by a supporting tag.

Quote from: marlboroza on January 23, 2020, 02:53:05 PM

I will always counter which I think is wrong -ve feedback, especially if it is wrong retaliatory feedback.

Even if I see were you are coming from with these quotes, I only see some users saying that the trust system is used that way, not that it's the right way to use it.

Quote from: nutildah on Today at 09:59:29 AM

And I can't find the theymos quote for it but:

Quote from: EcuaMobi on April 17, 2019, 12:39:18 PM

Theymos has said it's OK to do that if you strongly disagree with the left feedback.

Was that before or after the changes made to the trust system? I'm not on my computer and can't search for the date, but I consider that to be quite relevant, since there used to be no posibility of leaving neutrals.

Quote from: nutildah on Today at 09:59:29 AM

My rationalization is that the negative was incorrect in the first place, so I am simply attempting to undo that. I don't engage in this practice often but this time I think it is warranted.

Ultimately my post here is more of a request that DarkStar_ and JollyGood consider re-evaluating their negative trust on Gyrsur. I'd rather attempt to resolve the issue this way rather than excluding them from my trust network as they of course contribute more good than bad overall. I'm also open to hearing arguments as to why the negative feedback should remain. As things stand, I just can't see how it relates to trustworthiness of trade activity on the forum.

I totally get that, and I agree with you regarding the need to talk some issues before taking any action; while others require action first and discussion afterwards. Was the red tag incorrect? It may be, according to the own trust page, red tags are for when "You think that trading with this person is high-risk" which I don't believe is the case here; but that's not what my post was about (OMG; was it offtopic?). Following that same guideline, counter-positives are also incorrect, because they are meant to be placed when "You think that this person is unlikely to scam anyone"; not when you see some other tags you deem incorrect are in place and want to counter them.

I've also checked LoyceV's trust guide, which I'm aware is a mere guideline, but a pretty good one; and the counter feedbacks are not considered in neither positive or negative use cases, so it's safe to assume they'd fall into the "Other" category, and thus neutral tag.

Of course, everything trust related is very subjective, but we shouldn't be using it the old way, just based on tradition. Neutral tags were introduced for a reason, and they should be used more often in these kind of situations.