The real solution is to stop including users who have passed away or are otherwise inactive, particularly after it becomes clear that their ratings are outdated.
I have to agree with The Pharmacist on this one. When looking at the ratings issued by TMAN and Zepher, I don't they should be excluded due to their inactivity unless they are no longer valid of course.
Admins changing ratings would open a can of worms that is really not worth it, since we have a tool to solve it on our own.
Are you talking about counter-trust ratings? A positive/neutral trust rating is as invalid as the negative rating it's supposed to counter. It boosts a user's trust who would otherwise not have received that rating, so the user now has two ratings he doesn't deserve. One positive and one negative.
While others may have changed their own ratings, it doesn't necessarily mean that the user who left that rating has changed his mind though there really isn't anything to prove otherwise either.
It's debatable, sure. When picking out those examples I thought about how I would act in those situations. It's subjective, like any change in rating.
Imagine everyone coming from their hibernating caves to complain about all negative feedbacks Lauda (and other saints) left...
Lauda is no longer DT I believe, so her ratings wouldn't fit the profile.
Just remove those people from the DT member system. Like how Lauda left the forum, his feedback can be replaced by other.
But if the no longer valid feedback just gets by another invalid reply, nothing changes. The problem didn't go away.
Look at my trust profile. It's loaded with negatives from idiots who've long since abandoned the forum for whatever reason.
True, but those ratings bear no significance whatsoever. A rating by a DT member does.