Every time I read similar rules, I know that the author by negative trust means only valid and confirmed red tags and I have no doubt that the guys I quoted have the same opinion. Therefore, if you want your words to sound not ambiguous, you should adhere to the following wording: Your account should not have a confirmed / justified negative trust.

Of course, there are exceptions to the rules ... cases when no footnotes are assigned to the red tags and you cannot get acquainted with the details, then you should pay attention either to the author of the tag or to the reasons why you see the red tag. After all, adding a particular person to your list of trust means trusting the opinion of this person and the opinion of those people whom he trusts directly, (depending on the depth of trust). And when I talked about the "author of the tag" I also meant those persons whose tags are trusted by the majority only for the reason that these people have been verified over the years, whose tags are invaluable for the forum as a whole, even if they are without footnotes.

To summarize, we can say that it all boils down to preventing the forum from becoming a place where people's reputation is judged on the basis of nothing more than gossip or speculation. Therefore, my advice to you ... if you do not know the details, or you do not directly trust the opinion of the person who left the red tag, then you should not take such tags into account, (since you don't know for sure if such a tag was justified or not).