@Little Mouse: you haven't responded in this topic. Can you tell me what's your story behind
this post?
That's definitely weird and I'd sure like to hear an explanation for that--if it's a goof-up, I don't know how it was made.
Today,
JollyGood left this feedback:

Considering I just bumped this topic after 15 months, this looks like retaliation, which I don't consider
correct use of the Trust system. I haven't seen any hard evidence of any of the accounts involved participating in the same signature campaign.
I don't agree with JollyGood's feedback on these accounts at all. There's no need to leave a negative if alt accounts haven't been participating in the same campaign, and it looks like Little Mouse and RapTarX were in/applying for different ones. This is the reason I excluded JollyGood from my trust list; he has a very bad habit of leaving overly harsh feedback (to put it mildly).
People on DT, after the Talibans, are the most powerful and dangerous people on the planet right now; people's reputations are being ruined for not stealing or scamming, but for having an alt account, isn't that insane?
That's just a wee bit of an exaggeration, don't you think? After all, we're talking about a single member (JollyGood) leaving negative trust on 3 accounts suspected of being alts in this case. Comparing DT members as a group to the Taliban is just straight-up wrong.
I believe the forum owner stated that you are allowed to have many accounts as long as you are not stealing or harming others.
You don't have to believe it. Just read LoyceV's last post in this thread where he quoted Theymos saying exactly that:
For what it's worth: theymos agrees with hiding your identity:
I don't have a problem with alt accounts as long as they're not used for evading bans. If you're hesitant to say something controversial because you don't want it to be associated with your name, please create an alt account and say it.