~
Logically, when the police arrest someone, they must be accompanied by strong evidence, not based on wanting to show that authority is in their hands or the rank that is on their shoulders. DT members don't have any arrogance or personal grudges when sticking someone's butt with red paint, they work according to the rules that apply in the forum.
Really? All the police have an evidence first before arresting someone? Wow, so the cases of planted evidence isn't real? That analogy isn't really helpful if you're defending or on the side of the DT members because it implies that they can give someone red trust with impunity.
~
I'm not talking about removing feedbacks left by inactive members, most of it remain to be legit and valid. But there is some cases feedbacks become wrong. Let's say user receive negative trust for not returning loan. And after some time user who left him feedback dies or simply become inactive. User repays loan, but he still can't get rid of red trust. Offcourse, it would be wrong to remove all feedbacks left by inactive member or remove him from DT because all other his feebacks remains legit. For now such issue doesn't happens often, but eventually it will become more frequent.
You literally have the word "removed" in the reply that I've quoted, what do you mean you're not talking about removing feedbacks from inactive members. Loan defaulting is another case though, I think that there's should never be a removal even if they've paid their defaulted loan, maybe just changing it to neutral to indicate that this person has defaulted a loan but have paid it eventually. Even if it's not removed, pretty sure other DT members can step in to leave a neutral trust so as to help them clarify the information about why there's still a red trust.