Re: Should we hand out neutral/neg tags like candy?(open but might be future edits)
⭐ Merited by yahoo62278 (1)
The title is a bit misleading but i'm curious as to everyone's feelings on the issue of accusing people before having proof and handing out a neutral tag while looking for or asking for evidence?
I really appreciate your sensitivity to the reputation board. I see you are one of the DTs who have broad views and wisdom
I think, For a DT must have proof when giving the tag, because the tag of the DT has a big impact.
I've thought of a few things you might need on a reputation board:
1. Thread rules
2. The judgment thread can only be opened if the OP has preliminary evidence and preliminary analysis
3. Tread appeals must also bring evidence of the defense
4. Tags are given when the results have been decided (especially red tags)
5. Tags can be temporary (Have a certain period of time / permanent)
6. Neutral tags that don't have proof can be with better language (without judging) like = This account is under surveillance in 30 days
Then, if there is a tagging mistake, DT also at least apologizes
If someone argues with a DT member, DT members will ~ them. So, there is no point in sharing an unbiased opinion. The only good thing is, If a DT member says, "This is correct, and that is not, " I have to agree with him as an average Joe. The better decision for an average Joe is to ignore the reputation board and start shitposting to make money from the signature campaign (Which I have been doing for the last couple of days).
I think it's useful, though the risk of arguing here has enormous ramifications. DT managed to make this thread so scary. DT also seems unwilling to be criticized, as if they are gods here, and they know everything
Therefore I'm a bit confused, that while reading OP I'm more getting the impression that abusers are getting defended and abuser hunters are getting criticized, while there's not really anything to criticize in how DT is exposing abusers. Quite the opposite: I'm very grateful for acive members exposing shady activities. It's always very time consuming to research and compile the evidence. We also need to spend more Merit on these researches.
DT is giving out trusts only if there's really a reason to leave it. And shitposters complaining about neutral trust are just ridiculous. Most times, complaining will even earn them more accusations, when DT starts digging. Why are these shitposter accounts always involved in so much shady stuff?
You can almost bet on it that when a shitposter complains about a neutral trust, he will end up getting even more neutral trusts or even a negative trust.
DT is giving out trusts only if there's really a reason to leave it. And shitposters complaining about neutral trust are just ridiculous. Most times, complaining will even earn them more accusations, when DT starts digging. Why are these shitposter accounts always involved in so much shady stuff?
You can almost bet on it that when a shitposter complains about a neutral trust, he will end up getting even more neutral trusts or even a negative trust.
I think there is no problem if you have proof. Wherever judgments should be based on evidence not assumptions. If you want to prevent buying and selling accounts, then the admin recommends prohibiting this action. Or require using escrow to avoid fraud.
The problem here is, if the accusation have no evidence, as you do, you have a problem with timelord and you sue him in this thread. Do you think only DT should create a complaint thread if it receives a neutral or negative tag without any clear evidence?