If a DT member tags anyone for wrong reasons and refuses to reverse it, there is no way to remove the person from DT. I haven't seen. The best the victim will do is to ~ or leave a retaliatory tag.
If theymos for instance should create a poll to determine who leaves the DT, you will be shocked by the result of the poll.
If the system is failing, the consequence will be too many tags on people's profile and random ~ of users without reasons.
A retaliatory tag is always wrong. If a tag is definitely wrong then it could be correct to draw the attention of the community to that. But being prepared that if something is wrong it will be revealed.
~ for incorrect tag could be reasonable.
DT is not constant forever. There are always new participants, some old participants are losing support and even being distrusted. So if any of DT is working against the consensus they will be withdrawn from DT sooner or later. The consensus doesn't have strict boundaries, so there are some things on the very border and even if some respected DT member is sometimes out of boundaries it can be forgiven. But testing the system long will lead to disqualification.
It is good if forum users take part in DT making own trust lists and leaving reviews on others, when it is appropriate. (
Read the recommendations on tags and flags written by theymos.)
So discussions like this one show possible problematic points in the system and clarify current image of the consensus.
Well, I suppose that each case should have proof, it should be clear for someone from a side that a tag left correctly. Even if we talk about the neutral tag. Neutral doesn't mean it is less important. I think there's no point in leaving any tag if it is not important for others to know some information about an account. Neutral means this information is not making financial deal with this account nor significantly more risky, nor significantly less risky, but anyway it's important to know.