Imagine a campaign manager run the campaign smoothly without any scam, but this user leave inaccurate feedback.
This mean the manager isn't scammer, but he deserved to be included in distrust list. What's wrong to participate in his campaign when he's not a scammer?
Leaving inaccurate feedback is essentially the same as scamming, as it abuses the power entrusted to a DT member. A DT feedback can be crucial for an account, influencing how others perceive them, even if it's just a neutral tag. This feedback system should be objective and not driven by personal feelings, or it risks compromising the freedom of speech.
The trust system is complex because there are no clear-cut rules for who gets included on a user’s trust or distrust list. It often becomes personal, leading to biases based on whether we know or dislike the user. Personally, if I were to make a judgment and add someone to my distrust list, and they happened to run a signature campaign, I wouldn’t join it as a way to stand by my principles.