You are definitely confusing trust or distrust lists with negative, positive and neutral tags. Is that what the OP meant?
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?
I totally get what yahoo62278 is trying to point out. These trust lists and distrust lists are closely tied to trust feedback (whether it’s positive, neutral, or negative). Without trust from others elevating you to DT1, your feedback doesn’t hold much weight for most users. So, if someone on DT1 is known for giving out “inaccurate feedback” that can damage another member’s reputation, it reflects poorly on the entire DT network and undermines its purpose.
Honestly, that can be even more detrimental than scamming, as it can ripple through and affect the whole forum.
Isn’t the main role of DT to prevent or reduce scams? Feedback should ideally be reserved for actual cases of scams or clear violations. Inaccurate feedback risks unjustly labeling someone as untrustworthy, weakening the integrity of the system.