If you discover some coordination effort, I don't know what to say. I am unsure if it is against the rules, but I will look into the evidence.
I don't think coordinating or even campaigning for Trust inclusions (or exclusions) is a problem. From the OP:
In borderline cases, it should result in something of a political battle.
It would be nice though if they follow the basics, and
List the users who you trust to have good trust ratings and good trust lists.
If those accounts are alts of a game person, there would probably be some merit cycling between them that is at least frowned upon, and of course, I would be happy to discover such a situation.
If sockpuppet accounts help push someone onto DT1, theymos
theymos will blacklist them from DT1-selection if found out.
Otherwise, I must only be happy there is more variety in DT1: I think this was one of the targets of this procedure, wasn't it?
It's kinda useless to have DT1-users
who never sent any feedback.
In the message linked in my monthly review of DT1 reshuffles, there is a translation (by yours truly)of your Guide on how to use the Trust System properly.
So, I agree with everything you said, and above all, DT inclusion should be based on the trust of a particular user.
Yet, Feedback metrics are not included in the criteria for DT inclusion.
Maybe theymos will be inspired by this and amend the rules.
Until then, I haven't much to say, and if a political battle will emerge, I am not sure I will be too interested in taking sides.
Of course, if something filthy emerges, I will be very interested.