TECSHARE: /nods
I think that 3-prong test varies by jurisdiction/legal system. I was just going by the OED; libel: a published false statement that is damaging to a person's reputation; a written defamation.
It's never acceptable to "joke" about someone being a murderer unless you suspect them of being a murderer or everyone can see public records they have been convicted of same.
The first two was from my understanding of the libel laws in the US and the standard of proof that must be presented in order for someone to be 'liable' for libel.
The third bullet is my interpretation of US supreme court rulings on first amendment issues regarding satire of 'famous' people and libel.
I really cannot argue the moral issue of "joking" that someone is a murderer as this is not the appropriate venue for that and I do not have a strong enough of an opinion.
I would say that if you truly think there is a connection between his two comments and his ability to be trusted then the negative trust is appropriate. If you cannot make a strong logical connection between someone making this empty claim and their ability to be trusted then the negative trust is not appropriate. Remember that negative trust should be given if "you were scammed or if you strongly believe this person is a scammer"
Well, as I cannot afford to bring a libel suit, my use of the word "libel" is only for OED (non-lawyers' common understanding) purposes, not Black's Law/statutes/case law.
If someone is willing to damage someone's reputation by lying about their commission of the ultimate individual crime of violence (second overall only to mass murder), that's far worse IMO than simply committing property crimes, aka scamming. Perhaps there should be a double negative rating that covers accusations and defenses of heinous violent crimes.
First of all, it was just a joke and it was posted in your moderated thread so I knew it was going to be deleted by you and it wasn't intended to hurt your reputation because I think everyone on the forum knows your not a murderer. Secondly, reading the negative rep you left me you're doing the exact thing you're accusing me of doing except you're not joking about it and you're using your forum status to your personal advantage and not for the well being of the site. "I wouldn't trust this user with a single grain of rice or anything more valuable." is what you left on my profile. I don't think things like this are benefiting the site at all especially since I haven't done anything besides make a joke. Negative repping someone is only suppose to be used for people who are scammers and show suspicions of scamming, and you can't use it for anything else or you're breaking the rules. I don't think this displays enough responsibility to have that kind of power. I've been here for almost two years and I've contributed a lot to the site and for my account to be ruined over something like this is ridiculous. I think if the "Trusted Feedback" were only able to be used for people who've proven they can use it responsibly it would solve a lot of the problems around the forum. My account is branded with negative rep for something that doesn't have anything to do with trading and I believe it will hurt my business around the forums and I don't think that's fair for a member who hasn't scammed or broken any of the rules.