Quote from: malaimult on December 21, 2014, 02:48:25 PM

Let me get this straight. This person thought you were acting unfairly, he called you out on it, and you made it so his profile would be labeled as a scammer until he retracted his statements about you acting unfairly. Is this an accurate representation of what happened?

In other words, you want to be able to act unfairly and to allow no one to call you out on it.

If anything his trust rating should have been improved for calling out unfair business activity. What he was doing had nothing to do with him potentially scamming and therefore a negative trust rating is not warranted.

You seem to be complaining a lot about the fact that you were removed from default trust list, yet you fail to understand that your ratings given do not have anything to do with scamming or the ability to trust others and as a result are not accurate and should not be relied on

No, that is not an accurate representation of the situation. Armis was harassing me, not pointing out anything "unfair". I was selling a gift card for face value, he decided that getting what I paid for for my gift card was unfair. I made it clear he was unwelcome and he continued to make posts including insults and other harassment. If he was just "calling me out" on something, why stick around to make insults?

I then reported his posts but the reports were ignored. At this point I left him a negative rating with the assumption that uninterested 3rd parties would not be forcing their involvement in the situation, so that we could BOTH be restored to our former states. The rating was left for his harassment, and that is exactly what the rating stated. I guess I should take the strategy of everyone else here and just lie about it, and say I think he is a scammer, and then it would magically be ok. After I left a rating for him he proceed to make slanderous posts on 5 more of my threads, demonstrating to me very clearly that his intent from his first post was harassment. At no point did Armis ever take responsibility for his participation in this conflict or even try to deescalate. Of course the staff are not interested in restorative justice, they are only interested in making sure the "default trust" maintains its "integrity" (HA!) so they can maintain their dominant influence over all traders on this forum and make sure their paychecks keep flowing.

I do not leave negative trust flippantly, I have only left a handful of negatives over 3 years of trading. Other users on the default trust hand negative ratings out like candy for even the weakest of suspicious, and use "Scam busting" as a convenient cover for burning down a few personal enemies in the process and letting them get lost in the fray. Of course my single alleged misuse of a trust rating is unforgivable and negates my credibility. Sounds like uniform enforcement of policy to me.