I believe a number of people are a bit fearful of leaving negative trust for TC/QS for fear that they will be tagged back, removed from DT, hacked, trolled or worse.
Neither TC nor myself have left retaliation feedback against you, AFAIK no one has started trolling you, and I think I have acted professionally towards you. The real risk of getting trolled is if you were to leave a negative rating on a scammer who has gone to great lengths to hide the fact that they are a scammer, just look at the post history of tspacepilot over the past several months, he has gone to great lengths to troll me and slander my name. Other examples include turtlehurricane and CandyStripes (although he did this to BadBear, not me), both of which were exposed after being able to keep their scams hidden for a long time.
Regarding being removed from DT, I believe the forum policy is that inaccurate ratings will not be allowed to remain in the default trust network. I have posted to confirm that this policy is still in place and what is considered a "long" time however I have not heard back yet. I do wish to change your mind on the matter using factual arguments (as opposed to very generalized statements made by most people in this thread). It is my opinion that getting someone who has left an inaccurate rating to voluntarily remove a rating to be the best solution for everyone.
If you are concerned about charging a fee, then that is very little different from selling an altcoin at a 50%+ markup then what is available on an exchange, and from selling a domain you just registered for 6+ figures (both of which, if memory serves me correctly, you have listed for sale as much). Both involve an offer for something of value and the person you are dealing with willingly accepts that offer. Additionally, I do not think you would be willing to accept less money being sent to you for your domain just because the person you are dealing with does not want to trust you enough to send money first to you.
If you are concerned that the party involved is not neutral, then the argument is invalid because if you trust someone to escrow for you then logically you would trust that person with at least that much money in the event that you were trading directly with them. The reason for this is because there is the risk of the escrow running away with your money, just as with a direct trade, however when you trust someone to escrow for you (and the person you are dealing with is not the same as the escrow) then there is the possibility that the other party will try to scam you which would result in your money being tied up for some time while a dispute is resolved, having to incur a fee even though the trade did not go through and the potential for the person scamming you being able to fabricate sufficient evidence that the escrow provider should side with them (the last one is unlikely).
Lastly, I have added a disclosure on my escrow thread that I make no representation as to the party anyone using my escrow service is dealing with (including the possibility that they are trading with an alt of me). I would find it very difficult to argue against saying that someone should not be able to engage in a deal whose conditions may be controversial but they consent to.
Regarding TC, I am not certain what business he is involved in, however I am fairly certain he does not sell accounts. I believe that he has a policy of leaving trust under certain circumstances when he escrows deals (similar to how I have such a policy, however his is different then mine) and to hide the fact that someone is his alt he leaves trust. Afaik, none of his alts have ever been sold, not have they scammed.
Poll
