Let's just hope for all the users that give out merit(merit sources and the general population alike) that other DT1 and DT2 members don't take your precedent and construe it to mean that perhaps they can go ahead and red trust meriters if they merit other types of posts that the DT member finds unsavory.
Giving red trust to someone for meriting a post that you disagree with, find offensive, or think was otherwise wrongfully merited isn't acceptable, and I
think that's why I'd originally excluded teeGUMES from my trust list. I thought that was terrible judgement on his part, but in any case I don't think anybody should be negging members for those reasons.
Personally, I think red trust for merit should only be done for selling/buying merit or using it to rank up an account farm.
Agree, but personally I wouldn't even give merit abusers a negative and I stopped doing so months ago. There is way too much subjectivity when it comes to handing out merits, and it's often difficult to prove someone has abused the merit system. Red paint should be applied very conservatively IMO.
That sounds like a government to me, which is exactly what Theymos wants to avoid.
Actisstupidname's suggestion that Theymos should pick his friends for DT would be basically going back to how the system was before, right? Theymos had picked the people he trusted to be DT1 members if I'm not mistaken, and I wouldn't exactly call that a government. They weren't necessarily scam busters or members who left a lot of negs or did any kind of actions normally associated with governance. I'd prefer we didn't go back to that.
