Why are they different? Because their job is to police the forum, and after some time that becomes frustrating and builds callousness and unwillingness to listen to people any longer because you simply don't have the time or energy to listen to anyone's complaints any longer. You take your shitty merciless forum policing attitude and apply it to a trust system as a third party with no direct involvement in the situation, and cause MORE HARM, instead of allowing the two parties to achieve a mutually beneficial solution to the issue.
You sure seem to be making grand assumptions about how fatigued the staff are. I suspect you're projecting your frustration and fatigue with the community rather than the staff's viewpoint. It doesn't cause more harm, you just felt the force of it after doing something you thought you were entitled to. A completely neglected system would let anyone with minor or petty gripes get what they want, as in the attempt in your case.
This is not an assumption, you have stated with your own words you do not have time to review these cases carefully. Furthermore I don't have to assume anything, in your case all I have to do is witness your hostile stance toward anyone who questions your decisions. It does in fact cause more harm than good, because a scammer is back in minutes, how long does it take an honest member trying to obey the rules to recover their reputation? It may never happen in a lot of people's cases. They just lose all of their time and effort invested. You guys are using hand grenades to swat flys and then claiming the pile of bodies left over from bystanders is not a big deal.
The difference is most regular members don't have an obsessive compulsive need to get involved in disputes as a third party like staff and or staff protected users like VOD. If some one is out of line eventually the user base will push back WITHOUT mommy and daddy babysitting.
But sometimes mummy and daddy need to get involved when children get out of hand and can't play nice.
Isn't the entire concept of Bitcoin supposed to be focused around person to person trading? Furthermore your response just demonstrates your lack of respect for users here. Just because YOU think it is a good reason to intervene does not make anyone involved children, but I am sure it suits your authority complex well.
In my case, if the staff hadn't got involved, Armis would have never been put under the impression that staff would "fix" the rating I left for him and he would have removed his harassing posts, and I would have removed my negative rating, restoring US BOTH to out previous states. Instead staff forced their involvement now I am removed from the default trust and Armis still is marked with negative trust. Wow you guys sure made that issue better.
That's what you hoped. And Amis might be still marked with negative but it's untrusted and people will now disregard it once they see who it's from.
Seriously I'm done with your whole fiasco. What do you actually attempt to get out of this? All you're doing is making yourself look bad and making people respect you less and less.
You have said you are done commenting on my posts about 3 times now, do you really mean it? I never wanted to leave a negative on Armis's reputation permanently, but you made sure that all paths to any form of restorative justice between us were replaced with with authoritarian centralized punishment. So I guess we both lose because of your obsessive need for control and punishment rather than focusing on how both parties could find resolution (which I offered to him publicly).
