Since when and why regular members have rights to decide who is scammer, and who is legit without valid reports?
What's a valid report in your opinion? A guy may come to me and say that their service will bring my money back if I give them sensitive information such as my wallet.dat or a seed phrase. Should I deliver those to confirm that they're indeed scammers or should I make my justified preconceptions? This person may be harmful for a newbie; I choose to make this clear.So, my counter-argument is: Why don't negatively flagged users provide their evidence that they aren't malicious to change our minds? If it's clear, we won't keep our bad feedback in their trust pages.
Why do regular members with feedback ( which should be based on trading experience ) have powers to make non-valid statements and abuse the trust system ?
It shouldn't be based exclusively on trading experience. We aren't machines; we have instincts if something hits the fan.Why do the trust system have nothing to do with "trust" and why it is even called "trust system" consider there is nothing trust based on it?
With which person would you prefer to exchange or do anything that would require trustworthiness? A guy who has been here for over a decade and lots of users state that he should be trusted or a newly created account?I was going to continue answering your questions, but each one is worse than the other. I don't think that I deserve this punishment.
