A major goal of this is to allow retaliatory distrusts and ratings to actually have some chance of mattering so that contentious ratings have an actual cost. If someone is obviously scamming, then any retaliatory rating should not last long due to the DT1 "voting", but if you negative-rate someone for generally disliking them, then their retaliation against you may stick. In borderline cases, it should result in something of a political battle.
This is inspired partly by something that David Friedman said once (though I can't find the quote), that one of the requirements for a peaceful society is the credible threat of retaliation in case you are harmed. As DT was organized previously, one or both sides of a dispute was usually unable to effectively retaliate to a rating, at least via the trust system itself. Now your ability to effectively retaliate will tend to increase as you become more established in the community, which should discourage abuse generally. (Or that's the idea, at least.)
All that being said, I still discourage retaliatory ratings, and with these changes I encourage people to try to "bury the hatchet" and de-escalate rather than trying to use any increased retaliatory power you now have. Also, it's best to make your own custom list, and you must do this if you want to be on DT1.
I am never completely tied to anything, but let's try this for at least a few months and see how it works.
I feel that we are all part of Theymos "ant-farm " experiment.
The unfortunate part of the trust system is that it holds political and potential scam power.
For this reason I think it would be good to create a list of values that the majority on the DT list would like to maintain.
It is interesting that while the list was created as a trust list it appears that distrust is more important.
One of the things that I would like to alert people to is the danger of removing some of the old DTs from the list.
For instance when Lauda was removed from the old list there were numerous scammers that suddenly were untagged. This worried me.
Having a charter of what is acceptable and what is unacceptable will bring both discussion and some agreement.
I feel the idea of the new DT system is to have more eyes and ears out there fighting scams.
