Bear in mind you only cared about the negative once it had a visible impact. I doubt your objectivity.
Back when I wrote the feedback I wasn't part of DT. Then in 2018 I was added to Blazed's list and all hell broke loose it seems. You have claimed many things, of which you have followed up on very few thereof.
Remember the whole lawsuit debacle?
Remember the whole "quitting the forum" (and immediate return)?
The fact that there are now DT wars and manipulation on various fronts of the system should strike "centralized decentralization" into your heart. Perhaps we should return to the "decentralized centralization" of having DT comprised of theymos's picks... but wait, doesn't that mean he's going to only add scammers to DefaultTrust since theymos hates you so much?
Maybe the only system that works is one where Thule is at the head thereof. I'm sure you wouldn't have any complaints about that.
Thule makes some important observations and makes some strong points. He is a valuable member as is a time that does not blindly follow or remain silent.
You don't appear to be a trust abuser. A more sensible and credible DT selection. Although there are unexplained inconsistencies that could be interpret as double standards. There are some inclusions on you trust list of proved scammers and abusers. These could be due to lack of study.
I find your appraisal of those opinions voiced by thule to be disingenuous and mocking.
There is undeniable merit and a robustness to his assertions. He may be goes too far with theymos " support" or "endorse" the scamming and abuse. There is certainly an accommodation and tolerance for proved scammers and proved trust abusers that exceeds optimal limits.
Theymos has also sadly demonstrated a contempt for the truth whistle blowers being to the forum. One may hope this is due to him being annoyed those truths expose that glaring weakness in the designs he has been experimenting with. Those designs are as suboptimal for focused and credible scam warnings as the are protecting free speech.
It is safe to say that there are several obvious design tweak that Theymos could introduce that would improve things drastically in terms of reducing the luxurious range of abuse and capability for proven scammer to hold such influence in default trust. Theymos refusing to action or even discuss these tweaks, and prefers to apply tweaks for maximum negative impact of the abuse and bestow more incentive to abuse. Along with working with proven scammers to have their own red rags expunged leave him open to legitimate and criticism.
I don't think that taking his words and expanding them out into the ridiculous is sensible. His speculation ""may"" be lightly exaggerated in specific areas, but you attempt to reduce their value to near zero is unbecoming of one with such a general high standard of reason and objectivity.
I am willing to expanding on any point you wish further clarity or debate.
All members even those with anger and upset should have their points objectively considered, analysed and debated. Not from a gang of ridiculing bullies who smell entertainment and blood from the safety of the pack.
Out from nowhere there could come one to his aid that upset the easy advantage assumed.
That was once you actmyname. I hope it could be again.