A mod informed me that if I gave someone /Trust, they are well within the rules to demolish my entire base on a whim. However this is inconsistent with how the rules are applied elsewhere and it removes the incentive to base with others and truly integrate with the community. 1.) The rule verbatim: "No griefing and stealing in any form, even if it is unprotected", it's still a form of grief to abuse trust by theft of all valuables or razing your base to the ground! 2.) If a player has been given trust, there is no inherent implication that the owner is okay, or giving them permission to abuse that trust. This can be seen in the wording; I am trusting someone, not giving them full rights. Same as you give trust in real life- it comes with the assumption they will not do anything untoward. 3.) If one is allowed to abuse trust given to them; surely they should also be allowed to in the same manner destroy unclaimed areas- what is the difference between unclaimed and that which you've been trusted; both are builds without protection. 4.) One is not allowed to sell end-game objects. What about trusting someone in your claim and they taking all of your end game items? This is a pragmatic contradiction.
I member similiar thing in the past - griefer got banned but none stolen items was refunderd due No-refund policy. Also if I member correctly some1 form staff said - Trusting some1 is purely person-2-person matter, it's the issue between the mentioned players. Long story short - Ban griefer, learn from mistakes you made.
Oh boy, this is a very complicated matter. This rule is mainly in place because it is often difficult to determine who is the victim and who isn't. Now I agree with you that this rule also makes it very easy for stuff. There is no differentiation between you getting into an argument with your longterm basemate and him ragequitting with a bang or some random noobs getting trust and nuking your base. Staff work is a lot of work and this rule takes away some of the work load from them. Let's be honest, it is apparent to everyone, that right now staff can't even keep up with things, so putting even more on them is not the best choice. In general you should be responsible with how you deal with your base. You can always check the playtime of a player by running "/stats player NAME" which gives you an idea of whether you are dealing with some random noob or a longterm player. I have rarely or never seen the case where a longterm player griefs a base just for fun. Now, having said that, I think there is room for discussing this. But removing the "Player vs Player"-rule in general might not be the best idea.
When you trust someone it means you trust that person, it basically marries you to that person. Anything you had prior to the marriage and earned during that marriage suddenly becomes communal property. When you trust that person we assume that you were competent and knew what you were doing when you did it. In most cases players trust each other without a negative consequence, people are generally good after all. This doesn't mean you won't run into a bad egg now and then. Staff can not judge intent of another player, when a moderator comes to look at your grief ticket they only have the evidence set before them. If two players were trusted with each other than obviously you trusted them with your stuff so why would we start questioning your decisions? To start investigating issues between trusted players would become increasingly time consuming and introduce more problems than it would resolve.
