Are you the: 1) TRUST, BUT GAIN type, or 2) TRUST NO ONE type?

I'm the first and yes, the wording of the question leaves much to interpretation.

EDIT: Ok, the verify is throwing this off and I understand. Better said as wonglondo did below, gain is better.

I trust so much its a fault.

 

Originally Posted by Shaaarrrp

I trust people til they give me a reason not to.

Exactly this.

Depends on the setting.

In a personal or social setting I don't trust or distrust people upon first meeting, but then I don't put them in a position that it really matters whether I do or don't trust them.

In a work environment I absolutely do not trust any opposing attorney. As for clients, I take everything with a grain of salt and since I am in the proof business it doesn't really matter whether I trust them or not, it matter what I can prove or support with corroborating evidence in order to settle or win at trial.

In my mind trust is something that is built over time within a relationship and is constantly verified by the persons actions.

Not counting family members, there are about 9 people in my life I trust completely.

I trusted the first one. She fucked me. No more trusting.

While I'd like to say #1, in reality I'm a #2 (meh, I have my reasons)

I trust, but constantly verify. Basically, what Willy said.

 

Originally Posted by XquiziVex

I trust, but constantly verify. Basically, what Willy said.

I totally get this and pretty much describes me.

I trust most people but I usually need to verify they are a good person, but that isn't too hard.

I am jaded and really do not trust most females due to my past, this is probably a bad thing, but oh well.

 

Originally Posted by Willywoo

In a personal or social setting I don't trust or distrust people upon first meeting, but then I don't put them in a position that it really matters whether I do or don't trust them.

In my mind trust is something that is built over time within a relationship and is constantly verified by the persons actions.

this is spot on. I'd add that it also depends on the individual. I'm a lethally swift and accurate assayer of character, to the point of being able to see what a man would be like fight and what a woman would be like in bed. a person's eyes, expressions, mannerisms, and body language are to me no different than an interesting book. *praise musashi*

with that, I give people a starting point of trust that is different for each person. they can either gain or lose as much trust as they want through their words and actions. I find it interesting that, at least for me, there is a certain line of mistrust from which it is impossible to recover after having crossed. conversely, there is no level of trust that a person can achieve that can never be lost to some extent, if not altogether. perhaps it may become exceedingly difficult to lose, but never impossible, as a persons nature is rarely fully revealed to oneself, let alone an observer. for this reason, some degree of maintenance in relationships is critical. generally, there is an inverse relationship between the degree of maintenance required in order to sustain trust and the strength of the bond between the trusted.

as bigearn pointed out, it also depends on whether I'm dealing with a good person or a bad person, which isn't something I necessarily judge based on their actions, at least not right away, as bad people can do good things, and good people can do bad things. I think the worst kind of people are: 1) those whose personas are incongruent with their inner selves, and those whose teachings reflect that which they know to be false. these are people who secretly and consciously attempt to deceive those around them into accepting a false representation of themselves and the world. 2) people who not only attempt to deceive others in this way, but also deceive themselves. usually it is only a matter of time before the 1 becomes the 2. and a subcategory of the 2nd type is the third type of person(and imo the worst) who is the one that deliberately turns away from reality. the obvious symptoms of this disgusting choice are fundamental denial and systemic hatred of truth.

it doesn't matter how much a good ^these people(hypocrites) do. they can donate as much to charity, feed as many people, or read to as many children as they want, but they will always be regarded by me as bad people, because their motives are never pure. see chaz for details. I'd be much quicker to trust an honest marine, or a ranger, or a combat controller, or a SEAL, killers scarcely rivaled throughout the history of the world, than a hypocrite priest that blesses his flock with the gift of morality and promises of heaven, or a hypocrite politician that blesses his voters with the gift of exercising their right to democracy and promises of a better tomorrow.