I don't think Robinhood had any choice there. Trades don't settle instantly. Robinhood needs to post collateral with the Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation while settlement is pending, and the required collateral goes up with volatility. During the "GameStop debacle" they had to raise billions of USD in additional capital for this purpose, so no wonder they had to hit the brakes.
Blocking selling is a good way to get sued, so brokerages are very hesitant to do it. If the price drops the trader can claim they wanted to sell and are owed the difference. Blocking buying doesn’t have this issue since you can’t sue for theoretical gains.
In the context of what was happening in the market (the "short squeeze" that may or may not have ever happened), allowing sells but not buys clearly biased one position, could be seen as interference.
You are the product for Robinhood, as they are selling deal flow.
Vladimir Tenev will always put his customers first since they are paying for the deal flow information.
How can you trust any company that has you as the product?
You'll be shocked to learn that Robinhood also collects interest on your cash deposits and charges interest when you borrow money on margin. And gosh, other brokers like Fidelity also often route orders to Citadel. They're filling orders at the advertised prices, and following your limit price, are they not?
You could cry you don't like their prices or you think another broker offers better transaction costs, features, or fees, but talking about "trust" is a baseless smear.
i think this has more to do with the market tanking. nobody wants to log on to a sea of red. robinhood didn't start doing anything new as of september to drive people off.