Assume TCAS 2 or better:-
If you don't follow TCAS, you are second-guessing what the other guy is going to do.
If you don't follow TCAS, you are assuming that you can see and avoid all traffic in your area.
If you don't follow TCAS, you have no legal excuse to offer ATC when your non-TCAS avoidance causes other problems.
If you don't follow TCAS, you are probably going to die.
All the above, of course, assumes that you follow the recommended method of use. If you don't, then you are probably going to die soon anyway, so why bother?
I haven't yet heard of any sensible reasons for not following TCAS. And yes, I do understand how it works and its limitations. Capt Pit Bull may be able to think of 2/3 unlikely scenarios that may result in not following TCAS being proved a bad idea. I can think of at least 2 ACTUAL scenarios where NOT following TCAS killed people.
Beat that.
IMHO given that the exisiting (completely adequate) guidance material was not being implemented universally, whats the point of making it more inflexible?
Errrr - perhaps to ensure that it IS implemented universally????
The necessary guidance - i.e. don't manoeuvre opposite - was plainly stated by the JAA (as well as every manufacturers handbook I have ever seen).
OK - so neither aircraft manoeuvres oppostie to TCAS advice and what happens? errrrrrr - they crash. No sh1t, Sherlock.
So why do we have it? You tell me.
Sorry CPB, but as you say you were expecting to get shot down, and you proved exactly why you expected that - because you are talking a load of dingo's kidneys, and dangerous stuff at that. If you are going to pick and choose which regulations you obey, then you are far too dangerous to operate an aircraft. "Oh, sorry, I don't agree with those rules - I'm not going to obey those. These I might. Oh - and not those ones".
Not acceptable. Not professional. Not legal. Not safe. Not intelligent.