Hello, let's talk with facts.
~snip~
You started this thread at 09:50am yet send a PM at 1:41pm seeking a resolution - why?
Maybe you should have considered approaching me first before starting the thread. I will review the situation and revise the feedback to neutral if it is appropriate so there was no need for all the drama that is contained here since the thread was created when you could have sent a PM first.
If possible, kindly explain why took exception to my trust but not of others specifically to the point of creating threads in the Reputation board citing how you have been wronged.
P.P.S: I' a little worry about that fact that forum also turning into GULAG-like place, where you can be accused due to someone's words.
And also because the DT system doesn't work. I hope that I'm wrong, but I have a strong feeling that here everything ends as often: nothing will change. False accused guy will ask for help and will be ignored and a mad "commissar" will continue to tag everything he want
You ignored your previous two negs for a long time, but suddenly you attack the third because you see an opening? JollyGood is all over the forum right now - easy target to flush away your past errors?
I don't see how you calling IconFirm
mad is OK, but someone stating you may be an alt is not.
A little afterwords: Forum is turning in a some kind of shit with, really. It's not as it was in 2015-2016.
Have you helped at all in our fight against corruption, or did you say nothing as we took your scammy friends one by one? Now JG comes for you...
Edit: Thx johhnyUAMy sentiments exactly. He already had negative trust which will still sit there even if I revise mine to neutral but he made no overt effort to have it revised or removed yet the feedback I gave is causing him a lot of anxiety and distress to the point he created this thread.
You ignored your previous two negs for a long time, but suddenly you attack the third because you see an opening?
You a little wrong about this statement, let me clarify:
1. With bob I have a personal conversation, and it didn't help.
2. About second false feedback I tried to resolve in our local russian section. And at least few people removed their tags for me. Bob was one of them (after strong proofs as private conversation):
While the screenhots do not absolutely proof that this is not your alt yet.. i still believe that it would be highly unprobable.
I removed the rating on both accounts.
So in his opinion it is highly unprobable but not impossible.
Red trust without proof (or referring to another red trust rating without reference/proof, same thing) are not cool. Basically the trust rating the way it is now says that johhnyUA is a high risk in trading because he changed his e-mail address at some point in the past. Makes no sense.
This is true, I should have written it out my reasons for him being a bounty cheat with that reference link. Thank you for pointing it out, I will modify it.
Red trust without proof (or referring to another red trust rating without reference/proof, same thing) are not cool. Basically the trust rating the way it is now says that johhnyUA is a high risk in trading because he changed his e-mail address at some point in the past. Makes no sense.
IconFirm made assumption that account johhnyUA changed hands and they probably didn't give a fuck to check whether account is sold or not just because of
yobit's signature, which is the main reason of feedback anyway. JG's reference points "kvanko-johhnyUA alt accusation" topic, as there is no way to prove or disapprove it, JG probably see him as cheater who will do anything for money and he decided that yUA is dangerous, then he left him feedback and send him to "Ignoreland", which is, btw, according to yohhnyUA OK to do:
I can't understand one thing: why do you not put them in ignore list, eh?
It's really weird, see: For example,
i have some assholes in russian local which i don't like, moreover, i think they are dangerous to forum members. I left my feedbacks to them and send them to Ignoreland. Sometimes they create butthurt topics about me but most of the time i don't see them. So, what's bother you to do so? I am speechless. You read my mind!
marlboroza since when did you start gaining mind reading powers
Regarding tagging I am not sure a neutral tag would suffice on the basis of that conversation and here are two important posts:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1702409.msg25620198#msg2562019He is not my alt, he's my friend whom I invited to this forum a long time ago. (2015 as register date to both of us). But he start to write actively only this spring (when he understood how profitable bounty campaigns could be).
If any trustworthy member would ask about proofs, we are ready to provide it.
yes, he helps me to do translation for russian branch on this forum. Some kind of translation company
Kvanko Registration Date:
10/29/2015johhnyUA Registration Date:
10/30/2015It turns out that johhnyUA invited Kvanko to the forum,
but registered himself a day later 
Red trust without proof (or referring to another red trust rating without reference/proof, same thing) are not cool. Basically the trust rating the way it is now says that johhnyUA is a high risk in trading because he changed his e-mail address at some point in the past. Makes no sense.
Agreed, and this is yet another feedback of JollyGood's that I don't agree with, no matter how much he's right about Yobit being a scam exchange. I wouldn't tag anyone for being in a previous Yobit campaign, and the evidence of OP's account changing hands is just....meh, as far as I can see--but I didn't delve too deep into it.
Gotta go easy on those negs, JG.
I know, I really am trying The Pharmacist I took advice previously and tried to refrain from doing so. On a slightly different note, I still need to take the time out to see if any of my red trust can be revised to neutral, I did mention to you I would do it and I will get round to it soon.
IconFirm made assumption that account johhnyUA changed hands and they probably didn't give a fuck to check whether account is sold or not just because of
yobit's signature, which is the main reason of feedback anyway. JG's reference points "kvanko-johhnyUA alt accusation" topic, as there is no way to prove or disapprove it, JG probably see him as cheater who will do anything for money and he decided that yUA is dangerous, then he left him feedback and send him to "Ignoreland", which is, btw, according to yohhnyUA OK to do:
Ignore is fine, red trust to tell everyone that JG is ignoring someone - not so much. Same with the ratings that say one thing and point to another... it shouldn't be a puzzle, it should be factual and indicate "high risk in trading".
In my red trust I did not write I was ignoring him but I will update the wording to not mention Yobit but rather be more specific about the reason (character space permitting) which is I do not buy the whole story that he signed up then invited his friend to the forum because his
friend (alt) signed up before him and I do not accept any reason that
they (he and his alt) shared the same ETH address for any reason at all.
There no evidence about that. That's the problem. But we have evidences that I'm still myself. Called "signed message". If account would change hands in 2020 i doubt that he could sign message with an address from 2017-2018.
It wouldn't be the first time an account was sold along with a private key that was used some time back. I'm not saying the claims that the account changed hands are valid, the evidence is very weak. But, if you proved to the community that the claim is total horse shit, then maybe JollyGood would feel pressured to revise his tag. I personally think his use of the trust system is abusive. A hair trigger with red-tags is damaging to the system as a whole, and dilutes the value.
I have to say; in my opinion all the red-tags on your account are worthless. My trust settings only show the ones from JollyGood and bob123. The one from JollyGood shouldn't be there at all, and the one from bob123 is taking a hardline stance on semantics.
I see that KTChampion's feedback shows up on DT. I get the one about bounty cheating, and not believing the "Friends" excuse, but that's another situation where I don't like tagging people unless there's substantial irrefutable evidence. The other one is just another petty squabble using red-tags as a bludgeon. My recommendation to you is to not feed into it and make things worse with retaliatory feedback. These things have a way ironing themselves out in the long run.
I am sorry that you felt that my use of the trust system is abusive. I would not see myself with hair trigger tendencies but still I will take your feedback on-board and reflect to see my general style in the forum.
Show Posts
