Making a thread like that and locking it isn't the worst crime in the world, and I think everyone is blowing that way out of proportion.  Yes, it was a breach of etiquette and the thread shouldn't have been locked, but it's not as though he stopped any discussion about BitcoinGirl.Club's trustworthiness.  He just made it impossible to discuss in his own thread.

JollyGood has indeed shown a pattern of poor judgement when it comes to using the trust system, which is why I had him excluded way back before I wiped my trust list entirely.  In fact, I just realized that when I made a new trust list not too long ago, I forgot to exclude him from it--but that omission has now been corrected.  Last I knew, JG was trying to do some good on the forum and might still be; I haven't looked at any of the feedbacks he's handed out in probably a year or more, but though I don't think he ought to be on DT I don't think he's a malicious, evil motherfucker either.

And to those of you complaining about his wrongly-given trust, just ~ him in your trust list if you haven't already.  If enough members on DT do that, he won't be on DT anymore and his feedbacks won't carry nearly as much weight.  The whole DT system is a farce, but the inclusion/exclusion feature is a voting mechanism and problem DT members ideally should be weeded out through it.

Sometimes users know that it's a waste of time to respond to certain people.  There are some that like to engage in the arguments and those that don't want to argue unless they are arguing a point.

I wouldn't waste my time arguing on deaf ears in most cases.

He is a controversial figure indeed but at this point in time I feel the positive contributions he added to the forum via his feedbacks outweigh the negatives, so he will remain in my trust list. Yes, you're still free to discuss what you want, nobody is going to argue with you about that.

Well, unfortunately your advice fell on deaf ears and it did not even warrant a response by the OP. That degree of arrogance is precisely what members see on a regular basis and it alienates them. Sometimes you honestly wonder why bother posting with care and consideration with advice when those that you reach out to simply ignore you.

Not always, no. But he was spot on when it came to his neutral feedback on you, the 1st left by anybody:



An explanation that nobody believes.


Congratulations




Good. I don't hate you either; I don't hate anyone on this forum - there's nothing here that's worth getting that upset over - but anyone who lands on my distrust list does so for a reason.

Wrong. 

JG has left you neutral trust, which should not affect you.  You can't demand he changes the way he thinks; all you can do is try to convince him through actions. 

I caught an escrow scammer once.  I sent a message to the scammer, and his main account replied seconds later.   He left the forum after I caught him, but then came back during my hiatus.   

His was a lost cause a long time ago. Do not waste your time engaging with him (and especially not by advising him).

This is the 44th post in this thread but an interesting statistic is that 9 posts in this thread (equates to over 20%) were made by the komisariatku/PytagoraZ account farming puppeteer. Those are very interesting statistics.

I see some similarities between the komisariatku/PytagoraZ account farming troll and another account that ended up getting multiple tags therefore ended by giving up on that account. I hope the sooner the other accounts operated by the komisariatku/PytagoraZ account farming troll are accidentally revealed by him and receive tags as a response, the better.

Here I am returning to this thread after some time out and surprise surprise, nothing has changed. I cannot read the posts made by JackpotRacer because he is on my ignore lists (as are BitcoinGirl.Club and the komisariatku and PytagoraZ accunt farmers).

It seems as though the blackjack.fun forum representative is going to have to overcome several trolls if they are going to have any chance of getting their messages across.

C'mon man, give it up. Its so completely obvious what happened with your komisariatku account. You (he) posted as komisariatku not just once but twice on accident, and you even told shasan that the accounts didn't know each other. LOL. I do not think you're in any type of position to call anyone a narcissist given how brazen (and annoying) you were as a "newbie," and as you refuse to admit you got caught slippin. That's a classic sign of a narcissist: the inability to admit when one was wrong.

Next time (and I have no doubt you've started a new account already), try to be more humble, and don't interject yourself in reputational matters that don't concern you... That's a dead giveaway that a newbie is an alt... Among other things, which I won't disclose as they are "proprietary trade secrets."

The neutral was not given to him but to icopress.

Please ignore this troll, this is textbook example of when to use magical ignore button in forum.
It is so stupid to assume that I am angry about anything for simply answering lies from other members (that also involved me).
I am not going to waste my time debating or answering anything with cheating liars, but everyone else can find more information about him in link below:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5489102.0

Do you also use each other old underwear and toothbrushes by any chance?
With silly statements and stupid pretending when talking to yourself like this you are only digging deeper hole for yourself.
Congrats on ruining your accounts, and I can't wait to see other alt accounts you used for cheating

I’m not following you. Which negative tag was given to me?

I think I made myself very clear and you are trying to pull me into more unnecessary drama (your signature and personal text tells me you are/have turned into a drama-based member), which I’m not really interested… good luck.

Then why are you listing all the members who don't trust your judgment anymore, any why deceive people that icopress ordered everyone to do this?
That ''neutral'' post you wrote to him was actually negative in reality, as you directly blamed him that he mismanaged jambler campaign

I didn't? It wasn't me.

You mean his gibberish sense of writing? Hasn't it been smeared around enough that even a grail reader would ignore his ass? What an irony, Lmao! I never knew Bitcoingirl has such a good sense of humor  
Says a user with 3 red fine tags that says nothing really different about his adversary.
I don't really think it's a good idea to become an imposter, Mr name -- for whatever reasons that's happening, Do you really think anyone takes y'all seriously??

I think I have missed a lot. Where did icopress openly told people to distrust you? Or you open indirectly told people to distrust you.

I was in Jambler campaign and icopress did not tell me to do anything. I do not believe icopress can even do anything like that. Because some users in Jambler distrust you, do not think icopress send them PM to distruct you. Some people do not think Jambler is a mixer and that you intentionally looked for ways to bring it down and you have succeeded in what could have been helpful for some members on this forum. It is like you alleged that icopress did something, bit if it comes out that it is not true, what trust should we give you? That should deserve a neutral or negative trust.

I very disagree with your most recent neutral trust feedbacks, so I added you to my ~DT list. That's all.

You got a *neutral* trust feedback from someone?



Please, keep talking...

From what I understand, it seems you are trying to insinuate that icopress PMed members telling them to distrust you following the incident. That's a huge accusation, do you have proof of this?
According to what I understood from his post, he was trying to inform them that they will receive a PM from him informing them that they had been moved to different campaigns, after which they would change signatures.

I saw different members get enrolled in other campaigns without applying. It makes sense the PM was more of an alert to the concerned members that they had been accepted in other campaigns rather than asking them to distrust you. I stand to be corrected.