I would have liked to put this subject to rest a long time ago, but since Royse777 doesn't stop crying and some people don't seem to know what happened, I'm going to create this post, as recommended by LoyceV, to use it as a reference.

The summary of reasons is as follows:

1) His involvement in the Bitlucy case.
2) His dishonest way of acting by demanding people who left negative feedback to him to change the feedback and feeling entitled instead of being humble and keeping a low profile.
3) His dishonest way of acting by hiding behind an alt in the Casino Critique case.
4) His dishonest way of acting by covering up for naim027 scum.
5) His dishonest way of acting in the recent case of being banned for ad spam, although this is of minor importance, but reaffirms his dishonesty.

1) His involvement in the Bitlucy case.

I'll echo efialtis negative feedback:


Reference: Bitlucy withdrawal problem, does this acceptable?


2) His dishonest way of acting by demanding people who left negative feedback to him to change the feedback and feeling entitled instead of being humble and keeping a low profile.

I am not going to back it up in links because it is scattered throughout the various threads in Reputation, but those who have followed the story know what happened. Simply instead of shutting his mouth and trying to regain his reputation with a low profile, Royse777 started to pick on those who had not changed the feedback from negative to neutral, especially yahoo62278 and JollyGood. With yahoo62278 he got him to change the feedback from negative to neutral, I think because he was annoying and not to have to hear him anymore, but if we see the feedback we will see that despite the neutral color it is clearly negative in spirit.

Tell me if someone who doesn't know the story and doesn't care about color would make deals with Royse777 based on that feedback:


JollyGood was left for dead because Royse777's long whining was answered by even longer walls of text in response from JollyGood.

Later he had the same attitude with me.

3) His dishonest way of acting by hiding behind an alt in the Casino Critique case.

After a short time, he planned a big project that would not only earn him a lot of money if it went well, but also help him to regain his reputation:

[IBCO - suspended] ⚽🎰 Casino Critique⭐ FREE Chip for BCT Members ❤️‍🔥

I, and many, received an email like this:


This is dishonest. Potential investors had a right to know who was behind that account.

Then a newbie appeared, probably an alt, and when there were already suspicions, he created this thread:

Royse777 is Casino Critique

Royse777 was slow to show up on the thread, but he did show up not to confirm it was true, but to throw his weight around and accuse JollyGood of using alts to harm his reputation.

4) His dishonest way of acting by covering up for naim027 scum.

Royse777 was, dishonestly, covering up for a person if you can call him that, who has repeatedly demonstrated no moral principles. And not only that, but that scum was his biggest alibi in the Bitlucy case.



5) His dishonest way of acting in the recent case of being banned for ad spam, although this is of minor importance, but reaffirms his dishonesty.

This point is not so important, but, again, we see that he knows he is doing something he should not be doing, and he does it:


And thank goodness he didn't find out who reported him, otherwise he'd already be crying and opening threads against him.

The bottom line is that he is a dishonest person and I personally wouldn't deal with him for $0.01. Does this mean that he will necessarily scam all the deals he does? No. In this life you are not either a completely honest person or a serial killer like Ted Bundy who took advantage of the kindness of women to kidnap, rape and kill them, there is a middle ground.

I think that whoever makes deals with Royse777 has a certain risk of losing his money, that's why the negative feedback, although for example, I do not believe in the case of the campaings that he will manage them well and there will be no problem, but simply because it is more profitable for him, not because of his (dis)honesty.

Bonus: boasts about employing naim027:

Bump.

Is anyone going to give any explanation as to why this scum is still freely on the forum without being permabanned? I guess not.

I want to remind people he repeatedly broke the rules including the one about using alts while he was banned, which we found out shortly after he was unbanned.

I am reluctant to believe sobbing stories I read on forums, especially if they come from newbies, but what she tells sounds plausible.

I am sorry to tell you that I sincerely believe that you are not going to get anything, to begin with because for an investigation to be initiated, let alone a trial, you would have to prove that those bitcoins belonged to you and you will not be able to do it because you no longer have the private keys. You only have your word and that does not even start an investigation.

The moral I take from this is:

1) Don't tell people you have cryptocurrencies.
2) Put yourself in the worst case scenario and anticipate that they might try to steal them. For that case it is quite sensible to have a wallet to give to thieves both at home and if you escape to another country, and another much better hidden even in another location.

I agree. It is difficult to know what causes a price spike because there are so many players interacting in the market. I think a price recovery is within the normal range for this 2023 once most of the leverage garbage is gone and we are getting closer to halving, although there is still more to come.

The Miss promoting Bitcoin is fine with me, as is anything that helps popularize it, but I think it is extremely unlikely to have anything to do with the price rise.

Well, I in other posts defended that this IA could be positive and provide leverage but to quality and responsible posters of the forum. To shitposters it gives them a tool to spam much more and faster, multiplying the number of alts, so in principle I would like to see a measure like the one proposed by LoyceV, but as suchmoon I am skeptical.

Haha!

The crybaby is crying again. Crybaby, you're a crybaby. I won't even read you.


That neutral feedback is no longer valid and I just deleted it.

The only explanation I can see for what you are telling me is that as far as I remember you were a few months away from the forum and apparently you didn't find out what happened after that neutral feedback. It is that the rest who have followed the story do not need a post with links. But I will surely make tomorrow an explanatory post for you on this thread, well for you and for the ones who didn't know about the story, and I will leave the negative feedback, which will appear again on top, and the crybaby will cry again.

On the other hand I am going to update my ignore list with naim027. I will put his alts on ignore if I see him using them. The known ones, because I am sure he is farming other alts.

Often, movements in economics are not so much mathematically driven as psychologically driven. So yes, it can have an influence.

I don't hold any altcoins either and I think like poyaa87 that diversification should be done outside the cryptocurrency market, with the stock market, real state, gold and maybe something else.

I hope that at some point the altcoins market will be curbed, as we are in bear market and new ones are being created all the time while most of them are crap and are going to disappear.

If you notice, we are having slight sustained upward trend, which seem to indicate that barring catastrophic news, such as another FTX, that we can get back to $20k and beyond.

For anyone who is in on this, we know that sub $20k prices are extremely cheap, the thing is that there have been extreme downturns because of the leverage explosion but at the minimum that things return to normal the normal is a 2023 with upside.

Yes, for Argentina I am surprised by the low rate. Now, once they control which people have cryptocurrencies, don't be surprised by later taxes or confiscation attempts.

I understand that there will be people who will declare them out of fear, but those who do not declare them and take the minimum precautions will not be caught. Now, they will have to be careful if they want to spend or convert to fiat in Argentina, but I imagine that more than one Argentine has cryptocurrencies as an insurance or a plan b, and they can emigrate with them.

I forgot to say a couple of things.

Scum is not allowed to post in this thread and neither are the ones I have on ignore. I haven't even read what they have written before deleting.

As I trust LoyceV's great knowledge of the trust system, I have changed the last feedback to neutral.

I will lock the thread and if anyone thinks I should change any feedback they can PM me but I will ignore the scum and those I have on ignore.

One last point with respect to what the crybaby was asking for. Whoever distrust me, I'm not going to take it personally. Nor am I likely to make any changes to my trust list in the near future.

If someone distrust me, obviously, that could be one of the reasons for me to distrust him in the future because I trust myself. But I am not going to make automatic retaliatory distrusts if it happens that members in DT distrust me. In fact, Nutildah did it and I haven't even bothered.

Edit: unlocked for Nutildah.


Do you mean that is the only reason? I thought you would have more motives than that.

I didn't put a reference link because I would have to put at least 3 and they don't fit.

I am going to respond to the crybaby who is crying that I have left him another feedback and such and such.

I have the crybaby on ignore, what happens is that I read him when he was not logged in.

The crybaby doesn't seem to know or doesn't want to learn that two negative feebacks from the same person look like one from the outside. So at this moment he still has -3.

It seems that he doesn't want to know that I could redo it and put it all in one feeback, but this way people can see the temporal order better.

Stop crying, crybaby, I already said at the time when I left you the red tag and said that you were behind Casino Critique that anyone who wants to distrust me should do so, I don't care, as if everyone distrust me. You deserve more tags and you have not received them because many people have been paid, are being paid or expect to be paid by you in the future.

I will leave the thread open for those who want to discuss my feedbacks, not my ignore list.

At the moment the flag is no longer visible, and I believe that with the attitude of julerz12, who not only has not hidden at any time, but has given detailed answers and plans to start right away a repayment plan, his reputation will not be very damaged. As long as things go the way they seem to be going.

With that exceptional predictive ability you have, you must be tweeting from your yacht on your way to your private island, right? One of these days, apart from being a big mouth, you could post proof of how you short Bitcoin and make money with it.

In response to the OP, I think this year is going to be one of slight rises, but we are very low and the normal thing is to go up, but we should not be too excited about the slight rise of these days that may be due to pure variability in the short term, there is still a long year ahead....

Hey man! I don't understand you. You leaving or removing a tag shouldn't depend on what other people do. It should depend on your criteria. Moreover, you are DT2, so I don't know what you are talking about.

I've left him a neutral tag but I think a negative is acceptable. He himself has acknowledged that.

For me, everything will depend on how events unfold from now on, if he collaborates and starts a repayment plan I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. If not, I'll support the flag and change the tag.

Most times in these cases we have seen people hide and yet we are seeing him all the time responding and showing his face.

We can't see into the future but by statistics, this year will most likely have positive returns, both in the stock market and for Bitcoin. We will have to see how various issues play out to see how it materializes, such as the war in Ukraine, as you comment, or central banks policies. The rise of the stock markets is partly due to the belief of a rate cut later in the year, which would bring liquidity back into the markets and much of that liquidity ends up in financial assets.

Anyway, we have to think that if we end the year, say at $26k, that would mean ending the year in positive but we could not say that it has been a glorious year.

It will not be the first time, but it is not very common.


---


Yes, he is responsible for these funds. If he loses them he has to bear the consequences, even if it is in this case as it seems due to negligence and not because he stole them himself. At the moment he has one negative tag and two neutral ones reflecting the situation, when not even 24 hours have passed. I think both tags are acceptable. Neutral which will change to negative if he does not pay what he owes or conversely, negative which will change to neutral if he pays.

In this case we see that the two people most affected, those who hired him, give him the benefit of the doubt. From a distance we cannot know what really happened to him but from the way he acted I am also inclined to think that the most likely scenario is that he was robbed of his funds.

He will have to reach an agreement to pay back the stolen money, even if it is little by little, and it is going to be difficult because the money he is paying back is going to be money that he will not be able to use to buy food for his family.

Come to think of it, I have a question, julerz12.

Why did you make the campaign thread a self-moderated one?

I don't recall any other, apart from those of Royse777, who had good reasons, but you apparently didn't.

My goodness how quickly it all happened. I saw the campaign and applied precisely because Royse777 didn't manage it. For that I prefer to stay working for icopress for less than half. So I applied in a moment, after another moment I see that I have been accepted and then in a few hours I see two PMs from the campaign manager and now this thread.

We will have to think about this, but what I see is that leaving aside what has really happened, we do know at least that julerz12 has been careless. A campaign manager with the time he has been in the forum should have used a hardware wallet and not just rely on Electrum: