To all DT1 members | Interesting negative feedback from JollyGood!

[mindrust]

...A year ago I was told i should make a new account, I knew i shouldn't. I had declared my alt account as alt and it was banned...

You should be banned too then. Ban evading is against the forum rules.

[JollyGood]

A quick check of the feedback on that account (andulolika) shows threats and ban evasion, that user should not be trusted in any circumstance.

...A year ago I was told i should make a new account, I knew i shouldn't. I had declared my alt account as alt and it was banned...

You should be banned too then. Ban evading is against the forum rules.

[andulolika]

A quick check of the feedback on that account (andulolika) shows threats and ban evasion, that user should not be trusted in any circumstance.

...A year ago I was told i should make a new account, I knew i shouldn't. I had declared my alt account as alt and it was banned...

You should be banned too then. Ban evading is against the forum rules.

You the personal asslicker of whore lauda, keep using same pukable words. lol you just repeating same stupid words. Feels fine to have a mod on your back right? Just let the forum grow you'll see how it is to be outnumbered.

...A year ago I was told i should make a new account, I knew i shouldn't. I had declared my alt account as alt and it was banned...

You should be banned too then. Ban evading is against the forum rules.

I was banned already, you another of the circlejerk cuntgroup.


Isn't it obvious how you keep merits and positive ratings between yourselves? same words? same style? pukable.

"check the feedback of my group"

"a quick check on the feedback" Don't trust me trust all my friends look how we circlejerk trust and merits, you can join us too and even scam people with alts and do it for years with same account. We all have to learn a lesson here, it might take a bit longer for some.

[Fag20]

JollyGood is a JollyGood poster, cut the shit. Only who has a problem with him is probably a scammer.

[dragonvslinux]

JollyGood is a JollyGood poster, cut the shit. Only who has a problem with him is probably a scammer.

Leaving invalid feedback has nothing to do with how good of a poster you are. Having an issue with someone's feedback doesn't make you a scammer either  
Regardless, welcome to the BitcoinTalk Forum! Always nice to see "nice faces" appearing.

[peloso]

JollyGood is idiot and i newer trust his feedback

[JustinBounty]

Well, I once appreciated betking because they were refunding users their money and Jolly also painted me red. So Jolly is a little too harsh because when we appreciate someone, we don't know if the person has any back records. I tried to explain many times but he doesn't care as much.

Problem is now as I do any business on forum I would never be trusted by anyone. DT members should have some level of regards towards lower ranked members.

[trendcoin]

Hello everyone, I would like to bring up the topic that I opened before. I had previously sent a message that only supports vispilio's campaign management. I received negative trust for sending a message in support of campaign management. For personal reasons, as of today, I do not support him as a campaign manager. I ask all dt members and jollygood to reconsider the situation. I wish everyone a good day and a good year.



dooglus
gmaxwell
OgNasty
SebastianJu
yxt
A-Bolt
fronti
mprep
Dabs
Foxpup
peloso
Welsh
Mitchell
vizique
Ticked
jeremypwr
dbshck
greenplastic
hilariousandco
Avirunes
mindrust
buckrogers
Lesbian Cow
willi9974
JayJuanGee
Rmcdermott927
DaveF
examplens
nutildah
minerjones
tmfp
yahoo62278
Royse777
zazarb
LFC_Bitcoin
o_solo_miner
ezeminer
sandy-is-fine
SyGambler
klarki
LoyceV
actmyname
The Pharmacist
LeGaulois
DarkStar_
TwitchySeal
phishead
TryNinja
bob123
eddie13
johhnyUA
Jet Cash
condoras
Coin_trader
polymerbit
Yatsan
finaleshot2016
crwth
Ale88
duesoldi
imhoneer
JollyGood
xenon131
roycilik
CryptopreneurBrainboss
El duderino_
KTChampions
bavicrypto
Veleor
o_e_l_e_o
3meek
Maus0728
TheBeardedBaby
tvplus006
dkbit98
mole0815
witcher_sense
MoparMiningLLC
asche
cabalism13
anonymousminer
morvillz7z
fillippone
taikuri13
abhiseshakana
madnessteat
lovesmayfamilis
DireWolfM14
Corrosive
TalkStar
efialtis
Ratimov
geophphreigh
zasad@
Rikafip

[cabalism13]

...

IMO, tagging us here is a bad idea. In my 2nd Opinion, this has nothing to do with us.
Lastly, you already know what to do as it is already from 5months ago...
Good Luck.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

I don't even know if I'm on DT1 anymore, but personally there's nothing for me to reconsider since I'm not directly involved in this drama. 

The feedback left by JollyGood was inappropriate IMO, but I'm not going to leave a counter-positive for OP because of that.  For one thing, I am not a fan of counter-positives and second I leave positive trust only very rarely.  What would happen, for instance, if I left a positive for OP and JollyGood removed his negative, and I wasn't aware of it (or became incapacitated or something like that)?  OP would have a net green trust for no good reason, and that's not kosher in my eyes.

This is a problem between OP and JollyGood, and it's not a new one at that.  I'm curious as to why it's now becoming an issue again with OP.

[trendcoin]

...

...

Tagging you can be a bad idea. I do not know exactly what to do in such cases. I just called dt members to the topic and asked them to comment. I did not want to disturb you. I really don't know what to do. I want the situation to be reviewed again. thank you.

...

As I do not deserve negative feedback, I want to get rid of this problem somehow; now or tomorrow, somehow. After a while, it might be a good idea to re-establish the court so that the defendants can be heard again. I will request a retrial until justice is restored. I don't think I can do any better. I can't play the game in god mode like dt members. Even if I want, I can't do anything else. I am in restricted mode. :) therefore, my request is clear: I want to be judged again and I want to know what I have to do to correct the negative reporting. we are all ripe people of age. :) If there is a problem, we should be able to deal with it by talking well. thank you.

[suchmoon]

The feedback left by JollyGood was inappropriate IMO, but I'm not going to leave a counter-positive for OP because of that.  For one thing, I am not a fan of counter-positives and second I leave positive trust only very rarely.  What would happen, for instance, if I left a positive for OP and JollyGood removed his negative, and I wasn't aware of it (or became incapacitated or something like that)?  OP would have a net green trust for no good reason, and that's not kosher in my eyes.

In this "new" flag/trust system I think counter-positives should only be posted if you genuinely believe that the person is unlikely to scam. Counter just to oppose a negative is no longer functioning the way it used to in the "old" system because there is no convoluted trust score formula (which accounted for those counters) anymore.

This is a problem between OP and JollyGood, and it's not a new one at that.  I'm curious as to why it's now becoming an issue again with OP.

It was always an issue but we just swept it under the rug and moved on. I don't think it's appropriate to post negative trust for supporting someone you don't like, or as a diary entry saying "I put this person on ignore", which is something JollyGood tends to do.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

I don't think it's appropriate to post negative trust for supporting someone you don't like, or as a diary entry saying "I put this person on ignore", which is something JollyGood tends to do.

As I said, I don't think that's right either.  Where is JollyGood, anyway?  He should probably be PM'ed by OP if that hasn't happened already.  And frankly, this isn't the first time I've disagreed with some of his feedbacks either.  I don't know if I have him excluded from my trust list or not, but I'm going to check.

As I do not deserve negative feedback, I want to get rid of this problem somehow;

OK, I get it.  I'd probably feel the same way if I were in your shoes, with this bright red mark on your profile that shouldn't have been left for you.  I'm not accusing you of doing anything suspicious.

[JollyGood]

Hello everyone, I would like to bring up the topic that I opened before. I had previously sent a message that only supports vispilio's campaign management. I received negative trust for sending a message in support of campaign management. For personal reasons, as of today, I do not support him as a campaign manager. I ask all dt members and jollygood to reconsider the situation. I wish everyone a good day and a good year.

~snip

You sent 2 PMs today. I replied to your second one, my apologies for not responding to the first one you sent. Please check your PM (I hope I wrote the Selam greeting correct):

Hello trendcoin,

Selam Aleyküm and Happy New Year,

Please forgive me for not getting back to you earlier, I should have replied to your first PM but was very busy. Thank you for writing to me.

I will remove that negative trust because I read the campaign manager for 777 will remove users with negative DT trust. I know that is why you want the trust removed. It would be a sad situation if you are deprived of your campaign signature fee because of the negative trust.

Wishing you and your loved ones a happy 2021. Keep safe.

Kind Regards

~snip~

This is a problem between OP and JollyGood, and it's not a new one at that.  I'm curious as to why it's now becoming an issue again with OP.

trendcoin will be removed from the 777 signature campaign if the negative trust is not removed by 3rd January 2021 therefore there is an urgency on his part to try to have the negative trust removed.

As I said, I don't think that's right either.  Where is JollyGood, anyway?  He should probably be PM'ed by OP if that hasn't happened already.  And frankly, this isn't the first time I've disagreed with some of his feedbacks either.  I don't know if I have him excluded from my trust list or not, but I'm going to check

Yes you added me to your distrust list some months ago because of the feedbacks I left in the past but I stopped tagging users with dubious backgrounds a long time before you excluded me.

In the next few days I will probably start going through most of the negative trust I left and will either remove them or revise them to neutral in order to try keeping it limited to how the feedback system should be correctly applied (as per this excellent guide by LoyceV: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5191802.0)

[The Sceptical Chymist]

In the next few days I will probably start going through most of the negative trust I left and will either remove them or revise them to neutral in order to try keeping it limited to how the feedback system should be correctly applied (as per this excellent guide by LoyceV: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5191802.0)

Fair enough, and I'll re-evaluate my exclusion when you're through.  I have no hard feelings toward you, and I think you're trying to do the right thing but have left too many bad feedbacks. 

And hey, I've had to revise tons of feedback myself--especially right after the merit system was implemented.  I was intentionally misusing the trust system in order to fight shitposters because there was no better method to do so at the time.  I never felt good about it, but the spam situation in 2018 was out of control.  I deleted probably a few hundred feedbacks I'd left.

[trendcoin]

Thank you jollygood for your kind feedback.

I swear to you that this situation has nothing to do with the signature campaign. to prove this, I can gladly expect you to lift negative trust on January 4th or January 5th.


Under this topic, I gave up some of my thoughts that I carried in the past. For a number of reasons I don't have my old ideas. I also deleted my support messages that I had created in good faith that caused me to receive negative trust.


I have not defrauded anyone in my life. I did not cheat on anyone. I did not usurp anyone's labor. I lived an honorable and honest life. My profile on this forum is not a bad user either. an honest profile just like in real life.

Thank you for re-evaluating your opinion. I can wait for you until January 5th or until January 6th, that's no problem.


Thank you to everyone who participated and supported the subject. I apologize to anyone I disturbed you by labeling the subject. I wish everyone a good year.

[JollyGood]

Thank you for the comment, I also have no hard feelings towards you  

Hopefully I will not have to go to the point of deleting hundreds of tags but I understand why you wrote you used the trust system in a particular way back in the day. At the time I left negative trust it did seem easier to simply fight back against users with highly questionable and dubious backgrounds but it was an incorrect use of the feedback system.

Maybe a neutral tag at most would have sufficed in many cases to keep within the rules and I will probably start focusing on that.

In the next few days I will probably start going through most of the negative trust I left and will either remove them or revise them to neutral in order to try keeping it limited to how the feedback system should be correctly applied (as per this excellent guide by LoyceV: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5191802.0)

Fair enough, and I'll re-evaluate my exclusion when you're through.  I have no hard feelings toward you, and I think you're trying to do the right thing but have left too many bad feedbacks.  

And hey, I've had to revise tons of feedback myself--especially right after the merit system was implemented.  I was intentionally misusing the trust system in order to fight shitposters because there was no better method to do so at the time.  I never felt good about it, but the spam situation in 2018 was out of control.  I deleted probably a few hundred feedbacks I'd left.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Maybe a neutral tag at most would have sufficed in many cases to keep within the rules and I will probably start focusing on that.

A neutral one would definitely be more appropriate, especially if you're tagging members for your own future reference and if a negative trust would be too extreme.  That's pretty much what neutrals are meant for, even though you'll still get some members complaining to you if you leave a negative comment as a neutral. 

The bottom line, as I'm sure you're aware, is that you have to be very conservative when leaving DT positives and use good judgement when leaving negatives.  The negative trust you leave should reflect the fact that the tagged member might not be trustworthy, not that they're a spammer or a nuisance or something like that.