What is the reason to give me the red trust???

[Amel]

Hello @JollyGood

I don't think I'm making a big mistake. It's just that maybe the quality of my post was a little worse. Also, if there is any other mistake, please let me know, sir. If you look at my other posts you will understand that the quality in my post is not so bad. I am waiting for your reply.


Thanks

I have been given red trust from this ID
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1016855

[Vod]

I'll weigh in.  JG is supported by 10 people who are supported by many others.

I agree that your posts do not contribute anything.

[Amel]

I'll weigh in.  JG is supported by 10 people who are supported by many others.

I agree that your posts do not contribute anything.

I have no doubt about your prudence. I respect you enough. I assure you not to make such a mistake in the future. I hope you will forgive my mistake and take away my red trust in my account very soon.
Thank you sir.

[Vod]

I'll weigh in.  JG is supported by 10 people who are supported by many others.

I agree that your posts do not contribute anything.

I have no doubt about your prudence. I respect you enough. I assure you not to make such a mistake in the future. I hope you will forgive my mistake and take away my red trust in my account very soon.
Thank you sir.

You just proved the OP correct.  :/

[lovesmayfamilis]

I looked at your posts a little and was a little surprised. What do you think it's called?

In this case, your post looks like a call to create “as many alternative accounts as possible.” Are you serious? The rules of bounty company sound in such a way that in most of them they prohibit the participation of alternative accounts.

This means that if people have second accounts, they should appear as separate profiles. Completely separate. However, managers don't even recommend that. It's just that people create more accounts to increase their earnings.

ltcbtcdigger both participated in one signature campaign

Didn't find these profiles

For this situation, your post resembles a call to make "however many elective records as would be prudent." Are you genuine? The guidelines of abundance organization sound so that in the vast majority of them they preclude the investment of elective records. This implies if individuals have second records, they ought to show up as isolated profiles. Totally discrete. In any case, administrators don't suggest that. It's simply that individuals make more records to expand their profit. I have seen two client Hhampuz and yahoo62278 both took an interest in one mark crusade. The venture of overseeing more than o e record and meeting the week by week portion isn't a simple errand and you may end up spamming which may decrease your odds of being acknowledged in a lucrative mission.

https://archive.st/b1kx

By chance?
And you rewrite many other people's posts like that?

[suchmoon]

I'll weigh in.  JG is supported by 10 people who are supported by many others.

I agree that your posts do not contribute anything.

That's not what the trust system is for.

BEWARE: "Amel" seems to be posting for the sake of posting most probably for signature campaign bounty.

I have added "Amel" to my ignore and distrust lists. I recommend you all do the same: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5278797.msg55301513#msg55301513

... is not appropriate negative trust. Shitposts should be reported to moderators.

[hacker1001101001]

For this situation, your post resembles a call to make "however many elective records as would be prudent." Are you genuine? The guidelines of abundance organization sound so that in the vast majority of them they preclude the investment of elective records. This implies if individuals have second records, they ought to show up as isolated profiles. Totally discrete. In any case, administrators don't suggest that. It's simply that individuals make more records to expand their profit. I have seen two client Hhampuz and yahoo62278 both took an interest in one mark crusade. The venture of overseeing more than o e record and meeting the week by week portion isn't a simple errand and you may end up spamming which may decrease your odds of being acknowledged in a lucrative mission.

https://archive.st/b1kx

By chance?
And you rewrite many other people's posts like that?

Looks like use of some text spinner to me.

Yet this don't look like something which deserve a neg tag from someone like JollyGood how enjoys abusing trust.

[Little Mouse]

Wrong use of feedback system. This never deserves a negative tag. If JollyGood doesn't like his spam, he can either report the posts to moderator or simply can put the user in their ignore list (he did that although).
This is second time I'm watching JollyGood is using trust system in wrong way. Previous one was also for same reason if I'm correct. And this tag is from today 

[Amel]

... is not appropriate negative trust. Shitposts should be reported to moderators.

I also wanted to say this. Will I be given straight red trust for poor quality of a post

Looks like use of some text spinner to me.

Yet this don't look like something which deserve a neg tag from someone like JollyGood how enjoys abusing trust.

What kind of rule is it to give red trust only because the only one post quality is bad. I did not steal anything here. I did not do any scam.

Wrong use of feedback system. This never deserves a negative tag. If JollyGood doesn't like his spam, he can either report the posts to moderator or simply can put the user in their ignore list (he did that although).
This is second time I'm watching JollyGood is using trust system in wrong way. Previous one was also for same reason if I'm correct. And this tag is from today 

Here I have not done any harm to anyone because of which I can be given red trust. I will be given red trust only because the quality of one post is bad If I had made a big mistake, I would have compromised. But this is being unfair on me.


[moderator's note: consecutive posts merged]

[The Cryptovator]

It's quite surprising to me a Legendary user doesn't know how to quote the reply. Multiple posts in a row against forum rules. You can just merge them in a single post. To be honest, your replies on this thread are enough to mark you as a professional spammer even you don't know what should you write to whom. Your posting behavior is something like "posting to get paid". I am pretty sure if there was a merit system before you become Legendary then most probably you had to spend hundreds of years to become Legendary. I am not saying you deserve red trust for it, but your post doesn't bring any contributions to the discussion really.
@JollyGood, if you continuously leave negative feedback for spammers then most forum members will be tagged. Neutral feedback for such a case is enough, doesn't necessary to write with red that you are ignoring someone. Just click on the ignore button is sufficient, let moderators clean the forum, and help them by reporting spam. Trust system hadn't been implemented to prevent spam.

[Amel]

You just proved the OP correct.  :/

Only by determining the value of a post will you give me red trust I understood what kind of rule this is. People will make mistakes. So if he makes a mistake, he should be killed

Looks like use of some text spinner to me.

Yet this don't look like something which deserve a neg tag from someone like JollyGood how enjoys abusing trust.

No, there is no possibility of it happening. I never copy anyone's post. Maybe he didn't like the quality of my post, that's the problem.


[moderator's note: consecutive posts merged]

[The Sceptical Chymist]

I agree that your posts do not contribute anything.

That might well be true, but are we going back to the days of giving red trust to shitposters?  I thought we were all done with that when the merit system was rolled out.  Before that happened, actmyname and I were tagging shitposters left and right, but I never thought it was a good use of the trust system--but it was the only tool a DT member could use to combat them.  I definitely don't think DT (or even non-DT) members ought to be tagging shitposters. 

OP looks like he's got some other reasons he should be red tagged (like trying to buy merits), but his post quality isn't one of them IMO.

@JollyGood, if you continuously leave negative feedback for spammers then most forum members will be tagged. Neutral feedback for such a case is enough

Neutral feedback is fine, but I probably wouldn't even bother with that.  Just ignore shitposters when you come across them.

[khaled0111]

I agree with most of the replies above that the trust system shouldn't be used to tag spammers.
Anyway, @OP, the negative feedback left by JollyGood is the last thing you need to worry about as, now, you may get banned for plagiarism.

...
No, there is no possibility of it happening. I never copy anyone's post. Maybe he didn't like the quality of my post, that's the problem.

What about text spinners!
I used the first free text spinner I found on google to spin
lovesmayfamilis' comment and here is what I got:

it looks ~100% identical to your post  

[eddie13]

Maybe jg should remove it since he is about to be permabanned for plagiarism anyway..

Surprising they don’t know better than to stick their heads up by now..
Another legendary bites the dust..

[Vod]

I agree that your posts do not contribute anything.

That might well be true, but are we going back to the days of giving red trust to shitposters?

I wouldn't, but I'm not going to waste time defending a trivial instance of a sig spammer when there is so much more abuse higher up.

[YOSHIE]

@JollyGood, already warned you first about junk replies on the topic: Tennis: French Open 2020, and you move forward again repeating the same thing in the topic: English Premier League Season: 2020/2021, you pissed him off, even though he warned you about trash retaliation, you ignore it.

Should, you shouldn't do it again after @JollyGood reminds you.


@JollyGood, I can only say a case like that is 'Neutral' I think it is more appropriate, for a warning.

[lovesmayfamilis]

I think the neutral mark is not appropriate here.
The OP uses, like some others, paraphrasing posts and does not provide a link to the source. I did not search deeply, but I think that this is not his only such post.

Top 3 Coins Price Prediction Bitcoin, Ethereum and Ripple: BTC upside topped at $11,600

BTC is perched on head of a powerful flexibly divider, so drawback potential is restricted. On the upside, the bulls have the space to move the cost up to $11,600, before it meets a solid opposition level. According to Sentiment, there is an enormous spike in the age expended metric on sixteenth September. Normally, a spike brings about an unexpected value development (could be either sure or negative). In any case, passing by the IOMAP, we can figure that the development will be positive.




Throughout the most recent 10 days, there has been a sharp drop in on-chain advancement action. This is generally a bearish sign. In any case, Bitcoin isn't as reliant on-chain action as Ethereum.

https://archive.st/bbft

source:
https://www.fxstreet.com/cryptocurrencies/news/top-3-coins-price-prediction-bitcoin-ethereum-and-ripple-btc-upside-capped-at-11-600-202009190206









Unless the OP declares that he
Rajarshi Mitra

Paraphrasing text is tantamount to plagiarism.

This is very similar to one more user. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=2845817

[Vod]

I marked him with a simple neutral warning others not to hire him for sig campaigns.  I think that's fair. 

[Amel]

@JollyGood, already warned you first about junk replies on the topic: Tennis: French Open 2020, and you move forward again repeating the same thing in the topic: English Premier League Season: 2020/2021, you pissed him off, even though he warned you about trash retaliation, you ignore it.

Should, you shouldn't do it again after @JollyGood reminds you.

After receiving the warning, I did the second post well. Do you think the value of the second post is low I am always trying to improve my skills in English.

[dkbit98]

I would not give negative feedback in this case, but maybe neutral feedback and report for his posts would be the best thing here,
but I don't think any feedback must be permanent and if OP changes his posting habits than JollyGood will remove his feedback.