JollyGood incorrect neg tag

[johhnyUA]

Hello, let's talk with facts.
Yeah, I've edited this topic with more facts and less emotions.

What do we have here?

BEWARE: "johhnyUA" cannot be trusted

As IconFirm stated the account probably changed hands in January 2020 and was used to claim Yobit scam signature money. Possibly one of many sock-puppets purchased/operated by the same group seeking to make money from signature campaigns

Let me decompile it with main statements:
1. As IconFirm stated

Iconfirm tagged a lot of well known and trusted users, like his tag to yahoo62278 stating that Yahoo can't be trusted because of the fact he managed Yobit campaign. Of course this is pure nonsense.

So I think that using Iconfirm's trust rating it isn't good behavior. Especially for DT1/DT2

2. the account probably changed hands in January 2020

Probably, he he. This of course total shit, here is signed message with one of my old bounty addresses

Address: 0x6350632F0c38eF922EA2Eea20006779724eF0858
Proof that it was used by me: Google dock with Auctus 2017 bounty for trasnaltion
Archived screenshot with this address in my profile

Message: Hello, this is false feedback, and I'm that Johnny that registered in 2015

Signed message

Code:

{
  "address": "0x6350632f0c38ef922ea2eea20006779724ef0858",
  "msg": "Hello, this is false feedback, and I'm that Johnny that registered in 2015",
  "sig": "0x4a6a34f1efe669a794cf6b6f4d04ccd32f9051f9d17213f24d16366b309cc12237d8e6de7fdebc18beba7d29a90baf52dd69a5d736559b1efef2d8d548e53ee61c",
  "version": "3",
  "signer": "MEW"
}

Now anyone can check it in and find that JG write a totally wrong feedback.

In fact, this is all what needed, because the next part of feedback this is just JG's imagination and assumptions.

I'm very disappointed about the fact that someone tagged another people, added them to ignore list and don't want to hear opposite side. I can understand if we are talking about trolls or noobs, you will spend all your time trying to explain them some fact. But here we have opposite situation, when was tagged not the most trusted, but for sure not the worst member of our community.  


P.S.: To people which think that I'm afraid for my signature: You're wrong, Hhampuz didn't fired me after this feedback. I just don't want to be a honky clown which can be painted in red by anyone for any stupid assumption they has.


P.P.S: Yeah, i know that another drama thread. You won't believe but I'n also don't like such stories and to write here.


P.P.P.S: I'm 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  

[1715033646]

1715033646

[1715033646]

1715033646

[Vod]

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 johhnyUA

[johhnyUA]

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.

And of course such accusations is weird to hear from a person which has not resolved neg tags over years. I think you should understand problems with them better than someone other. I just have some opponents (as same as you) which used some speculative proofs to make their personal vendetta. What I can to do here? Create another 100pages holy war? As i said before, i'm not typical "reputation topic warrior" so after few hours of butthurt I'm telling myself something like "Oh, what a fuck I'm doing now? Arguing about red symbols in online forum. Pretty good! Real workout for the guy". 

  JollyGood is all over the forum right now - easy target to flush away your past errors? 

I don't have errors here. The only error I make is to invite my friend on this forum. This was really total fuck up. In fact that he didn't appreciate it and when I was needed a help in real life, he refused to help. Whatever, hard price (as you see, aftermath still happen to me) but a good and valuable lesson.

And I don't see where JG is here 

I'm just asking to not to write any shit to my trust based on words of well known trolls. IconFirm tagged Yahoo and many other well respected people for nothing. This is not trustworthy behavior.

Have you helped at all in our fight against corruption

Yep, I helped, in my russian local. Was one of the first. So again, this is weird to accuse me in the fact i didn't running all my free time for forum needs.

Now JCG comes for you...

JG just wrote a nonsense which i can refute. About "hacked account" especially. This what I propose to do in OP post (to verify message with my old addresses) and in peaceful PM to JG.

[Laudanum]

Jollygood is known for imposing double standards.

Legendster is pushing yobit as other DT have before he never goes after them.

Also I would research his past here in rep. He is a huge trust abuser and gives those offering to work and repatriate scams he has busted in the past back on the forum for a price. Even when it is pointed out to him.

Jollygood is pure slime.

Research, organise with others he is true abusing and take it all to meta and present to theymos.

He may say you're boring and should shut up, but eventually enough people demonstrating his trust system is full of holes DT abuse may wake him

[suchmoon]

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.

[johhnyUA]

After shabbat I'm here again to try to resolve this little misunderstanding.

Makes no sense.

Yep, so I've added signature with my old bounty address and anyone can check it, and maybe influence JG to review his feedback (not only for my purpose, but also for his own and the total forum. If we would keep to do trash here, this will not end well).

And yeah, behavior to tag and then to ignore in PM and on forum this is also not too good for DT member. If you don't want to bear some responsibilities for your feedbacks, just wipe away your trust list and do some useful things (like Hhampuz done)

[marlboroza]

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?

[The Sceptical Chymist]

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.

[suchmoon]

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".

[johhnyUA]

which is, btw, according to yohhnyUA OK to do:

You caught me, man. The only difference is that i, firstly, discussed everything with this guy (from the link), after that I tagged him and when some time passed - I added him to my ignore list. in JG case we don't have any interactions before (with guy from me link i have like 3-4 month of disputes) and his trust rating based on words of a weird person (just a little bit weird).

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.

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.

[Vod]

Jollygood is known for imposing double standards.

Is my quote author correct? 

[DireWolfM14]

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.

[JollyGood]

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 johhnyUA

My 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#msg2562019

He 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: 10/29/2015
johhnyUA Registration Date: 10/30/2015
It 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.

[DireWolfM14]

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.

Calling it "abusive" is a bit much, I take that back.  I know you work hard to keep the forum safe and free of scammers, and for that you deserve recognition and commendation.  I would hate to see you fall from DT as a result of some of the more frivolous red-tags.  The only reason I haven't included you in my trust list is because I feel you're quick with your judgements in some situations.

[JollyGood]

You are right on occasion I have been quick off the mark to tag.

You may be aware of more incidents but I can recall I think of at least two occasions where I did leave negative trust where it was not warranted and I think I apologised to the user in question in a thread rather than PMs and reluctantly revised feedbacks for other users.

On a different occasion I was pressured in to removing a red tag for a particular but later on the same user in question made a mistake that deserved a red tag and it was not contested.

I will definitely take your advice I appreciate the feedback.

Calling it "abusive" is be a bit much, I take that back.  I know you work hard to keep the forum safe and free of scammers, and for that you deserve recognition and commendation.  I would hate to see you fall from DT as a result of some of the more frivolous red-tags.  The only reason I haven't included you in my trust list is because I feel you're quick with your judgements in some situations.

[johhnyUA]

You started this thread at 09:50am yet send a PM at 1:41pm seeking a resolution - why?

Because of frustration. You know, when your ass burning, sometimes such things happen. And yeah, i have an opposite question to you: Why do you answered only after a lot of respected users wrote here? I've sent PM to you like 5 days ago. I know, there is different situations and cases in real life, but you had time to write in Gambling section. Nothing personal

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.

I know, maybe this is my bad, but as i remember, you tagging someone and after that adding him to ignore and blacklist his Pms.

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.

Didn't understood it too well. No native english speaker.

My 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.

Why you all telling this "he had made no effort" ? My tag with "alt case" i tried to resolve in our russian local section, and just waste my time for nothing.
With bob i tried to resolve situation in Pm, again with zero efficiency (maybe this is the answer why i created topic here at first and only after that write to you in PM)

It turns out that johhnyUA invited Kvanko to the forum, but registered himself a day later  

Don't fall under dirty tricks. This is obvious that If i "invited" someone I know in real life this is not directly means to register before him. I was in crypto since early 2015, have some bitcoins, read this forum (without registration) and there one day was a giveaway of 40 (or 50) dollars, so i told my friend that it would be a good start in crypto to register and claim it. And as we see here, Kvanko registered before me.

and I do not accept any reason that they (he and his alt) shared the same ETH address for any reason at all.

At least this would be not the proofless (but wrong, whatever), without shit like "hacked account". I hope you've read all topic which you reference to. If my arguments didn't convice you, i have nothing to do with it. With bob i was a little bit worried, like "Oh, what other people will think" and now I'm just ignoring it.

The main reason that false tag still exist, so time to time i will be tagged by anyone who is to worried about forum (no). And according to you I need to write PM's to anyone with something like "Oh sir, we are not alts, see our personal conversation in Telegram. Or would you like in VK, or maybe our private information, sir?". No, i will not do that. I was not found in a trash can (close translate for slav catch phrase "Meня нe нa мycopкe нaшли" which means that i have a pride and dignity).

Maybe with people i respect i will show needed proofs (like it was with bob). But not with you or someone else. Not because I don't respect you or anything. Just as i said before i will waste too much time for any new taggers (and they will be, this is for sure. Some people don't want to go too deep with a passion to tag someone.)

So if you need another proof (signed message from another old address) about your incorrect claims about "hacked" acoount, i will be glad to provide it to you. About "alt case" the only what i can show you is the resulting PM from bob123:

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.

yep, this is very unpleasant and insulting that i was tagged by bitcoin hater (not you, KTC) and his tag still damaging my reputation in the eyes of some bitcointalk members. But anyway, not the first time i face injustice in some human groups. And the forum is the least place to be worried about.  

Edited:

These things have a way ironing themselves out in the long run.

you're right man, i would merit you, but let me keep my last merit for a good post outside of Reputation board  

EDITED: Grammar

[Vod]

I have looked into this, as much I can not speaking Russian.

johhnyUA has stated he wants to prove he didn't have an alt; I told him there is no way he can prove that.  There is nothing trustworthy about having alts - it's what you do with them.

I cannot investigate any further, and so as long as johhnyUA doesn't keep claiming he has proof he cannot prove, I withdraw all my trust on this issue.