I think JG's heart is in the right place but... yeah, using more neutrals and less conjecture would be far more useful to the DT and the forum as a whole.
I would like to feel that I have contributed positively to the forum. Being neutral (no pun intended) I would say my heart is in the right place too therefore thank you
Do you think JollyGood should be on DT network?
My answer is YES, he should be on the DT.
Also i was following him on one
case where he turned the trust into neutral.
All i know is that he is doing a very good job in helping the the community safe from 1xbit scammers and promoters.
You are correct about the 1xbit scammers, I am trying to keep posting at least once per page in their threads in the hope that newbies or those unaccustomed to
what 1xbit actually are - would see it and avoid them. Having said that I have not been active in the Scam Accusations board as much I would like to and would be returning there at some point but for now and for a long time have concentrated on posting about other issues across the forum.
The trust system has been changed and I do not see there are any significant trade he has done (no trade at all) except creating mess all around and bossing the users he do not like.
You think that everyone who gave theymos positive trust feedback all traded with him?
I think it's nothing personal with Jolly hating anyone, he is just over zealous giving negative feedback to anyone who is related with any scam projects.
He changed latest feedback to neutral so I see no point in creating this topic now, unless if you or your ego have something personal against him.
The OP has had something against me for a long time for reasons I was never told. I never paid much attention to the OP after I felt their dislike, I had to un-ignore the OP just now to read their posts because my name was mentioned the in the thread title.
It is quite possible there is an ulterior motive behind this facade/thread but whatever it is I would not consider it being created for the good of the forum when something like this would be created by someone that I do not engage with. I think the few times the OP posted about me or to me was something designed to let me know their dislike therefore I did not pay much attention to their posts.
The only time I recall that I engaged with the OP was with their alt-account when their main account was hacked and I was offering moral support to them and chastising the hacker but that is a different matter altogether. I think I added or re-added the OP to my ignore list after a short time their forum account was regained as I did not see any improvement.
The OP excluded me around the same time that mass signature campaign cheat (figment) who operated farming accounts and maybe still has them, had not been exposed by
nutildah at that point (
excellent thread). Figment sent PMs asking users to exclude me from their trust list, at least one of them directly told me so they were asked/told to exclude me otherwise figment would exclude them. Later when the farming accounts and signature cheating was exposed, I realised I must have tagged several of his sleeper accounts red therefore hurt his account farming and he was trying to affect others in to excluding me.
I am not saying the OP and the figment signature campaign cheat and farming account operator are connected in any way... nor am I saying the OP was or was not influenced in any way by the figment signature campaign cheat and farming account operator - I am just saying the timing of both acts seems within close proximity.
Do I think JG is a bit overzealous? Yes.
Do I think it matters? Not really. <-- And there is the issue that I think a lot of people miss.
There are 2 places where negative feedback matters.
1) When doing trades with people
2) If you are in or want to join a signature campaign where the manager excludes people with negative trust.
In case #1, you really should read peoples feedback anyway before trading to see why the numbers are what they are. And then make your own decision. If you just look at the numbers without doing some other form of checking then well IMO you are on your own.
In case #2, most campaign managers are going to do a bit of research. If they just see the 1 negative from JG and do no more research about the applicant, that is up to them.
But, I would also say that if the company whos signature I am wearing now goes evil and starts scamming people I would expect a negative tag from JG it's just who he is. Would not want it, don't think I would deserve it, but would expect it. Now, if the next manager that I apply to just looks at that and not my 4000+ post history and all the merit and other positive trust. Well, IMO they are going to loose a good participant in their campaign. [Sound of Dave patting himself on his back, yes Dave you are a good poster, keep it up]
Dave, if the signature website you promote started scamming I would probably start a thread asking all campaign participants to kindly stop promoting a known scam, similar to this one I started for the 1xbit signature campaign participants:
REQUEST FOR ATTENTION OF: All 1xbit Signature Campaign Participants... and this one I started about the Yobit X10 scam:
YOBIT SCAM: x10 Banner Promoters Will Be Tagged For Promoting a Ponzi SchemeThat same principle would apply to other campaigns too and I would be hoping for members from across the forum to start tagging those accounts because in the end the forum is used by too many scammers as a vehicle to steal from people and to fool them.
35 times out of 41, JollyGood distrusted the user on the same week or later.
Yep, that definitely looks like retaliatory exclusion to me. I'm not exactly sure why he hasn't excluded me from his trust list, but it could be because he knows I don't have anything against him aside from the fact that he's overzealous with the negs he leaves--and I've communicated that to him before. I believe I even told him I would reconsider my exclusion of him if he modified his feedback-giving habits, which he hasn't.
JollyGood, if you're reading this thread (which you probably are), you should weigh in on this. Otherwise it's just going to be a discussion about you without hearing your thoughts, and that's kind of lopsided.
Yes I am reading this, I found it a while ago after I read my name in the thread title and am trying to pack in as many replies as I can in one post
Put quite simply, from my side there is an element of respect towards you as a result of your posts and I trust you therefore I see no reason to exclude you from my trust list regardless of which list (if any) you add me to, or remove me from. Surely you would not expect me to heap praise upon you in a thread that has been created to drum up an anti-JollyGood agenda, would you?
Slightly off-topic, it is also possible to trust and like a forum member without adding them to a trust list as much as it is possible to distrust and dislike a forum member without adding them to distrust or exclusion lists but I tend to update my distrust as often as I can.
Looking here:
https://loyce.club/trust/2021-10-02_Sat_06.08h/1016855.htmlJG has 2323 people on his distrust list. So it's not like he just distrusts certain people.
The next question after is it retaliatory, is how many of those 35 (or 41 depending on how you want to look at the numbers) did he not even care about till they distrusted him.
Unless he chimes in, we may never know.
Of the 41 you listed personally I would not trust over 35 of them. The others I either feel neutral about or disagree.
Which goes back to two questions, once again just my opinion:
Is it retaliatory? <-- Probably
Does it matter? <-- Probably not.
More of my opinion:
I put people in my distrust list for a number of reasons, I don't do it a lot but when I do there usually is in my mind a good reason.
I can see several users here that put people in for reasons that I don't agree with. BUT: I agree with the distrust.
As of now unless JG chimes in I am going stop commenting. Why? Because if he does not then it shows that he does not care and is going to keep doing his thing. Which is 100% fine. If people want to ~ him that is also fine. But as of now looking at the list you gave of 41 people since I do agree with over 75% of it I am fine with trusting him.
Also going to see if I can spend some time this week when I am not working on a laptop with a small screen and counter some stuff that I 100% disagree with. It's just going to be easier on 2 big screens then 1 13" screen to flip though browser tabs.
-Dave
I honestly have been multi-tasking including typing away trying to make this post shortly after the Liverpool vs Manchester City game ended. I just checked the time, I think it ended well over over 3 hours ago and between other tasks and writing this post - I did nothing else.
About the previous users I excluded or those that excluded me, I have no comment to make, it is that simple. I mean, after checking the latest list, it seems I added 20 users to my distrust between 25th September 2021 and yesterday (2nd October 2021), I probably cannot recall any of those 20 off the top of my head but if hard-pressed maybe I could name one or two but without reading the feedback (which is not always left) I might not be able to elaborate. After reading some post history I might be able to pinpoint the reasons but I do not keep a personal log with reasons. If it is in the feedback then all can see, if it is not in the feedback but the member has been excluded how am I going to elaborate on certain exclusions when I cannot explain just the 20 or so I added in the previous week?
These are my exclusions over the past month:
2nd October 2021: 2323
25th September 2021: 2306
18th September 2021: 2260
11th September 2021: 2259
Dave, I think that is around 64 members I added to my distrust list in the past month. I have no idea right now if any of them excluded me and if so, who excluded who first. As for the motives may be behind the exclusions, the trust should state it unless I also did not leave any and excluded them on the basis of what I read in their posts or existing feedback from other members. There are several cases where I excluded a member but I did not leave feedback based on what they wrote and how I interpreted it... whether any of it, part of it or all of it is retaliatory is debatable because the answer depends on how the person reading it defines it. Those that are on my distrust list and have been excluded along with those that have received red tags will probably see it different to a member that has left me positive feedback or added me to their trust list.
I think JollyGood is a bit too trigger happy on the negative feedback. I thought the same about Lauda back in the days. In both cases, many of their feedbacks are justified, but not all.
You may well be right but in the following example I was not trigger happy at all. For example I wanted to exclude efialtis, I thought I did a very long time ago after I read a post that showed duplicity and made me feel he is not trustworthy. I looked at the profile, saw the link to his website and took a look at it, I was not impressed with the potential scope of conflict of interest and add to that what I saw as the duplicitous nature of some posts I found him untrustworthy. Somehow, I forgot to add him to my distrust list and time went by.
It so happens that they made a post recently which in my opinion was a nonsensical piece of attention seeking theatrics based on a false belief of their superiority. I read it, (cannot be sure if I had to un-ingnore), had as chuckle at what I was reading then promptly checked if they were on my distrust list (as I do with members from time to time) and that was when I realised they were not. I decided I would not add them until a few after the
thread associated with iv4n was concluded because I was going to start a thread asking for the views of the forum members about how we should approach members that claim to give honest reviews on their websites about various gambling or gaming websites including casinos but have affiliate hyperlinks as well which would bring them an income if a user signs up and plays at that particular game.
It just so happens that the OP mentioned earlier that efialtis excluded me, I checked this and it is true.
Now, since I intended to add him to my distrust list months ago and thought he was already on it, when can I do it and not be accused of retaliatory distrust or exclusion? Say after 1 week, or 3 weeks, maybe 26 weeks? Does the fact I stated I thought he was on my distrust list count for anything or will a retaliatory tag be associated?
