My campaign journey has ended due to this

[Twentyonepaylots]

Few months ago, I was a very active campaigner ( my previous posts/activities will tell ) but then this shitty campaign by 1xbit caused my -1 neg trust from JollyGood after I tried applying  to their campaign which I don't have an idea that it was a scam campaign coz I see a lot of people are applying on which I take responsibility of. I tried to appeal to him and he didn't replied which I totally understand. Now it's almost impossible to join any campaign anymore. What frustrates me more is that I really want to provide an art services so I could help few people here in regards with art, and again with neg trust it's almost impossible at this moment.

Now every time I see the thread of 1xbit reminds me of this, IDK why it is still here on the forum.   

[1714188905]

1714188905

[1714188905]

1714188905

[1714188905]

1714188905

[1714188905]

1714188905

[1714188905]

1714188905

[1714188905]

1714188905

[_act_]

Not knowing that 1xbit is a scam gambling site should not be an excuse. Or let me put it like this, you have already been tagged and nobody knows or can prove if what you are saying is true or not, but did you wear the signature and avatar of 1xbit? Did you remove the 1xbit signature and avatar immediately when you were tagged or you were paid for one week or some weeks before you removed both? I think JollyGood would have messaged you back if you have not gone beyond only joining the scam campaign gambling site.

If what you said is true but which I do not yet believe, all I can say is that you have already been tagged, JollyGood will see this thread but you can still message him again and request for the red trust removal. Improve your post, I believe improving the way you are posting will change his mind ones he noticed that you have changed the way you are posting in a way you can join good campaigns that are only picking good posters unlike 1xbit that did not see good posters to pick because good posters did not apply, shit posters applied for 1xbit, posters that are not having merits or having just 1 or less than 5 merits in the last 120 days. That deserves red trust as 1xbit is not only just scam campaign but also taking shit posters that want to make the quality posting on this forum to reduce. Thanks to suchmoon, JollyGood and many other people that were reporting them.

What I noticed about 1xbit is that the betting site is a scam, people that joined it first were tagged, shit posters joined it which I believe are alts which are no more useful because no one would want to risk his main account to join such campaign, turning this forum into a spam haven with spam posts.

Post good and continue your determination which is the red trust removal, it would be removed if you start and continue to be active with quality posts which is what that will make you deserve it removed.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

And this is an issue for you now because....?

You had to have known your negative feedback would preclude you from getting accepted into most of the reputable signature campaigns, no?  It's not as if JG just left you that feedback, either--it's been nearly a year.

What frustrates me more is that I really want to provide an art services so I could help few people here in regards with art, and again with neg trust it's almost impossible at this moment.

What is it about that one feedback that's preventing you from doing whatever it is you described above?  I don't know what "art service" you want to provide, but a single neg due to you being linked with 1xbit probably shouldn't interfere. 

I'd no idea 1xbit was still active here, since I have signatures ignored.  But the forum doesn't ban scammers, so that's why they're allowed to remain on bitcointalk.

[Despairo]

What frustrates me more is that I really want to provide an art services so I could help few people here in regards with art, and again with neg trust it's almost impossible at this moment.

Your account didn't have any active flag and the feedback because of 1xbit, if you use escrow of your services, I don't see the feedback would hurt your reputations. As long as your art portfolio is originally created from you and using escrow, no one will think you're a scammer. Why not try to create your services thread?

And this is an issue for you now because....?

I think his purpose want to join the signature campaign again since he said he was an active campaigner. If you read his post history [1] he never made any post about contributing to the forum, he only create post about art contest which is money oriented. This mean if he only want to post because of money, he wouldn't post if he didn't earn money. Since he didn't contributed anything after he got negative trust by @JollyGood  , the negative feedback shouldn't be deleted.

[1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1075222;sa=showPosts;start=0

[Don Pedro Dinero]

Few months ago, I was a very active campaigner ( my previous posts/activities will tell ) but then this shitty campaign by 1xbit caused my -1 neg trust from JollyGood after I tried applying  to their campaign which I don't have an idea that it was a scam campaign coz I see a lot of people are applying on which I take responsibility of.

You mean you applied but never got to join the campaign?

It seems that JollyGood tagged not only the people who participated, but also those who simply applied.

I find this a bit tough. Someone could have applied without realising it was a scam and then withdraw or delete the application without ever actually participating. I don't think they should get a red tag for this.

There would be a grey case for me, which would be those who applied and were not accepted. In this case I think the tag would be more justified.

[cryptoaddictchie]

Thats hurting actually. Well just continue or provide service to others. Probably with huge transactions youve done with that services, others might ignore that negative feedback on you for just joining a scam signature campaign. If you succeded on that, then maybe some will drop you a good positive rating and that negative one will be ignored as many are trusted you for your services instead seeing you as a scammer for that mistake of yours.

[Rikafip]

Few months ago, I was a very active campaigner ( my previous posts/activities will tell ) but then this shitty campaign by 1xbit caused my -1 neg trust from JollyGood after I tried applying  to their campaign which I don't have an idea that it was a scam campaign coz I see a lot of people are applying on which I take responsibility of.

Did you wear 1xbit signature for some time before you got tagged, or you were tagged immediately after applying for signature campaign? I am asking because I remember DT members contacting people after they got tagged and usually deleting the feedback if signature was removed immediately. Also, you are not a new member so how come you ignored negative trust on their bounty manager as I am sure he had plenty of those?

Let's be honest here, if people were not getting tagged for promoting scammers like 1xbit I am sure that many wouldn't have any issues joining their campaign but are not doing so only because of the fear of negative tag.

[NeuroticFish]

Now every time I see the thread of 1xbit reminds me of this, IDK why it is still here on the forum.  

While you're right with "IDK why it is still here on the forum", you're wrong with blaming them for what has happened to you. Look closer and you'll see that it was your own fault to not read all the red warnings around that campaign.
Yes, I know, you can tell that I expect too much from a Sr. Member. But you're here since 2017, or at least the account is. You had to learn the proper ways at some point...

[The Sceptical Chymist]

It seems that JollyGood tagged not only the people who participated, but also those who simply applied.

I find this a bit tough.

I think that's what happened, and JollyGood has been known to be quite harsh with the negative feedback--that's why I took him off my trust list.  OP's trust actually doesn't show up red on my end because of that, but if he's still on DT2 or even DT1 then yeah, it's going to be a problem for OP getting into anything other than a bounty that doesn't care about feedback.

Personally, I think JollyGood ought to rethink some of his feedbacks but I suspect he's not going to.  There have been threads just like this one before, and he's not inclined to reverse any of the ones he's given.  Tagging applicants to a campaign is stepping over the line IMO, but we've all got differing opinions on that. 

[lovesmayfamilis]

Did you wear 1xbit signature for some time before you got tagged, or you were tagged immediately after applying for signature campaign? I am asking because I remember DT members contacting people after they got tagged and usually deleting the feedback if signature was removed immediately. Also, you are not a new member so how come you ignored negative trust on their bounty manager as I am sure he had plenty of those?

Let's be honest here, if people were not getting tagged for promoting scammers like 1xbit I am sure that many wouldn't have any issues joining their campaign but are not doing so only because of the fear of negative tag.

Judging by his registration, he could only apply for participation but did not participate in this company.
The post with the registration has been deleted, and also I did not find it in the spreadsheet. Therefore, we can conclude that he did not participate and receive payments.
Subsequently, there were also applications for other subscription companies, in which the OP, apparently, was not accepted.

https://ninjastic.space/addresses?address=bc1qme0j0hxrxyghzgxfrdd7sat5eehuyatugak2th
https://ninjastic.space/post/57235692

My negative trust is from applying to scam campaign ( 1xbit ) which I didn't know. Applying to redeem my  reputation.

My negative trust is from applying to scam campaign ( 1xbit ) which I didn't know. Applying to redeem my  reputation.

OP, Sometimes choosing the company you're going to advertise with carefully will help you maintain your reputation....

[JeromeTash]

You should have seen all the warnings about 1xbit before you decided to apply for their signature campaign.

How did you miss seeing
1. Red trust and flags on all 1xbit's profiles amd campaign manager's profile.
2. Warnings in the campaign thread by so many members that anyone would risk getting tagged if they applied for the campaign.
3. Multiple scam accusations and reputation posts complaining about 1xbit at that time.


The fact that you are so careless is evident even today.

Blender wallet, a service that you are advertising on your signature has been off for several weeks now.

Before even going off, they claim the "noncustodial" wallet was hacked and funds for users were withdrawn.

How do you not know this and continue advertising such a service on your signature after all that long?

[FatFork]

Few months ago, I was a very active campaigner ( my previous posts/activities will tell ) but then this shitty campaign by 1xbit caused my -1 neg trust from JollyGood after I tried applying  to their campaign which I don't have an idea that it was a scam campaign coz I see a lot of people are applying on which I take responsibility of.

Did you wear 1xbit signature for some time before you got tagged, or you were tagged immediately after applying for signature campaign? I am asking because I remember DT members contacting people after they got tagged and usually deleting the feedback if signature was removed immediately. Also, you are not a new member so how come you ignored negative trust on their bounty manager as I am sure he had plenty of those?

I'm not sure if he wore a 1xbit signature during that time, but I think JG gave him plenty of time to change his mind before tagging his account. He applied for the 1xbit campaign on June 15 and received negative trust on July 1. Then, after realizing he wasn't going to be accepted into their campaign, he deleted his application and started complaining.

Given how inactive he has been for the past year, I doubt this is his only account on the forum.

[Poker Player]

The fact that you are so careless is evident even today.

Blender wallet, a service that you are advertising on your signature has been off for several weeks now.

Before even going off, they claim the "noncustodial" wallet was hacked and funds for users were withdrawn.

How do you not know this and continue advertising such a service on your signature after all that long?

It seems that the OP is not a careful person at all. Out of curiosity, I checked if there is a signature campaign in the thread:

Overview of Bitcointalk Signature-Ad Campaigns [Last update: 30-April-22]

And there is no signature campaign of that service (obviously). Surely he joined in the past and he has not removed the signature.

Reminds me of everyone who continued to carry Lightlord's  777coin and Bitvest.io signatures long after they stopped running in the forum. I still saw one the other day.

[NeuroticFish]

And there is no signature campaign of that service (obviously). Surely he joined in the past and he has not removed the signature.

I think that some do keep the old signature for proving some sort of "status", i.e. that they were accepted to campaigns.
Or some may keep signature in order to "fool" people that they are any good, by showing that they're somewhat trusted by the campaign manager (I don't know how to explain it well), without realizing that one can do quality posts even if he's not member of any campaign.

Maybe I didn't explain well, but the point is that it can also be seen not as carelessness, instead as somehow trying to pretend he's more than he is.

[Poker Player]

I think that some do keep the old signature for proving some sort of "status", i.e. that they were accepted to campaigns.
Or some may keep signature in order to "fool" people that they are any good, by showing that they're somewhat trusted by the campaign manager (I don't know how to explain it well), without realizing that one can do quality posts even if he's not member of any campaign.

Maybe I didn't explain well, but the point is that it can also be seen not as carelessness, instead as somehow trying to pretend he's more than he is.

I get the idea but I think they are wrong. If you are not in a signature campaign I think it is better to post without carrying any signature, because this way you show that it is not only economic interest that brings you to this forum.

[DaveF]

I agree with what has been said:

The -1 is not that big a deal if you want to provide a service just use a reliable escrow and if you do enough good deals over time it really will not matter.

As for joining signature campaigns, that really is up to the individual manager.

But still wearing the sig for a service that has gone away and itself is tagged is not a good thing.

-Dave

[Rikafip]

I'm not sure if he wore a 1xbit signature during that time, but I think JG gave him plenty of time to change his mind before tagging his account. He applied for the 1xbit campaign on June 15 and received negative trust on July 1. Then, after realizing he wasn't going to be accepted into their campaign, he deleted his application and started complaining.

The way he wrote it was like he immediately got negative feedback after he applied for 1xbit signature campaign, but this is a completely different thing. He was given more than 2 weeks time to remove that sig and if that wasn't enough, then even 2 months probably wouldn't be enough for him.

[Findingnemo]

If I am not wrong this action taken by JollyGood after multiple warnings to the campaign participants but they never cared so he made a list of people who are wearing the 1xbit signatures and getting financial benefits from the scammers. If you didn't get that financial benefits but still you got negged may look harsh but its your responsibility to choose what you're promoting because literally you're helping the scammers and being one if the reason for people to lose their money.

Interestingly, I didn't find your name in the list which actually have 124 names.

[dkbit98]

Few months ago, I was a very active campaigner ( my previous posts/activities will tell ) but then this shitty campaign by 1xbit caused my -1 neg trust from JollyGood after I tried applying  to their campaign which I don't have an idea that it was a scam campaign coz I see a lot of people are applying on which I take responsibility of. I tried to appeal to him and he didn't replied which I totally understand. Now it's almost impossible to join any campaign anymore.

I don't know how long you were a part of 1xbit campaign but it was big risk joining and everyone was well aware they could receive negative feedback.
There is still a chance he could remove that feedback, but instead you should concentrate to improve your posts and get some positive feedback for your services and trades.
If you want to provide some design and other art related services you can always create brand new account, and you don't have to publicly say that is your alt account.

Now every time I see the thread of 1xbit reminds me of this, IDK why it is still here on the forum.  

You are wrong if you think that removing or banning 1xbit will somehow magically remove your negative feedback and make everything clean again.
Bitcointalk forum is giving enough free speech to everyone, including scammers and shady gambling websites like 1xbit, and I think this is not bad.

Judging by his registration, he could only apply for participation but did not participate in this company.
The post with the registration has been deleted, and also I did not find it in the spreadsheet. Therefore, we can conclude that he did not participate and receive payments.
Subsequently, there were also applications for other subscription companies, in which the OP, apparently, was not accepted.

If this is true than I think JollyGood should consider removing negative feedback he gave him, or at least change it to Neutral.

[SatoPrincess]

At this point, I’m sure if the keywords 1xbit is searched on bitcointalk forum, the company has been mentioned more than a million times good and bad, mostly bad reviews associated with the company and its signature campaign. But talking about it everyday is free advertising imo. They probably have more people clicking their websites through bitcointalk because they are everywhere. OP wants his feedback removed, I suggest he contact the person who gave the feedback and give convincing reasons why it should be removed.