Thread locked I owe it to aew. JollyGood and his Feedback

[Poker Player]

As long as you are right it prevents but if you are wrong then you are accountable for the damage you made to the account.

I doubt very much that there are serious consequences of leaving negative feedback for a few days while things are being clarified to prevent scams.

Nowadays even to participate in signature campaigns, you are not automatically kicked out because you are given a negative feedback from a DT. For example:

Do not have any legitimate negative feedback on your profile from a DT-member.

➥ Don't apply if you have more neg tags than green tags, or if you have an active flag (c)

[dragonvslinux]

The upside is JollyGood is able to acknowledge incorrect use of trust system (great), the downside is it may take several months to do so (unfortunate).

When someone is asking you something then you respond in a good manner, when someone is asking explanation then you explain. That's how we practice in gentlemen world. Do you think we have several months for him to wait?

No obviously not. It's disappointing that JollyGood hasn't responded to this thread, but also hardly surprising. Unfortunately, it usually takes the persuasion from others that he trusts in order to engage with constructive criticism (hint hint). This isn't even intended as further criticism, but more a statement of facts, as acknowledged by JG himself. In summary, he's unlikely to respond to you directly, only to others he respects, even if it'd be the mature thing to do, given that you appear to be a respected member here, rather than a troll or a scammer etc. Everyone would be open to constructive criticism, but sadly this is not the case...

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

In summary, he's unlikely to respond to you directly, only to others he respects

Well in this case JollyGood may publish a list of users who he trust for discussion, so we can see LoyceV and whoever else are in it. It will save our time and we will know who to request to get answers from JollyGood. Don't tell me these are the users who he had in his distrust list.

Have a service, "I will get your answer from JollyGood for $5" (like they do on fiverr LOL). Whenever any of us will need the service, we will order the gig. They will be users like me or the people who received negative feedback but when they wanted to contact JG in PM or wanted to address him in reputation thread, he decided not to respond their valid reasons. Sounds like a joke. but look a the number of feedback he left. The service will really make them rich.

He obviously feels that he is above explanation of what he do now. If a user has such mindset then its risky to give them responsibility. DT is a huge responsibility. A DT member should come forward to clear his doings when its in question by anyone. Accepting or denying the explanation is something else but this anyone even could be the real scammer who received the feedback for a proven scam.

[Poker Player]

Bump.

Lol, I've realized, BitcoinGirl.Club, that you have left JollyGood negative feedback.

Even if you are on his ignore list I think we are going to have drama.

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

Lol, I've realized, BitcoinGirl.Club, that you have left JollyGood negative feedback.

Even if you are on his ignore list I think we are going to have drama.

I have my reasons explained in the reference. In short
1. He did not pay starmyc for his work even asked for refund for the first job. Left red tag as hostage.
2. His arguments are inappropriate and his use of red tags based on the inappropriate arguments. He did it twice (from the limited investigation I conducted myself) once for nemgun and recently for Royse777

An example of his inappropriate argument and how he suggest others to step in to his arguments

[......]
It was on telegram where CEO used the user @BitlucyCEO

Has notting to do with Royse777[......]

Well it does not matter which employee or part owner of Bitlucy contacted you to work for them. Based on the facts as they are known thus far, Bitlucy was owned by two people: Royse777 and the Bitlucy CEO - therefore some would say it does have something to do with Royse777.

[......] Are you saying for example, in a group of company if the chairman runaway with the fund resulting the entire company including their shareholders in loss, you are going to tag the chairman and all the shareholders? This is pathetic. You were the same pathetic against the user nemgun too.[......]

[dragonvslinux]

Lol, I've realized, BitcoinGirl.Club, that you have left JollyGood negative feedback.

Even if you are on his ignore list I think we are going to have drama.

I have my reasons explained in the reference. In short
1. He did not pay starmyc for his work even asked for refund for the first job. Left red tag as hostage.
2. His arguments are inappropriate and his use of red tags based on the inappropriate arguments. He did it twice (from the limited investigation I conducted myself) once for nemgun and recently for Royse777

Well you have your reasons, I can't argue with that. I did PM you that list of users that JG would likely listen to for a reason, re: others he respects, but I get the impression you didn't bother reaching out to anyone  

There's one user in particular that you trust the judgement of, and who JG trusts and trust is reciprocated. Maybe worth reaching out to them to get a response don't you think?

While I'm not here to argue with why you gave him negative feedback, it would have been a good idea to try and a find a mediator of sorts prior to the feedback...

Nowadays even to participate in signature campaigns, you are not automatically kicked out because you are given a negative feedback from a DT. For example:

Do not have any legitimate negative feedback on your profile from a DT-member.

➥ Don't apply if you have more neg tags than green tags, or if you have an active flag (c)

This isn't true or accurate, think I'm currently proof of that right now 

I have also been part of Hhampuz's signature campaign before, because as stated, it's for legitimate feedback only. icopress otherwise doesn't kick you out for negative DT feedback, as stated.

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

While I'm not here to argue with why you gave him negative feedback, it would have been a good idea to try and a find a mediator of sorts prior to the feedback...

This is not a case for me that I became a victim of something. Now I desperately need to reach out to other members to request support to get the tag removed, on the other hand with the long years in the forum I don't think anyone will feel comfortable too if I PM requesting to make a connection with JG. It sounds funny and dramatic. By the way it was a sarcasm (the gig thing) on the other post but thank you for the list.

I wanted to have a one to one discussion which was said in the PM I sent to JollyGood on the last 20th July. I was expecting his response. I waited 6 days until I created this topic on 27th. I still waited and until now there are no explanation from JollyGood of why he left these unfair red tags to user starmyc and nemgun? He failed to support his cause.

Starmyc has business in the forum, a Software Engineer. Since the red tag left by JollyGood, starmyc did not get any order (it seems JG revenged tag worked), he became inactive although he sent me PM on July 17th saying, JollyGood took the work and asked him to refund for the previous work (how unfair and sounds pathetic). Nemgun obviously was a victim of the CEO just like Royse777 was a victim of his CEO. You don't jail the shareholders because the main head runaway with the money.

I wanted to ask jollyGood in private without making it public that he should resolve the problem with starmyc or give me a reasonable story and reconsider their tags. The tag on Starmyc can be even looked at as JollyGood was using it to silent him. Look at all others feedback on starmyc, how it went wrong only with JollyGood?

[dragonvslinux]

While I'm not here to argue with why you gave him negative feedback, it would have been a good idea to try and a find a mediator of sorts prior to the feedback...

This is not a case for me that I became a victim of something. Now I desperately need to reach out to other members to request support to get the tag removed, on the other hand with the long years in the forum I don't think anyone will feel comfortable too if I PM requesting to make a connection with JG. It sounds funny and dramatic. By the way it was a sarcasm (the gig thing) on the other post but thank you for the list.

Well I think you got your response in the form of a retaliatory red tag which is disappointing though not unsurprising. I guess it further proves your point about his abuse of the trust system though.

I wanted to have a one to one discussion which was said in the PM I sent to JollyGood on the last 20th July. I was expecting his response. I waited 6 days until I created this topic on 27th. I still waited and until now there are no explanation from JollyGood of why he left these unfair red tags to user starmyc and nemgun? He failed to support his cause.

Fair enough when you put it like that, I still think it would of been worth reaching out to others, as now this isn't just about starmyc and nemgun, but your own red tag as well.

[dkbit98]

I wanted to ask jollyGood in private without making it public that he should resolve the problem with starmyc or give me a reasonable story and reconsider their tags. The tag on Starmyc can be even looked at as JollyGood was using it to silent him. Look at all others feedback on starmyc, how it went wrong only with JollyGood?

Can you even contact him in private, or he totally blocked you as well?
We could really benefit from less drama in this forum, but all I see is that he refused to explain anything about this case and just gave one more negative feedback.
Maybe negative feedback was a bit premature from both sides, but one he gave is 100% retaliatory.

Well I think you got your response in the form of a retaliatory red tag which is disappointing though not unsurprising. I guess it further proves your point about his abuse of the trust system though.

Other DT members should seriously reconsider if this Candyman should still be a part of DT members, and doing nothing is only going to encourage him to continue doing the same thing.
He is again mentioning Royse in his feedback to member BitcoinGirl.Club, just proves that is seriously obsessed with this member.
I am calling other experienced members to examine this case.

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

Well I think you got your response in the form of a retaliatory red tag which is disappointing though not unsurprising. I guess it further proves your point about his abuse of the trust system though.

Be careful who you are talking against. I will not surprise to see you received one just because you expressed your opinion in the bold form I marked.

Can you even contact him in private, or he totally blocked you as well?
We could really benefit from less drama in this forum, but all I see is that he refused to explain anything about this case and just gave one more negative feedback.

PM sent, public topic created but instead of explanation he now thinks sending a red tag on my trust page was appropriate. He did not use any of the chances that he was given. Right now his response does not carry any value. I will rather ask others mainly everyone including who have him in their trust list.

[LoyceV]

I think there should be a dedicated BitcoinGirl.Club vs JollyGood thread. Now it's spread out too much and harder to find the details.

First, let me remind you that my guide to correct use of the Trust system exists.
I'll start with BitcoinGirl.Club's tag on JollyGood:

Failed to pay starmyc $100 for the 2nd job.
In addition, the user used to be a scam buster (past) but now he use his earned reputation to process nonsense against the people he do not like, make others his hostage with the red tag, demands unlawful private information to share and protect his employers to secure his job. Do not take any tag left by him as good reference.

The Reference link doesn't mention starmyc, so that part seems incomplete. If it's accurate, maybe you can make this a separate tag including proper reference link.

But, and that's the main point, I get the feeling you used starmyc as an excuse to create a tag for the second part, and I think the second part should have been neutral. This doesn't mean "that trading with this person is high-risk". Make it neutral. It could mean you don't trust his judgement, in which case you can exclude them (and try to convince others to do the same).

Remember this:

A major goal of this is to allow retaliatory distrusts and ratings to actually have some chance of mattering so that contentious ratings have an actual cost. If someone is obviously scamming, then any retaliatory rating should not last long due to the DT1 "voting", but if you negative-rate someone for generally disliking them, then their retaliation against you may stick. In borderline cases, it should result in something of a political battle.

Well I think you got your response in the form of a retaliatory red tag which is disappointing

And that's the next point I want to address:
JollyGood's tag on BitcoinGirl.Club:

BEWARE: BitcoinGirl.Club cannot be trusted. The accusations made against me are baseless and are part of a revenge ploy to post lies and then keep repeating them.

Not a surprise BitcoinGirl.Club did not leave red or neutral feedback for the Royse777/Bitlucy scammers but left me a revenge tag. Do not trust anything BitcoinGirl.Club says

I'm confused: who left the first negative tag? I thought BitcoinGirl.Club was the first. Then why does JollyGood call that a revenge tag?
JollyGood's tag looks like revenge to me: there's no Reference link, just an opinion that "BitcoinGirl.Club cannot be trusted". The Royse777/Bitlucy part seems completely irrelevant to me: you can't tag someone for not tagging someone else!

What happened to Be the bigger man? Receiving a negative tag does not mean trading with the person who left it is high-risk, so it doesn't justify tagging them too!

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

But, and that's the main point, I get the feeling you used starmyc as an excuse to create a tag for the second part, and I think the second part should have been neutral. This doesn't mean "that trading with this person is high-risk". Make it neutral. It could mean you don't trust his judgement, in which case you can exclude them (and try to convince others to do the same).

I agree in separating two parts. But since there are no point (at least this is how I looked it) to leave one neutral and another red so I decided to have all at once.

Few weeks ago may be months, I saw DireWolfM14 somewhere said he sent JollyGood a PM about some feedback to discuss or something, I can not remember it clearly.
These days I am more in reputation board, I was noticing JollyGood creates unnecessary arguments and insults others who do not support his arguments, likes to show off he has an ignore list, disrespects senior members who were producing babies even before his birth to this forum. He can not tolerate when someone say he is wrong in something. All looked to me an attitude problem.
So I wanted to see how his inappropriate attitude reflects on the feedback he left. He has many pages of feedback which was impossible for me to check one by one. So I was quickly scanning a few of them before I found the case for starmyc and NEMGUN. NEMGUN case looked to me the same as Royse777 but starmyc case looked to me very straight forward. So I sent a short PM to starmyc:

Did you eventually get paid by JollyGood

I saw starmyc had everything good even a good feedback from another DT member for his work. But since JollyGood left the negative feedback, starmyc tried to resolve it but eventually gave up and slowed down in the forum.

In the mean time he replied my PM

Hello,

No, not at all, despite the really low cost of the work done. He took the stuff, and even asked me for a refund for a previous work.

I recommend not working with him, or asking to be paid using a third party and really well defined & trackable requirements to not get cheated on.

Regards.

I used to be a software engineer. Freelanced for many years in the long past so I know how it goes. I do not have any doubt that JollyGood started demanding additional works but denied to pay and kept asking for more works. Sometimes an employer thinks that they bought the freelancer and use them as their own property. I suspect that exactly what happened and resulting he even asked to refund for the first job which was finished successfully before starting the 2nd job. And finally it finished with the negative feedback he has to hostage him.

But I can not just take one side in considering so I PMed JollyGood and asked if we can have a one to one conversation. But even after 6 days he ignored and did not think to reply. Then I created this topic. But still there are no input. At this point what should I take as guaranteed? He does not have any explanation at all. If he does not then his feedback to starmyc was inappropriate and it will be safe to say that he scammed the labor of starmyc and did not pay him for the work. I will believe starmyc over him because starmyc gave me more explanation after his last PM response.

It seems, starmyc really is established person in his life right now, happy with the job now, he does not care at all. But he expressed his regret

I'm sad because I spent quite some time to work on this stuff at the time and all I got is this bad reputation stuff.

This is one starmyc, how many more starmyc have the same feeling and JollyGood destroyed their forum life? He did not pay for the work but he did not stop there. He decided to leave a negative feedback and stopped starmyc.

I suggested starmyc to create a flag if he thinks that there should be no more starmyc if he does then I will have no problem to support it.

[LoyceV]

I agree in separating two parts. But since there are no point (at least this is how I looked it) to leave one neutral and another red so I decided to have all at once.

The point is that it's more accurate

It seems, starmyc really is established person in his life right now, happy with the job now, he does not care at all. But he expressed his regret

I'm sad because I spent quite some time to work on this stuff at the time and all I got is this bad reputation stuff.

In my opinion, Lauda was too trigger happy on the red paint, and JollyGood goes down the same path. I especially dislike that this scares off good users, while real scammers will just continue with a new account.
I've discussed some of JollyGood's negative tags a few times (probably in Reputation), but gave up after it seemed futile. He must have had enough of it, and stopped trusting my judgement last May.
Why didn't you add starmyc to your Trust list? His feedback seems reasonable, and that would mean he'd be on DT2 when you're on DT1, and would level the playing field a bit:

A major goal of this is to allow retaliatory distrusts and ratings to actually have some chance of mattering so that contentious ratings have an actual cost.

I checked JollyGood's feedback on starmyc, and I'm surprised he tagged the user saying:

When I asked for the source code he declined asking for more money. If I did not get the source code I would have to go back to him for every small tweak I wanted to make and therefore he would ask for more money again and again.

Meanwhile, his own Reference link shows he didn't ask for source codes, and I think it's unreasonable to expect free source codes after you pay someone for a freelance job.

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

Why didn't you add starmyc to your Trust list? His feedback seems reasonable, and that would mean he'd be on DT2 when you're on DT1, and would even the playing field a bit:

A major goal of this is to allow retaliatory distrusts and ratings to actually have some chance of mattering so that contentious ratings have an actual cost.

I did not look into it that way but gave a thought for few second. I am still not convinced that if I should do it. If I do then it feels like I am changing my setting only for a particular user. On the other hand starmyc is not someone who left many feedback and I can consider the judgement of most of his feedback are accurate. I will give more thought before to take your suggestion.

The point is that it's more accurate

There is an after and before question now since he sent me a retaliatory feedback. 🤣
When I remove my old feedback then technically he will say I sent him the retaliatory feedback because my one will come later. I am thinking a way how to correct it and also use appropriate reference for starmyc case too.

In my opinion, Lauda was too trigger happy on the red paint, and JollyGood goes down the same path. I especially dislike that this scares off good users, while real scammers will just continue with a new account.

Lauda's feedback were never thought me to keep hostage the user but some of JollyGood's feedback feels to me that he use his negative feedback to hostage others. May be it's because Lauda was not disrespectful in their interaction with others.

but gave up after it seemed futile.

He is using it in his favor. It surprise me why some of the users who consider him a good scam buster (which he was long ago, he changed), do not take their time to recheck the change.

stopped trusting my judgement

He tilde (~) everyone who does not speak his language. It has nothing to do with the judgement we use for feedback leaving for others.

I checked JollyGood's feedback on starmyc, and I'm surprised he tagged the user saying:

When I asked for the source code he declined asking for more money. If I did not get the source code I would have to go back to him for every small tweak I wanted to make and therefore he would ask for more money again and again.

Meanwhile, his own Reference link shows he didn't ask for source codes, and I think it's unreasonable to expect free source codes after you pay someone for a freelance job.

Like I said on my last post an employer thinks that they bought the freelancer and use them as their own property. JollyGood was demanding unnecessary additional job resulting not paying him for the 2nd job but inappropriately he was asking to refund for the first job that was done successfully. He was simply denying to pay for the valid job.

Let me share the last PM from starmyc

Hello,

Indeed, I'm no longer in the freelancing business anymore, and my current work is too busy and keeps me away all this stuff.

Also, the amount was really small so (I don't remember the precise amout, but it was like < 200$ in btc)... as this story is old, and I'm out of business, I've no longer any interest about recovering this small amount of money.

I'm sad because I spent quite some time to work on this stuff at the time and all I got is this bad reputation stuff.
But well, that's life and there are more important things to deal with.

Have a nice day anyway!

[LoyceV]

I'm glad to see JollyGood changed his tag on BitcoinGirl.Club to neutral:

BEWARE: BitcoinGirl.Club cannot be trusted. Made baseless accusations against me as part of a revenge ploy to post lies then keep repeating them. Do not trust a compulsive liar as BitcoinGirl.Club

BitcoinGirl.Club seems mentally unwell, suffers from serious anger problems and from delusions of grandeur because of an overinflated ego (revised to neutral)

I consider this correct use of the Trust system (independent of what it says).

[Poker Player]

I'm glad to see JollyGood changed his tag on BitcoinGirl.Club to neutral:

BEWARE: BitcoinGirl.Club cannot be trusted. Made baseless accusations against me as part of a revenge ploy to post lies then keep repeating them. Do not trust a compulsive liar as BitcoinGirl.Club

BitcoinGirl.Club seems mentally unwell, suffers from serious anger problems and from delusions of grandeur because of an overinflated ego (revised to neutral)

I consider this correct use of the Trust system (independent of what it says).

I do not agree with this.

Only the color has changed. Saying that BitcoinGirl.Club is a liar, that he cannot be trusted and that he has mental problems, should be written in red.

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

[...]

Yes it is changed to neutral 🤣


Even though I provided full reference of the accusations I made against him he is considering they are baseless. But interestingly it seems he received all my pathological reports from my doctor.
He propose:
I am a compulsive lair
Mentally unwell
Serious anger problem
I have delusions of grandeur
I have overinflated ego.

How even a neutral feedback applies here? My trust page is not for him to write my pathological reports.

Update:

I do not agree with this.

Only the color has changed. Saying that BitcoinGirl.Club is a liar, that he cannot be trusted and that he has mental problems, should be written in red.

Thanks, you were just earlier than me to post it 😉

[Poker Player]

How even a neutral feedback applies here? My trust page is not for him to write my pathological reports.

It doesn't.

There is a widespread idea in the forum that neutral color can be used for anything. And I don't agree.

If I write a neutral color feedback saying: "Scammer. Don't trust him even for $10 transactions."

That should be written in red. If I don't write it in red it's because I know what I'm saying is false or I don't have proof, so I shouldn't write that.

[LoyceV]

I'm glad to see JollyGood changed his tag on BitcoinGirl.Club to neutral:

BEWARE: BitcoinGirl.Club cannot be trusted. Made baseless accusations against me as part of a revenge ploy to post lies then keep repeating them. Do not trust a compulsive liar as BitcoinGirl.Club

BitcoinGirl.Club seems mentally unwell, suffers from serious anger problems and from delusions of grandeur because of an overinflated ego (revised to neutral)

I consider this correct use of the Trust system (independent of what it says).

I do not agree with this.

Only the color has changed. Saying that BitcoinGirl.Club is a liar, that he cannot be trusted and that he has mental problems, should be written in red.

It should be red if he can back it up with a proper Reference link with proof. Without that, it's just his opinion. He's entitled to have one, and I prefer neutral over red for it.

He propose:
I am a compulsive lair
Mentally unwell
Serious anger problem
I have delusions of grandeur
I have overinflated ego.

How even a neutral feedback applies here?

Neutral works de-escalating. Other than that, when I read feedback like this, I simply ignore it. But usually it makes the person who wrote it look bad.

My trust page is not for him to write my pathological reports.

Sure he can, up to 5 posts.

[FatFork]

The point is that it's more accurate

There is an after and before question now since he sent me a retaliatory feedback. 🤣
When I remove my old feedback then technically he will say I sent him the retaliatory feedback because my one will come later. I am thinking a way how to correct it and also use appropriate reference for starmyc case too.

This no longer applies because his feedback on your account is neutral.
An appropriate reference for negative feedback would be the scam accusation topic. Did you ask starmyc why he didn't create a scam accusation against JollyGood if he felt cheated by him?

Like I said on my last post an employer thinks that they bought the freelancer and use them as their own property. JollyGood was demanding unnecessary additional job resulting not paying him for the 2nd job but inappropriately he was asking to refund for the first job that was done successfully. He was simply denying to pay for the valid job.

Again, the situation would be resolved much more clearly if starmyc made a proper scam accusation and provided all relevant evidence. The way things stand, you seem to be taking sides based on the word of one party, despite the fact that neither side has provided credible evidence to support their claims.