Would you tag these users?

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

I was reading the topic What is going on???, and was about to reply a user. While I was reading, I noticed the discussion about another inappropriate feedback and it's left by none other but JollyGood.

If my memory is working properly then I read someone [a JollyGood fan] was writing or JollyGood himself was saying that JollyGood was revising left feedbacks and updating the inappropriate negative feedbacks in to neutral but it seems he has not changed at all. Check the recent feedbacks he lefts for others [;dt added].

borovichok: Received tag for AI posting and Changed hand.
tjtonmoy: Merit abuse a year ago
jvanname: Attention seeking and trolling.
Symmetrick: Changed hand, we know the rest anyway.


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=1016855;dt
These are from last December and 8 days from January 2024.

How many of you really think you were going to tag these guys for the same reason?
Will you also address these feedback as inappropriate?

Edited to add urls of profile trust pages

[1714205487]

1714205487

[1714205487]

1714205487

[1714205487]

1714205487

[The Sceptical Chymist]

I wouldn't have tagged any of those members except perhaps for Symmetrick.  If an account is suspected strongly enough of being sold/hacked/whatever, I'd tag it in a heartbeat.  But leaving a negative for merit abuse or even using AI to generate posts is questionable at best.  For the latter case, that's a matter for the mods and posts like that should be reported.  Tagging merit abusers has always been controversial but not strictly forbidden.

In any case, haven't we covered this ground extensively, thoroughly, and to the point where we don't need another thread about it?

[digaran]

Just be patient, his time will hopefully come, but there won't be any second chances for him, he had many of them but didn't use them wisely.

Karma works like this: if you use someone's past against them, get ready for your past to haunt you.

[sheenshane]

IMO, only borovichok was inappropriate and the rest was accurate.
I don't see using AI posting should be on the red tag, it might be good if it is a neutral one for only awareness from others, as long as it wasn't copy-pasting from other websites.  Reporting to the mods is the right thing.

tjtonmoy - cheating bounties (it's of forum rules)
jvanname - trolling (it's on forum rules)
Symmetrick - changed password, suspected change hand.

But my question is, have all of them been presented with information to defend themselves?  It seems there's a chance that it will turn to neutral as the feedback says.

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

I wouldn't have tagged any of those members except perhaps for Symmetrick.

I see many neutral on his feedback page. Not a fan of Symmetrick that does not mean when I get a chance, I will give him a negative feedback where the accusations were one sided. Obviously everything about Symmetrick ended up controversial and perhaps true but without concrete evidences of scamming or confirming by the victim a red tag is very inappropriate. I see Poker Player had the same judgement of leaving a negative feedback. They come with words like, "likely..." but then you see the feedback is red.

I always said the DT system become too easy to gain and for some members it became a passion to leave feedback to others page so that they can gain some attention and be included by others.

In any case, haven't we covered this ground extensively, thoroughly, and to the point where we don't need another thread about it?

I don't remember but you have to consider my age too. After a certain age, a man starts to old. On the other hand, if we extensively covered the ground then we were supposed to see some improvement but there are no improvement at all. JollyGood still is in DT and still is leaving inappropriate feedback to members pages and demotivating the members to continue their time on the forum. It always happen when someone disagree with his opinion and tries to overrule his words.

But my question is, have all of them been presented with information to defend themselves?  It seems there's a chance that it will turn to neutral as the feedback says.

It sounds like if anyone wants to demand something from me then they will leave a negative feedback with an speculation then it's my job to invest my time and present unnecessary links, quotes to get the red feedback removed with a neutral feedback? In other words, you hostage me with a negative feedback to demand your needs.

[Shishir99]

If my memory is working properly then I read someone [a JollyGood fan] was writing or JollyGood himself was saying that JollyGood was revising left feedbacks and updating the inappropriate negative feedbacks in to neutral but it seems he has not changed at all.

I don't know if you are talking about me or not. I guess I have never stated something like this. But, I was triggered because yesterday I made a post on the same thread you mentioned. I guess I had a disagreement with you where you were saying he was trying to make friends with me. I don't want to bring these things again, but thanks for the topic. I do not have enough merits, unfortunately.

If I talk about the tags you mentioned, I will go with TSC. Symmetrick tag maybe appropriate if we consider that account changes deserve negative feedback. The rest accounts do not deserve negative feedback. I have posted about tjtonmoy's case and I have shared my opinion there.

[decodx]

Using AI shouldn't necessarily get the red tag in my view - maybe a neutral one just to give heads up is better. But I am not closely familiar with Borovichok's case, so I don't know if there is something more to it that warrants the negative.

As for the other three, I think the negative tags are deserved. All three are obvious trade risks at the moment. Although in the case of Symmetrick it doesn't matter anymore. I left him positive because he helped me recover my money from the scam mixer, and I don't want to remove the tag now since that fact remains true. However, I wouldn't trust him again due to the suspicion that the account has changed hands.

[ineedhelpplease]

For tjtonmoy, at first  i'd say that a year ago is a little far due to the time, I would only use it as part of the tag reason if he continues nefarious activities and use it as one of the reasons within the comment box. Maybe a neutral tag as a notice to others would fit better, simply because it has been a while and people can change.
In this case, since he has been exposed for cheating in the pumpkin contest which proves that he is continuing breaking forum rules I would say it's fair to provide both reasons to tag, which is what JollyGood has already done.

Jvanname, well it's just needless to say he does deserve the tag. Personally I wouldn't though unless he was attacking me consistently.

[decodx]

For tjtonmoy, at first  i'd say that a year ago is a little far due to the time, I would only use it as part of the tag reason if he continues nefarious activities and use it as one of the reasons within the comment box. Maybe a neutral tag as a notice to others would fit better, simply because it has been a while and people can change.
In this case, since he has been exposed for cheating in the pumpkin contest which proves that he is continuing breaking forum rules I would say it's fair to provide both reasons to tag, which is what JollyGood has already done.

I believe the new tag is probably fueled by his recent controversies (first a non-collateral loan request, then begging for donations and lying about a hacked account).

Jvanname, well it's just needless to say he does deserve the tag. Personally I wouldn't though unless he was attacking me consistently.

Jvanname is a troll toxic to the entire community, a mental case that calls out that we should all suffer and die a horrible death.  Here's a quote: https://ninjastic.space/post/62933000

Personally, I think he deserves much more than just a negative tag, but unfortunately the forum mods still tolerate it.

[borovichok]

This is unedited post. Anyone can check it out, it's 100% human text. Just my grammarly keyboard failing a simple grammar class.

Stick to a player that's outstanding and confident in scoring points. Every team do triggered winning and losing, we have potentials of winning, if they do not have this hope, they wouldn't have compete or contend for any solidable points in the league. Thrilling victory is achievable and everyone has the right to be able to place wager on games. We all have choices to make and our favorites in the game. @morvillz making an exception of choosing Wilson or Flacco over Brownings bases on the tactical date examined, but the same underrated Brownings is the favorite of most viewers in the system.

[Shishir99]

But my question is, have all of them been presented with information to defend themselves?

If you are not sure and had to ask this question, then how did you say this? If someone gives negative feedback to others, shouldn't they do their investigation? 

IMO, only borovichok was inappropriate and the rest was accurate.

It seems there's a chance that it will turn to neutral as the feedback says.

Judging from his feedback history, this is his typical feedback writing system. Even though it looks like he is willing to change the feedback to neutral, I don't remember seeing him change the feedback he left.

Personally, I think he deserves much more than just a negative tag, but unfortunately the forum mods still tolerate it.

You are a veteran member of this forum. Trolling is not allowed according to the forum rules and you know this. So, if moderators give him a pass, why do you bother? It's clearly mentioned that negative feedback should be for trading-related matters. We know that you guys use it for other purposes as well. But, seeing negative feedback for every other reason making it worth less. It seems like everyone deserves negative feedback these days. DT members leaving negative feedback left and right, everywhere. It seems it's nothing.

[digaran]

If you see some DTs leave unreasonable red tags left and right is because they are a bunch of insecure pussies, that DT status is their only leverage over anyone in life. Imagine someone who can't score the ugliest chick, would try to compensate the failure by bullying people on the internet. Lol

[decodx]

Personally, I think he deserves much more than just a negative tag, but unfortunately the forum mods still tolerate it.

You are a veteran member of this forum. Trolling is not allowed according to the forum rules and you know this. So, if moderators give him a pass, why do you bother? It's clearly mentioned that negative feedback should be for trading-related matters. We know that you guys use it for other purposes as well. But, seeing negative feedback for every other reason making it worth less. It seems like everyone deserves negative feedback these days. DT members leaving negative feedback left and right, everywhere. It seems it's nothing.

I get what you're saying, but I gotta disagree.  The way I see it, theymos set up reputation system outside of forum moderation constraints, so things could be as democratic as possible.  Like in a regular democracy where anyone can vote, you know?  So if you disagree with someone's feedback, you can simply exclude them from your trust list.  And that's it. 

But when it comes to this jvanname guy and all that "trading-related matters", I do think he's too risky to deal with.  His behavior within the community has been consistently antagonistic and disrespectful, and I believe that it justifies a negative trust rating.  Would you personally engage in a trade with him, knowing his history of hostile interactions with other forum members?

[borovichok]

It's been more than 12hrs and JollyGood is yet to show 1 evidence of AI generated content in my post history and why he left me an inappropriate negative tag.

The last time I contacted JollyGood about the inappropriate neutral he left me for posting on his gambling thread, he asked me to give him 12 months (1 year) to find enough evidence to back up his feedback.

That his neutral tag is not affecting my signature participation that I shouldn't bother him about it. Now you left me a red based on someone's feelings. ( what someone suggested) I left the post up there for anyone to scan.

[digaran]

So Johnny bad boy is now leaving negative trust with no evidence and for moderation related stuff? Meaning he is now taking the matters in his own hands by ignoring moderator's decision and trying to act like one, imposing his made up rule.  In other words, JG thinks if a member is not dealt with by mods, he should deal with them and make them leave the forum since he thinks tagging everyone is equal for them to leave.

That scammer is beyond saving now.

[borovichok]

So Johnny bad boy is now leaving negative trust with no evidence and for moderation related stuff? Meaning he is now taking the matters in his own hands by ignoring moderator's decision and trying to act like one, imposing his made up rule.  In other words, JG thinks if a member is not dealt with by mods, he should deal with them and make them leave the forum since he thinks tagging everyone is equal for them to leave.

That scammer is beyond saving now.

Not sure if he has ever changed his feedbacks in the past as I've not been on reputation more often but I hope he does it because it doesn't speak good for both of us. I'm not a trade risk person and I haven't done anything illegal here. I left him a couple of messages so I assumed he's sleeping or busy at work at the moment.

[digaran]

So Johnny bad boy is now leaving negative trust with no evidence and for moderation related stuff? Meaning he is now taking the matters in his own hands by ignoring moderator's decision and trying to act like one, imposing his made up rule.  In other words, JG thinks if a member is not dealt with by mods, he should deal with them and make them leave the forum since he thinks tagging everyone is equal for them to leave.

That scammer is beyond saving now.

Not sure if he has ever changed his feedbacks in the past as I've not been on reputation more often but I hope he does it because it doesn't speak good for both of us. I'm not a trade risk person and I haven't done anything illegal here.

If he tagged anyone for plagiarism, shi*tposting etc, you better to open a thread on meta, since it's directly related to moderation policies.

[borovichok]

So Johnny bad boy is now leaving negative trust with no evidence and for moderation related stuff? Meaning he is now taking the matters in his own hands by ignoring moderator's decision and trying to act like one, imposing his made up rule.  In other words, JG thinks if a member is not dealt with by mods, he should deal with them and make them leave the forum since he thinks tagging everyone is equal for them to leave.

That scammer is beyond saving now.

Not sure if he has ever changed his feedbacks in the past as I've not been on reputation more often but I hope he does it because it doesn't speak good for both of us. I'm not a trade risk person and I haven't done anything illegal here.

If he tagged anyone for plagiarism, shi*tposting etc, you better to open a thread on meta, since it's directly related to moderation policies.

Theymos can't help anyone, the system is decentralized and if you want to get anything sorted out you have to use the p2p approach on the reputation board. This is exactly what I'm doing.

[nutildah]

So as not to clutter Loyce's thread, I'm transferring the conversation here:

I will consider changing it from "Looks to me like this account is using AI to write posts " to "This account posts are of low quality", how does that sound?

English might be poor but the posts ain't - I don't deserve any of the tag. You can put me on your watchlist and see how things turns out henceforth. The forum is currently offering a second chance, I believe everyone deserves it.

I disagree... Your posts are pretty bad. For example, I just flipped to a random page of your posts and found this one:

Opportunities are open daily in the market, it's our main objective to strive harder and earn quite significant profits and also sets our good strategies in trading to keep portraying news and ourselves in earning quite significant trophies and points in the market. We have intentions of raising our feets above our shoulders in the market, it's never an easy job to be on triggering trades. Fraudsters will not back down, they have this winning mentality of steady persuasion of their clients who happens to be the real trader's and investors.

Like... what??

I don't deserve any of the tag.

A neutral tag is warranted. However, a red tag is not. It is true that moderation issues shouldn't result in red tags, generally speaking. I would sooner just put people whose posts I don't want to read on ignore. As a result of this practice, my ignore list is so large it won't open for my profile.

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

So as not to clutter Loyce's thread,

I was reading LoyceV's reply on his self-moderated topic [1], [2]. The shit-posting crossed so much that Switzerland got angry LOL.

But good to read at the some point that we all agree, none of it deserves a red tag.