Topic: Incorrect use of red feedback. (Read 987 times)

Topic closed

You guys already made him famous. It seems like it is a trend to create a thread in the reputation board every few weeks. Which leads to spreading his name more and more, and I believe people check his profile. Why don't you think that everyone might not feel as you think? Everyone has a different point of view. Since Royse has explained his every case, His potential clients may get convinced whenever they read it. Creating more threads means advertising more about Royse.

Everyone is free to Include anyone on his trust list and the opposite. So, whoever thinks they don't trust Royse anymore has already excluded him from their trust list. If you believe his feedback is incorrect, you should ~ him. That's all you have to do. It seems the drama is endless. We may see more threads in the future.

How will it looks if those that abuse the use of flags on others account be given same tags as well to taste the sweetness of it, not until a fact is established on a member to be a scammer or to have participated on an inappropriate manners on the forum and well referenced, then i see no reason to be tagging others when you can report a user or ignore him, this even prevent you from seing any further shit about such person once you press the ignore button on them.

I avoided participating in the thread but decided to post as my name was mentioned twice falsely accusing me of misdemeanours. Since the accusations against me are ludicrous I will not even address them but I will make some short comments and I would confidently state the vast majority of consensus would agree:

Based on evidence available, I do not believe aifinex, naim027 and Poker Player are alt-accounts. Based on evidence available, I do not believe Poker Player contacted any prospective clients to warn them away from any campaign manager.

Posting on-topic and discussing as per the OP title regarding the use or misuse of negative trust by another member is probably the best thing going forward or for the OP to consider locking the thread if it continues to go off-topic as it serves no purpose unless it stays on-topic.



 

I don't see any injustice in this case, there is a reason and history why he left that negative feedback.
Man I have to say Royse777 is for sure getting more and more popular thanks to OP and Poker guy  
This guys made Royse one of the managers with most signature campaigns in forum, so he must be doing something good or this ''advertisement'' is not working  as they intended.
I hope you guys finally give it a rest, if you can't be friendly in forum than just ignore each other.

There's one thing that need to be clarified about giving a feedback on user, we shouldn't take their judge into our hands by leaving them a negative feedback in place of neutral tags, because the comments or reference go along way in explaining the purpose for doing such, if you don't like a user doesn't mean you should attack him by any chance leaving a negative feedback and keep telling the world you left a neutral feedback.

That's what it seems to me. I'm going to try not to come here for a week or so, although this section is a bit addictive because it's like the bitcointalk gossip.

To the OP I would say that no matter how much he writes a detailed thread with many reasons explaining why Royse777 shouldn't be in DT, there are people who will neither read it nor change their trust list even if they read the thread.


Surprisingly to me, even I myself have played devil's advocate, saying that his feedback, although ideally it should be neutral, it is not so bad that it should involve distrust by DT members.

A- The client doesn't have to stop working with him to make the feedback relevant.

B- So what?  You have the right. 

I don't know the backstory here or really care.  And I think you guys should go look at OgNasty/Vod history and think if you want to end up like them.  It only takes one of you to take the high road and drop this nonsense. I promise you this feud will not result in a "winner", just a lot of wasted time.

But yeah, I can't help myself from commenting on the "sound facts and arguments" followed by something that's not.

Yes, if you look at the analysis I made above trying to do it from an objective point of view, I come to the same conclusion.



Apart from that, you only have to look at the command of languages that one and the other have. When have you ever seen me write in Russian? Or in French? OP is indeed an alt account of someone but at a glance we can see that we have nothing to do with each other.

Besides, that's what I said before. When I was calling Royse777 crybaby and all, if I had contacted his clients I would have told him too. I mean I called him everything, I blew the whistle on Casino Critique, I wrote negative feedback on his profile, I wrote a thread explaining why I thought he was a dishonest person, and I was going to hide for having contacted one of his clients? Come on, don't make me laugh.

Naim027 was never banned after he was exposed, wasn't he?
I know it is a little bit off-topic to this thread but, even though I personally do not think Poker Player is Naim027, I find it is reasonable enough to assume he might be around here, it seems he does not have much of a  problem using alternative accounts.

---

Also, I am yet to do my own search on that service which some are claiming to be a proxy of the infamous 1xbit. Is there any thread around here where I can find a summary of the alleged proofs and history? I would like to take a look at it. 

Unlikely.

@LoyceV, sorry for back to back mentions. Are you alt of Royse777 by any chance?

I got this far in the thread, and you may have cooled down some, but if you're still aggravated enough to report those posts (even though you're not wrong in doing so, that kind of off-topic stuff is par for the course in Meta/Reputation threads), take a deep breath and slowly exhale.

Looking at the feedback Loyse777 left, I don't think it's absolutely inappropriate--but I do think it ought to be neutral and not negative, especially if he's on DT.  But if he truly doesn't trust the members he left that trust for and would have left it anyway, i.e., in a non-retaliatory manner, I might be on the fence about it.  DT members have left negs for way less than what happened in this case, with no ensuing drama.  However I don't think that's what's happening here; I do think Royse777's feedback is getting some get-back if you know what I mean.

Oh the drama.  Better phone my mamma!

It never ends with Loyse777, does it?  What happened?  It's like he went from being a respected member one minute, and then tossed into a leper's colony at mach 5 the next.  Don't answer that.  I know the story.

Edit:

OK, I now got this far in the thread and I have to say that I'm also not buying either of those theories, especially not the Naim027 claim.  He was a very poor writer if I remember correctly, and you are far from that.  That could be faked of course, but I still don't believe you're his or airfinex's alt.

Happy to agree to disagreement, given you recognise those feedbacks are certainly in the "gray area" as you put it.

Ultimately it's up to DT to decide whether the feedback should remain trusted or not and for now I'm abstaining from that decision and only here to raise my concerns. Despite not trusting your judgement I wouldn't be in a hurry to add you to my exclusion list anyway. That's reserved for repeatedly leaving incorrect feedback, as opposed to a couple of "dodgy" feedbacks that remain questionable. If you continued leaving retaliatory feedback to those who criticism you I probably would though and doubt I'd be the only one, as that would show more of a pattern of inaccurate feedback, not that this would bother you I think.


Fair enough. Point well made I guess.


Without evidence, it's completely pointless assuming PP and OP are the same person. OP created account in 2018, PP in 2020. Quick math = OP is not an alt of PP. The thread is otherwise about incorrect use of feedback, which anyone is able to raise as a concern. Not necessarily the one receiving it. In fact it's quite common that a different member would create a thread about such an issue...


Maybe there is more to the Bitlucy story than I cared to follow. I'm only looking at the current situation in front of me, rather than what happened in the past (even if probably quite relevant).


Exactly. Just be grateful with what you have. Maybe it could be more, but it certainly could be a lot less. Maybe try not to let the haters get to you so much in future?

Sorry, just to add some more context.


So far two that you can quotation. To me they are in the gray area and I chose to take the side I like. You or anyone else don't need to agree with me. Let's settle it as agree in disagreement. You always have the option to do the following in your trust page.

In fact, there is a public thread where I requested everyone to do the same. I also blacklisted myself by requesting theymos from DT1 network, removed myself as one of the merit source. All because to keep myself out of all potential drama that can cause.



Concerning retaliation?
If I was responding out of retaliation then JollyGood and efialts would had one to each already.

Poker Player and this OP account which I doubt it's a different person behind the account though (the thread exclusively create to talk about the feedback left on Poker Player's feedback page and take the blame to OP account so that PP can wash his dirty hand). I have no doubt in mind that he/his alt did not conduct my clients to cause me financial damage. The motive was not to help the clients but to change their mind (it's important to understand the motive hence bold font), which in two occasions it was successful.

There are no  X, Y or Z. It's only PP and JG LOL (with their possible alts to hide their face). Is it too hard to understand considering series of events that happened after Bitlucy fiasco?

Conclusion:
I don't live a life with what I lost. I live my life with the positive achievements I have. I rose from ashes many times.

In fact, look at the BRIGHT SIDE.
If Bitlucy did not happen to me, if I was not thrown away to the corner by some of these haters, if I was not tortured so much mentally that I had to see a specialist, I had to leave the place for long time where I love spending all my day then I would not be able to raise again. So let them do their things and I am happy with what I have.

There is a saying, action speaks louder than words.

Look, I'm going to ask you a rhetorical question, which I don't expect you to answer if you don't want to, first because it's rhetorical and second because you've said you're not going to answer anymore in the thread but I hope it makes anyone reading this think.

Do you really think that if I had contacted a client of yours, I would have had any problem in saying it at all? Do you think I had any need to create alts?

Why would I hide? I called you a crybaby and everything. No, I would have had no problem saying so, then or now.

I'm not here to approve of the actions by Poker Player, airfinex or others, especially if they are contacting potential clients of yours. In fact I think it's bang out of order. The main reason being that your trust feedback already highlights the Bitlucy fiasco (red tags or not), so there is no need to send a PM. But to be leaving retaliatory feedback? I think it reflects badly on you because it doesn't prove they are scammer. At worst they are interfering with you conducting your business here, but there's no case of scamming. Scamming you out of prospective business you say? I don't buy it... for the following reason.

Potential clients could have easily found these concerns themselves from your trust page and I'd hope/imagine they would check these things. So I don't think it's fair/accurate to be exclusively blaming user X, Y or Z for loss of income, because you could be losing it anyway. Especially from clients that don't realise you'd be getting enough applicants for your campaigns anyway, that sounded like the main issue.

I do sympathise with the issues you are facing, but just because the situation is difficult for you, I don't think you should be leaving negative feedback as you have done so. I respect the work you do on the forum a lot, as one of the top bounty managers, but the way you deal with situations and the feedback you leave certain users leaves a lot to be desired. I also know I'm not the only one who thinks this, I'm just saying it out loud.

I find it BS to be honest. I have never contacted anyone to tell them not to work with you.

Me and airfinex being alts is another BS that is obvious to anyone looking at the two profiles. I was also accused at the time that Naim027 and I were alts, so I'm not even going to stop to take it apart.

You can believe it or not, but I neither contacted anyone via Telegram at the time nor have I contacted them now to tell them to hire you or not. The OP did, and I guess other people did too, but not me.

The latest:






Their spell did not work though.

Ah yeah, some will say screenshots can be manipulated. So this time it's from desktop application. Furthermore, give me a good reason why I would do screenshot manipulation, at least today where I am now, I think doing such things are just a very costly waste of time for me.


2nd latest:





I was their first choice, we were even close to close the deal and then this. I don't know if it was the same PM or DM information send to harm my business by any of these like OP, Poker Player or anyone else or the client found it himself. It costs me over $6k weekly budget campaign.
Even though we are not working in the main campaign (in fact I dropped a side offer which I think not worth it for them to spend money) but we are working together in some other sectors.



A confirmation, call it 2nd blow
This topic from OP of course.
Their spell did not work here too.

First blow:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.61584717
Never talked about the project budget so I have no idea how much I lost.

I have no idea if there are any other case but so far 4 cases in front of me. Out of 4, two was successful and two was failed. The success rate is 50%, it's not a small number.

@dragonvslinux, you say this
Look everything from my side of eyes.

You and others seen everything from the Bitlucy fiasco and everything that happened with few members afterwords. You can easily figure out who could be the potential low life members can do such things. You will find not more than 2 if you narrow down the search, two key person and they could have many alts to hide their real account face. One is Poker Player without any doubt and have fun with finding other one.

Cheers,

My last response to this topic. Enjoy.