Nowhere in his feedback do I read Royse777 needs to share with me the information you shared with others. You have 1 red tag(2 from the same user, but still basically 1). With what happened you are lucky to only have his feedback against you. If it was just a regular user or newbie they would have been painted by 50 users, but most of the community gave you a pass.
If you don't like Jollygoods feedback then ~ and ignore him and move on or answer his inquiry and solve the problem. Quit being a drama queen!!! Yea i'm coming off a bit harsh but it is as simple as what I just said.
The fact she opened this thread for such a pointless exercise shows a problematic mindset on her part and drama queen is quite apt. I feel Royse777 did not deserve a pass and the fact she was tagged red by many members only to have those red changed to neutral has given her more desire to try and remove the remaining negative trusts.
It's so refreshing that the era of pitchforks and flaming torches whenever someone's hurtful feelings have been hurt by negative trust feedback has waned and become instead something of a yawn-fest instead of a cluster_Fk!
Royse777 definitely has anger management issues which should have been addressed some time ago.
What does not help her is the small group of 2-3 members that are trolling and being duplicitous as they are following the Goebbels doctrine of propaganda "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it".
They have started dropping a few sentences here and there about me and kept up their pretence in the hope of it being regurgitated enough that other members would mistakenly believe it. Thankfully they are on my ignore list and I can skip past their nonsensical drama until or unless I opt to read them when they are quoted by others in a post.
Heres a idea instead of making this thread to complain about your reputation what about making a thread asking for your victims to post so you can pay them back ? ? ?
You have a valid point but be careful because the backlash from the 2-3 trolls will probably start against you for saying something which is 100% true.
The last I read Royse777 was refusing to pay a victim because (I am not joking) she wanted to carry out KYC! It basically means those that Royse777 voluntarily offered to make whole again will not receive their funds.
Have you heard anything so absurd that a partner of a scam casino voluntarily stated they would make victims whole again but then decided to not make a victim whole because first they wanted KYC for a company/website/business that does not exist and second the victim was angry and upset at being scammed he made threats to kill the Bitlucy CEO.
Here is the nonsense Royse777 posted in another thread created with the specific intention of trying to have her negative trust changed:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.60590237Royse777's previous move worked out well for her, as yahoo62278 ended up changing his negative feedback to neutral. Now I doubt it will work for her with JollyGood.
You are correct. I will not change my negative trust.
Correct also, the previous move by Royse777 which lead to the yahoo62278 negative trust being altered to neutral was because of a culmination of issues and events. That
infamous now locked thread has all the drama contained within it and that along with several posts elsewhere helped her have another negative trust removed..
And about asking for explanations to the 50 who trust JollyGood, lol, maybe after this thread someone will change or come to give explanations, but if they trust him knowing that despite making a good contribution to the forum, he sometimes gives red trust as candies, I do not think most of them will change anything.
In mi case I looked at his trust list and trust feedbacks, and decided to neither include nor exclude him. And this thread is not going to make me change that decision either.
It really is scrapping the barrel when someone can fall that low that they would create more drama just because one member (me) has updated a feedback
Waiting to see what BitcoinGirl.Club has to say as well.
I am not bothered, it is just another attention seeker that I have on my ignore list.
I would rather ask the questions to the users who is trusting JollyGood.
In the same way I told JollyGood that he's exaggerating and advised to cool down, now I will do the same to you: please cool down, you're exaggerating and this will do more harm to you than good.
And I will not answer your question because:
1. I don't have to.
2. As I said, you're exaggerating.
3. If I'd answer, it would be an answer neither you, nor JollyGood would like.
All I can tell that my trust list will probably change (suffer a big clean up), an operation that seems to be badly needed now since I've became part of DT. But it won't happen overnight and it certainly won't happen under pressure.
Royse777 locked that thread before I could reply. There certainly was no exaggeration on my part. The fact this thread was created on a whim on the basis of an updated trust speaks volumes. I tried to keep out of this drama for as long as I could and am only making my first and last post here.
... you're exaggerating and this will do more harm to you than good.
If I were Royse777 I would act in a more humble way, because as yahoo62278 says, if that had happened to someone else, that person would have many red tags nowadays, not changed to neutral.
I agree. Instead of being humble that she did not receive double figure red tags, Royse777 (whilst being urged on by some of those on my ignore list and those with ulterior motives) somehow believes nobody has their own right to their own opinion about leaving tags when it comes to the Bitlucy scam.
Furthermore, what this drama has shown is if you leave no tag or neutral tag then it is fine but if you leave a red tag then trolls start created threads and use other threads to post lies in order to attack members that feel obliged to leave red tags because a scam took place.
I did not read a single post where Royse777 actually apologised wholeheartedly for the part she played in the Bitlucy scam. It seems like saying the word sorry was and is too much for her overinflated ego. If those 2-3 members (that I thankfully have ignored) stopped applying the Goebbels doctrine of propaganda to support Royse777 then she would have come back down to earth a long time ago.
Feeling entitled to have others give her explanations about who they include in their trust lists, when she has been involved in a scam that has made a lot of people lose money, doesn't look good and it makes me think that JollyGood is right when he says she has anger management issues.
She definitely does have anger problems, she regularly throws tantrums when she does not get her way. Unfortunately for Royse777 she is easily susceptible and as long as she has several members egging her on for their own motives to attack me or anybody else, she will continue to make outrageous demands.
Are you trusting him because he is busting scam?
Yes, he's done quite a lot in the past exposing a ring of scammers, that's why I added him to my trust list. In the event that things change drastically, I can revise my trust list accordingly.
logfiles you have been doing your part for the community by contributing in the scam accusations board and your efforts are appreciated by many of us
I am out of this drama thread.
(concerned Jolly fan, not a threat)
