Topic: JollyGood is trusted by - and question. - page 3. (Read 1765 times)

Can we not discuss off topic please?

Cheers,

Please be careful when you are choosing your words.


Quoting everything to keep record.

Do you think to adjust the green color to purple or brown. Sometimes I see it's hard to differentiate between blue and green. It's hard to see difference between two green lines (#50 and #52) and blue line in the middle (#51).

Brown and purple look better for differentiation.

This is so much clearer if you use the BBCode, I highlight backscratchers in green:
I tried 4 years ago, it didn't happen.

If it is not Poker Player being accused of contacting prospective clients telling them to not use his services and him allegedly losing business, it is now allegedly me causing lost business to him.

I guess the previous times set a precedent. Tags are placed but he wants them revised or removed and he gets them revised or removed therefore he thinks he can go after someone every few months trying to get a tag removed or revised. Narcissist is a word that immediately comes to mind.

First, if he chooses to revisit the Bitlucy scam then he should do it with complete honesty and not be selective in an attempt to show himself in a much better light considering what actually took place. As a gesture of goodwill, I will refrain from posting links to comments he made related to the Bitlucy scam.

Second, I am fairly sure he blamed someone else when he said (words to the effect of) previously he was down and out, depressed, suicidal even, before he miraculously recovered and came back to the forum and bombarded every ANN thread he could trying to manage their campaigns. He is now alleging I tried to destroy him. What a melodrama.

Third, the feedback I left was based purely on the fact he was self-proclaimed Co-Partner of Bitlucy as well as Marketing Director of Bitlucy and added to that he was also campaign manager too (and all the associated issues I will not post here) therefore to allude I left feedback for any reason other than his conduct within various roles at Bitlucy is absurd and is an attempt to misdirect from the facts.

Putting cap in hand trying to have members add or remove me from trust lists based on a campaign managers whim (while having the lure of signature campaign participation), is quite insulting. Can anybody here imagine any other campaign manager posting such complete and utter nonsense wrapped in a one-sided melodrama laden with deception all for the sake trying to use any means necessary to try to have a negative tag removed or to render it useless by way of trust exclusions? The two campaign managers that I hold in very high regard would never stoop that low.

Maybe sending a PM to discuss what he wanted to achieve would have been a better start than seeing him starting at gutter level with this thread. I could be wrong but it seems he opted for the latter because he is managing several campaigns and probably thinks he can exert influence over the majority of members who trust a member he does not like.

Regardless, if he had any decency he would have sent a PM to start a discussion in order to get an understanding of perspective from both sides but I guess arrogance and over-confidence was always part of his persona and it grew over time as his portfolio of campaigns increased. He contacted another member that left him negative feedback to discuss the issue but did not contact me, instead he jumped straight to creating this thread allowing a group of trolls working in tandem to post their propaganda whenever they get a chance.

I think he is more into this-
Otherwise, we wouldn't see Royse777 removing these 2 feedbacks. And we all should consider this quote. It's an internet forum after all.

There must be at least one topic on this. I can't remember who created this or am I in dejavu because I had a bad sleep last night lol. However, before discussing a possible implementation, it is worth to discuss the downside of the system.

This is interesting. I guess you mean being able to vote, for example like with flags, but with trust feedbacks. I think the idea is worth to open a thread in Meta to see what people think and try to convince theymos if the majority of people think such an implementation would be useful. However, I leave this to you who came up with the idea or to those of you who are very strong in the trust system.

So, regarding the feedback to be discussed in this thread and other feedback, a more democratic decision could be made.

Since I've been mentioned here but I don't want to be dragged into the drama, please let me explain my position quickly:

Yes, I have JollyGood on my trust list because in my opinion, it's overally very beneficial for Bitcointalk to have JollyGood on DT due to many valid feedbacks left by JollyGood.
In addition, JollyGood is actively giving our shameless and annoying shitposters a hard time. As someone who's very well aware of certain shitposters not trying to improve anything, it's very important to support community members like JollyGood for calling out shitposters and remind them to improve.

No, I don't support JollyGood's negative feedbacks on @Royse777 account and I'm hoping everyone will find a suitable solution. In general, I'm in favor of giving DT a possibility to remove certain feedbacks, for example if at least a net amount of 5 DT1 members would oppose a certain controversial trust feedback, these feedbacks would vanish in untrusted feedback, even if it's a feedback from a DT1 member (like our case here) if enough DT1 members agree on removing it vs. don't agree to remove it.
Such a feature would be able to solve issues like mentioned by OP.

Wow. I kinda feel special now... 

Just kidding, I just saw my name mentioned and had to give it a good read before I fully understood.

Yeah his ratings were a bit too much and too often and causing too much shit-stirring for me to deal with.

Anyhow, glad I understand why I was mentioned now, and no, I don't care at all if he distrusts me, i could give zero f's about this kind of stuff as of late, I'm just too busy.

Allow me LFAO

Let us work with some data to justify some findings 😉 [You are an A**hole to inspire me for spending the last an hour LOL].
You and everyone else, feel free to make your own findings whatever you like from it.

Data collection one: Judgement trusted by JollyGood VS Users trusted by JollyGood

Set A:
1. joeperry (Trust: +4 / =0 / -0) (327 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
2. Lauda (Trust: +34 / =18 / -5) (1939 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
3. allyouracid (Trust: +1 / =0 / -0) (287 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
4. stompix (Trust: neutral) (DT1! (7) 4847 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
5. Avirunes (Trust: +12 / =1 / -0) (466 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
6. DaveF (Trust: +31 / =2 / -0) (5181 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
7. examplens (Trust: +5 / =4 / -0) (DT1! (19) 1464 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
8. nutildah (Trust: +15 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (23) 5940 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
9. yahoo62278 (Trust: +38 / =2 / -0) (DT1! (25) 3197 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
10. LFC_Bitcoin (Trust: +30 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (18) 7528 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
11. Slow death (Trust: +3 / =2 / -0) (583 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
12. Javi_Anibarro (Trust: neutral) (32 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
13. Hhampuz (Trust: +122 / =3 / -0) (5044 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
14. Igebotz (Trust: +7 / =3 / -0) (DT1! (9) 1370 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
15. icopress (Trust: +34 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (21) 5577 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
16. logfiles (Trust: +5 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (12) 1454 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
17. tvplus006 (Trust: +14 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (14) 1613 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
18. witcher_sense (Trust: +15 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (16) 3967 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
19. The Cryptovator (Trust: +22 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (23) 2100 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
20. lovesmayfamilis (Trust: +27 / =2 / -0) (3906 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
21. TalkStar (Trust: +9 / =0 / -0) (734 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
22. Ratimov (Trust: +24 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (12) 11217 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
23. FatFork (Trust: +7 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (9) 2175 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)


Set B:
1. Vod (Trust: +26 / =2 / -0) (1938 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
2. DiamondCardz (Trust: +8 / =0 / -0) (101 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
3. peloso (Trust: +1 / =3 / -5) (187 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
4. Coinfan (Trust: +1 / =0 / -0) (117 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
5.
6.
7. digit (Trust: neutral) (10 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
8. Timelord2067 (Trust: +15 / =13 / -0) (DT1 (-9) 1135 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
9. jeremypwr (Trust: +29 / =2 / -0) (DT1! (10) 3320 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
10.
11.
12.
13. dopey (Trust: neutral) (14 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
14. Gianluca95 (Trust: +7 / =2 / -0) (196 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
15. SiNeReiNZzz (Trust: !!!: +4 / =2 / -11) (793 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
16.
17.
18.
19. thandie (Trust: neutral) (360 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
20.
21.
22. s0nix (Trust: neutral) (11 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
23. TwitchySeal (Trust: +6 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (4) 1447 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
24. vlom (Trust: neutral) (113 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
25. JaredKaragen (Trust: neutral) (165 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
26. Jemzx00 (Trust: +1 / =1 / -0) (45 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
27.
28. IconFirm (Trust: +0 / =1 / -2) (74 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
29. johnsmithx (Trust: +0 / =2 / -1) (7 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
30. blurryeyed (Trust: +0 / =5 / -4) (20 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
31. kurian (Trust: neutral) (2 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
32.
33. mosprognoz (Trust: +3 / =1 / -2) (177 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
34. KTChampions (Trust: +6 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (4) 1609 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
35.
36. invincible49 (Trust: +1 / =0 / -0) (255 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
37.
38.
39.
40. darcon_pr (Trust: neutral) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
41.
42.
43. cryptobenn (Trust: +0 / =0 / -1) (1 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
44.
45. 1miau (Trust: +8 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (27) 5985 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
46. Trade Runner (Trust: +0 / =1 / -2) (66 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
47. bitbottrader (Trust: neutral) (8 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
48. zasad@ (Trust: +3 / =2 / -0) (3903 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
49. protrader786 (Trust: +0 / =0 / -1) (61 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
50.
51. decodx (Trust: +2 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (5) 770 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
52. CryptoYar (Trust: neutral) (634 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
53. villain_Mr.Burns (Trust: +0 / =2 / -3) (25 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
54. PaperWallet (Trust: +0 / =1 / -2) (21 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
55. Poker Player (Trust: +1 / =0 / -1) (1777 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
56. wagmi (Trust: neutral) (75 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
57. light_warrior (Trust: neutral) (741 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

Ignore data Ratimov, Javi_Anibarro. Hhampuz from Set A. Fill the blank space of Set B. You will have a perfect match.


Data collection two: Judgement Distrusts by JollyGood VS Users Distrusts by JollyGood
Set C:
Fuc*k you all, good luck copy pasting all 2715 members LOL. Go to this page and use your keyboard. Press Ctrl+F and paste a user from Set D. 2 of 2 match means the user exists in Set C.

Set D:
1. HostFat (Trust: neutral) (DT1 (-2) 195 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
2. TECSHARE (Trust: +41 / =10 / -1) (957 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
3. Gyrsur (Trust: +1 / =3 / -0) (513 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
4. babo (Trust: +8 / =0 / -0) (2753 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
5. figmentofmyass (Trust: +0 / =0 / -12) (983 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
6. robelneo (Trust: +4 / =1 / -0) (135 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
7. funchiestz (Trust: # +0 / =0 / -9) (92 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
8. andulolika (Trust: # +3 / =2 / -8) (47 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
9. rby (Trust: +0 / =4 / -1) (360 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
10. teeGUMES (Trust: +8 / =2 / -0) (952 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
11. owlcatz (Trust: +43 / =0 / -0) (855 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
12. fuguebtc (Trust: +0 / =0 / -1) (16 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
13. Vadi2323 (Trust: +1 / =2 / -0) (231 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
14. BenCodie (Trust: +3 / =1 / -0) (357 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
15. mhanbostanci (Trust: +0 / =0 / -2) (511 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
16. Kalemder (Trust: +0 / =0 / -1) (1219 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
17. BitcoinGirl.Club (Trust: +1 / =3 / -0) (DT1! (4) 1507 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
18. ekiller (Trust: +2 / =0 / -0) (DT1 (-5) 612 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
19. SpectroCoin_support (Trust: # +0 / =0 / -4) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
20. raiblock Banned! (Trust: +0 / =0 / -3) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
21. TeMHuK Banned! (Trust: +0 / =0 / -1) (9 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
22. zloy_hulk (Trust: neutral) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
23. coin-investor (Trust: neutral) (56 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
24. xtraelv (Trust: +5 / =0 / -0) (1792 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
25. crwth (Trust: +4 / =3 / -0) (DT1! (2) 950 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
26. HolyTransaction (Trust: !!!: +0 / =0 / -3) (1 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
27. Vispilio (Trust: +1 / =3 / -2) (1226 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
28. pdogbc (Trust: +0 / =0 / -3) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
29. hacker1001101001 (Trust: # +1 / =2 / -3) (314 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
30. Flypme (Trust: !!!: +0 / =0 / -1) (2 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
31. A_Creature (Trust: +0 / =0 / -1) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
32. Steamtyme (Trust: +6 / =1 / -0) (1928 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
33. translocated (Trust: +0 / =0 / -1) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
34. dragonvslinux (Trust: +2 / =1 / -0) (DT1 (-1) 2062 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
35. Apaxy (Trust: +0 / =0 / -2) (1 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
36. jopen (Trust: neutral) (439 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
37. vycl87 (Trust: +0 / =1 / -2) (620 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
38. huseyin15 (Trust: neutral) (25 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
39. yurez83 (Trust: +0 / =0 / -2) (18 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
40. Nihrupka (Trust: neutral) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
41. miyav (Trust: neutral) (88 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
42. DireWolfM14 (Trust: +20 / =1 / -0) (4088 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
43. HedgeFx (Trust: neutral) (392 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
44. Bitcoin SV (Trust: # +0 / =2 / -23) (233 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
45. John Abraham (Trust: +0 / =3 / -3) (546 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
46. efialtis (Trust: +25 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (4) 1323 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
47. DragonDance (Trust: +0 / =1 / -3) (116 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
48. Goodcat49 Banned! (Trust: +0 / =0 / -2) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
49. Ajay1910 (Trust: neutral) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
50. truth or dare (Trust: +0 / =4 / -3) (15 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
51. ajanwalker (Trust: neutral) (361 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
52. saxydev (Trust: !!!: +0 / =4 / -6) (52 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

Ignore data owlcatz, ajanwalker from Set D. Fill the blank space of Set C. You will have another perfect match.

Finding one: Exception is not example. owlcatz, ajanwalker both are the luckiest members who were not distrusted by JollyGood, even though they distrusted him. owlcatz is well known to us but this ajanwalker is lucky until now LOL

Finding two: Sad to see Ratimov, Javi_Anibarro. Hhampuz still haven't trusted JollyGood. Come on brothers! Add him, you already received the reward even before asking for it. Who is Javi_Anibarro?

Source [in case anyone report it for plagiarism 😂 ]: https://loyce.club/trust/2023-09-02_Sat_05.07h/1016855.html

Include JollyGood, sooner or later you will be in his trust list, reward is guaranteed, trust the data.

Dare to exclude him? You will be in his distrust list.
What the fu*k am I shitting? You are already distrusted LOL

Thank your for having me 😉

Maybe it's not such a bad thing you didn't manage whirlwind campaign because jg would probably gave you another negative feedback, and I am sure he won't do that for any other manager for obvious reasons

Just move on, ignore him, and know that you can't get all campaigns in forum, give some space to icopress and others  

No I don't, because he is not using trust system correctly, but I don't really care about broken DT anymore.

This thread sucks.  

Based on the title I thought you were going to make a generic argument about JollyGood's abuse of the trust system.  That would have been a good thread, and you might have actually gotten some of the DT1 members who have JG included to reconsider.  For example, when I recently trolled a troll, some DT members were quick to point out how much they dislike speculative feedbacks, yet ironically they keep JG included despite the fact that his reviews are full of speculations and worse, retaliations.

I don't really care to call anyone out specifically, because when I go through the list of those who trust JG I see a lot of names that I revere, trust, and respect.  Some of them run businesses on the forum, and to JG's credit he does have a nose for sniffing out shitbirds.  That can be helpful to those who rely on the community's feedback when selecting members to hire for a sig-campaign, or they're looking for someone with whom to conduct a trade.  So, I don't begrudge anyone who's got him included, I've done something similar myself by having Timelord2067 included in the past.

Unless JG suffers a short-circuit like the one Timelord2067 recently had, his chances of getting kicked off DT are slim to none.  If getting JG kicked off DT was the goal you meant to achieve by creating this thread, you went about it all wrong.  Instead of pissing, whining, and moaning about the review JG left on your trust wall, make the argument why you believe JG is bad for the trust system as a whole.  A thread like that wouldn't suck.

It appears the negative feedback has now been removed.

I hope you remembered all the sensible things that I published earlier, so you did it (and not because one of the recognized users mentioned it).

Marsel

I just noticed that you have tons of positive ratings after the JG red one, and if that is all organic and unsolicited then you're doing well in rebuilding your reputation. Doesn't seem like you should be too worried about the JG rating. OTOH stirring this pile of poo again and again can only make it worse.

Think about it this way: if someone is really deciding to not hire you entirely because of one red trust rating despite the number of more recent positive ratings, do you really want that business? Another way to look at it is this: do you want to be transparent to your potential customers, or do you expect them to not notice the Bitlucy fiasco if there are no DT red trust ratings about it?

I think all you need to do when someone asks about that JG rating is to give them a 1-2 sentence summary of your side of the story and direct them to one of the threads on that subject for more info. If you feel confident that your behavior in that debacle and afterwards is not worthy of red trust then your potential customers should be able to see that as well.

I never wanted (thought) it to look like you said above and I am not okay to see someone to send unsolicited PMs to my existing clients or potential client telling : "Hey this guy is a fraud, don't risk your business with him". Not when I am handling huge amount of cash (coin) per month, incoming in escrow wallet and outgoing for payments. No one can prove any mismanagement of the funds in my business. You, of course missed the timeline.

That being said, if that negative feedback looks like a feedback for not liking a message from the messenger then I remove it. I really have very little time to go deep into a discussion and prove a point to keep it.

All I can mainly say is good luck trying to get JG excluded from DT as he is supported by many DT1 members and has been for over a year now, since he left you that feedback.



In the meantime the support for his feedback hasn't changed much. It seems pretty clear by now that those who support his feedback aren't particularly concerned about the feedback he left you, or at least where he lost some supporters he gained others. The point is by now another thread about it isn't going to change anything so you'll just have to deal with the fact you may lose some customers because of it.

I'm also not a fan of the feedback, however unless something changes, like more negative feedback towards you or questionable feedback to others from JG, then there's no point in bringing this back up.

Unusual but interesting and a very good question. I don't think (at least, I can not remember asking anyone to write a feedback on the feedback page) I would do such things and ask someone for a positive feedback. Ethically, I think it's not okay to ask for a feedback from others unless it comes organically from them.

Since you asked this question, I may share a bit about this unspoken feeling that I always had in me. When I had my lending business I had many regular borrowers who used to take loan and after few successful payments they asked me to leave positive feedback for them. I always ignored such request, it was like - I did not see what they wrote except in one or two cases, some even went ahead upfront to leave me positive feedback with the hope that they will get a return from it. You can see a few on my trust page.

There were two reasons for me leaving lending business:
- I was in huge loss
- It seemed (never wanted to speak openly) like many people expect they deserve a feedback from the lender especially if the lender is in DT.
At some point I was annoyed having all those requests and ignoring many.

Anyway, after managing so many campaigns I have earned this: +19
May be it that indicates something or may be it's nothing, not sure.

My counter question, mind sharing why would you ask such unusual interesting question?

He also left many tags for people that directly came out of no fact, no logic but purely out of retaliation. May be you did not check his sent feedback section. There is this problem - when you want to check his trust page from Loyce.club or want to check his feedback page, you will see there are so many numbers in the list and since you have this great beautiful memory about him that he is a great scam buster (he used to be long ago), after seeing a first few you feel better to close the page. Have you even ever considered how he insults people on different threads, he does it all the time to the people who do not accept his arguments.

IMO, part of the issue is that JollyGood does have a lot of it right. He also has a bunch wrong, once again IMO.

So, do you not support (trust) him and have his good feedback count less, or do you not have him on your trust list and possibly have someone get away with something that they might not have if JG had not been DT1 / 2.

Obviously I trust you I am in a campaign you manage and are in my trust list.

On that same note JollyGood is in my trust list because he has left some well deserved tags on people over the years that others have not, And, I fully admit I am also part of the problem because I should be tagging people but keep putting it off if I was more active, I think that taking out 'marginal' people would probably come easier to me since I would have already tagged them.

Have to think about the best way to handle it.

This forum needs a copy & edit feedback from another user function....

-Dave

We all want the best for the forum, but we often make decisions based on emotions rather than facts, and most DT find it difficult to fix their mistakes because they don't want to look like idiots, but trust me when I say there is no shame in doing what is right. When the Bitlucy scandal broke, most of us were swept up in the OP story, and even a flag was created against Royse, but when the truth came out, we realised that the customers were not the only victims of the scam; Royse too was a victim.


I agree with NotATether that the second feedback did not justify what really happened, Royse was not in charge of the hot wallet vault and was not given any backend access to the site, from what was reviewed he was only offered co-partner to take care of promotion and ANN management, Bitlucy were so clean that no one could have predicted that they would scam their customers in the future. He received the same punishment as other customers who deposited. It was never his responsibility to refund victims; yet, he tried his utmost to reimburse campaign victims because he personally hired them.

When Luna's investors were burned, none of the Luna influencers, marketers, or promoters were held liable for refunding the victims. Marketers' rights are restricted. Royse has paid for his recklessness and has managed over ten successfully projects afterwards.  Nail him to the cross for one fault out of 100 is just too harsh.

I truly want both of you to finish this drama without causing any further dramas. If I were JG, I would change it to Neutral and rewrite my sentence. The same to efialtis.

JG is someone I respect and with whom I have shared some of my personal experiences, but if he makes a bad decision, I tell him to his face. Only someone who cares will tell you that you have faeces on your teeth. Haters will laugh and turn away.

Just curious, have you ever asked other users to post positive feedback for you? Like your campaign participants perhaps?

I'm not exactly sure about the timeline, but at some point you were part of many allegations and you did collect negative feedback for that. I get that you don't like airfinex sending a PM to your client, but it looks like the message itself was correct.
I don't think this justifies a "trading with the user is high-risk"-warning. See this:
If anything, warning someone against a potential problem could even be considered doing the right thing.

About the wording of your feedback: maybe he did it to cause you financial damage. Or maybe he did it to save your client from that damage. Either way, it looks like you're blaming the messenger for a message you didn't like.