Topic: JollyGood is trusted by - and question. - page 4. (Read 1698 times)

It was lucky indeed for Royse to not manage that campaign, I'm not sure if Royse would have asked the WW to escrow 40k worth of DAI. (Correct me if I'm wrong.)


I'm glad it is sorted out between you two.

This is a credit to you.



I too have long since given you the benefit of the doubt and I'm glad you did. Just to reiterate that I never contacted any of your clients, and, in fact, I thought you had made it up, somehow manipulating the screenshot (I was not the only one who thought so), but seeing according to joker_josue's analysis showing that the screenshot had not been manipulated, I ended up believing that, indeed, a client told you that I had contacted him, when I did not contact anyone.

If it happens to you again, please send me a PM and let's somehow confront whoever told you.

Lastly I wanted to give you some friendly advice. I would spend my energies on building the new and not fighting the past. Continue managing campaigns as well as you do, make your business instead of a serveral hundred thousand a year business, a $1M one. Most likely scenario is that you will continue to accumulate positive feedback and if you get to a point where you have 50 or 100 positive feedbacks, the fact that you have two negative ones from a long time ago will be completely irrelevant.

And since you talked about Best_Change, I think it's a good example, because as of today the only negative feedback and from someone who is no longer on the forum is buried under 25 positives and it doesn't matter.

Visible image



Poker player got the benefit because there was a chance that he did not do it but you can not prove that you did not do it. After going this far, how would you expect I give you a benefit?

The feedback is
To be honest, I provided some hidden service and some consultancy for them but they never wanted me to bring it public because they were afraid that it could give their brand some negative influence (fact is, we can not blame the clients for it, they really do not have any clue what goes behind a negative feedback. A trusted feedback, that's all they see. Of course a little research could prove their idea wrong. I have many campaigns who are TOP brands and thriving in the industry like Sinbad, Yo!Mix, MegaPari etc and they could see these brands are in right direction).

It's very unfortunate that whirlwind.money pulled the scam, I don't think Hhampuz is to be blamed or any of us who helped, deserves a negative promotion. We are just managers, not some people who came from the future. We know nothing more, we know as much as you know from public domain.

It will be a good start if he also removes the feedback he left me, in the form of a personal vendetta.

I can't prove I didn't do it. See my point? You can't disprove a negative.

That was long overdue, but it's a good start. Now let it go.

This was all true. I think I've said it before: You fucked up! But, I also hope you've learned from it: be less trusting and more careful. And there's this:
@JollyGood: I think you should consider theymos' quote too.

I mean, with the way Whirlwind's reputation imploded at the end, it was good that Royse ultimately did not manage that campaign (and have a new scam accusation to contend with).

Didn't Royse777 meant that he would have gotten Whirlwind campaign if not for the negative tag? That means the company told him he is not going to give him the work because of the feedback. I may want to employ a campaign manager, if I see a campaign manager that is having no negative feedback and bad neutral feedback, I will prefer the person to someone that has one negative feedback.

That is not going to be possible. What I see is that Royse777 should settle this amicably with Jollygood and efialtis.

With what I see now, Royse777 is a good campaign manager. This should be settled and the negative tag should be changed to a good one or be erased, but this can not be done with them fighting each other. With what I think, Royse777 does not deserve that red trust anymore.

As campaign manager, you have already paid off all the signature campaign participants (from your pocket) IIRC.

It says you are a co-partner though? If you did not have access to the vault or wallet storing the players' funds, and it was not your responsibility to manage that as part of the co-operation (and you also do not have a percentage stake in bitlucy or derive any profit from it outside of the signature campaign), then you legally have no obligations to reimburse them yourself, as that should've been the bitlucy guy's job but as everyone has seen already, he was a scammer.

But because of this negative feedback it may have lowered his chances of getting more projects. Just like if someone has a negative trust rating from DT when applying for a signature campaign, they will end up not getting accepted.

In my opinion this is likely why Royse brought up this topic for possibly to find a way to settled the situation like from negative rating to make it neutral. If I remember correctly Royse also gave JG a negative rating and as of now it has been removed.

Fact is I am still surviving because of those feedback I earned though my contribution to the forum, these are approval from people for the years of contribution I have in the community. I believe feedback system should be organic.

But these negative feedback from JollyGood are not organic. It's about his personal dis-likeness and he expressed by using these feedback. Something that came out from his personal dis-likeness is hurting my business which I am conducting with the HIGHEST standard (no one can question the quality of conducting the campaigns I have). The monthly transaction volume of my business is minimum $25K, yearly minimum $300K but still I get reasons like "We are not going with someone who have negative reputation". It's not fault of these new people, the potential clients who are overlooking others feedback. They see all but when they see the negative one, obviously it creates a doubt in their mind, that doubt leads a change of mind. I am not saying I will have every projects that launch in the community, the other managers are as good as me if not better than me but when a project miss out of hand just because of the reason of having negative feedback, it's hard to take.

Feedback system especially the negative feedback is not to use against someone who you don't like. You can give a positive feedback to anyone you like, it does not harm but a negative feedback can have many negative consequences and one should not just give it when he does not go alone with others.

There are no question JollyGood is not comfortable with me. It's not complex to understand why he left these negative feedback. It's not just me, you will discover majority of his negative feedback are towards the people he does not go comfortable. Is this a good reason to have him in your trust list?

Conflict with with The Cryptovator, is it about TMAN leaving negative feedback to Best_change because they did not have an escrow? Do you see defending them was a wrong reason at that time?

Look where is Best_change now. They needed this defense from someone (I am glad I was there for them) or they were not here now. If I was joining TMAN and how JollyGood reacts, then Best_change would be destroyed so far and you were not wearing their signature today.

It's easy to support a positive reason but before supporting a negative reason, one really needs to consider so many unthinkable consequences especially when it is about a business. A business is not just a living tool of one person, many people depends on it. If Best_Change was ruined at that time, then thousands of people currently who are depending on them now would have different story.

You have a lot of positive references to your good work in your reviews. Do you consider those people less important than another forum member who left you a negative review? We here on the forum always encourage everyone to do an independent investigation and eventually draw their own conclusions for a solution. Why are your advertisers too lazy to figure it out and take sides?
You asked why JollyGood is on my trust list (I received a telegram notification, and therefore I answered).
Both of you were on my list: JollyGood and YOU, Royse777. But you subsequently asked very much to remove yourself from this list, which I did, but not at the first request. I want to say that I respect both of you, and I respect your opinion and your firm position. Therefore, I will not change anything since you really have an explosive nature; this has been working since the conflict with The Cryptovator, and this may be your main problem with other users who have given you red tags.

After all considering, I gave you a benefit of doubt, it was a huge one and still telling myself it needed a warning but it's okay. I still have enough evidence and reasons to believe that it is you who sent PMs to my clients and eared them negative things not to hire my service. But anyway, I ate it all. Hope next time I will not see and experience any such thing anymore.

I just had a chat with efialtis. It seems he believe at that time he was right and I was wrong, he believes I was supposed to take my decisions based on his warning. It seems he does not understand a situation may take longer time for someone-else to evaluate before making a conclusion.

According to his feedback

I should, If I remember I was bad also towards you too. Sorry for that. Someone needs to be on my shoes before to understand what I was going through at that time.

But anyway, a negative feedback is not a prescription for anger management or I am wrong?

Let's start with the feedback left on you by JG. Reading his feedback the top part is true. Feedback updated: This user has serious anger management issues and avoids answering questions about their full involvement in the Royse777/Bitlucy scam. You let your emotions control you when you were replying in that thread. Might have needed to take some time before responding is all i'm saying.


JG is not the only neg you have either. efialtis has also neg tagged you over the same issue. Just in case you missed that.

I really don't think the neg trust is hurting you all that much. You've picked up quite a few campaigns over the last 1-2 years. I see you self promoting in darn near every new opportunity that pops up. You're not going to get them all, I can tell you that from past experience. You can be the most popular person on this forum and still not get them all.

Jollygood is not going to have 50+ people remove him from their lists. He might be open to revising his feedback on you, but I doubt he ever removes it completely. Is it really worth opening the drama back up?

Pointless drama. I doubt that not even 20% of those who have JG on their trust list are going to change it for this thread. JG has already been talked about a lot in the forum and some people have already excluded him. This thread does not add much more.


Since this thread is not about you and me, I'm not going to respond to what we've already talked about many times.

The feedback left for you is because there are some good reasons for me to believe that you conducted my clients personally and suggested not to hire my service because I have negative feedback. Which was totally immoral and unexpected. You were not able to prove it that you did not do that. All evidences, suggestions lead it to you only.

To be honest personally I suspect you and JollyGood (only you two) are two direct threat for my business, you both intentionally harm it and feel good when you are successful. Difference is JollyGood have this bad ass attitude to do it publicly by manipulating the DT system with his scam busting image and you are coward enough to do it via private communication.

As for not accepting you in signature campaign. Tell me a manager's name who did not accept you for this feedback. I will personally talk to them about it.

Nice thread. Looks like there's an interesting new drama, especially about @jollygood, I'm really excited today

---

Maybe I need to prepare a coffee for @BenCodie, @BitcoinGirl.Club

I don't know why you don't apply yourself. You have a garbage feedback in my profile that you yourself have recognized that it is in a grey area, that is to say, that you are veiledly recognizing that it is garbage. It prevents me from joining some signature campaigns.

Lead by example.

You only see the speck in someone else's eye.

I trust JG among other reasons because he made a perfect reading of the garbage feedback you left me.

So I was thinking just to ignore the feedback left by JollyGood, it's been long days and I thought it isn't gonna matter. I have enough in my portfolio to continue my business without the effect of the feedback. But it turns out I still get refused by clients because of the feedback he left on my trust page.


These clients on the forum are new, they have no idea who left negative feedback for what reason, their only justification is the negative feedback is there and it's visible, they believe a negative feedback is bad for their business (it make sense when there are others who does not have it, it's the first thing that they see before everything else when they do their home work).

There should be no argument that the feedback were left because JollyGood was felt insulted of the response I had when he was trying to show his usual bossiness to me that he shows to other members all the time to destroy their reputation (people who does not go along with him). JollyGood failed to destroy me entirely though but his action is effecting me until this date.

Do you guys (who have him in your trust list) really think a controversial user like JollyGood should be in the DT area?^(Q2)
I will be grateful to hear some justified response from you for the both questions left for you.

Cheers,


JollyGood's judgement is Trusted by:
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. joeperry (Trust: +4 / =0 / -0) (327 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
6. Lauda (Trust: +34 / =18 / -5) (1939 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
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. allyouracid (Trust: +1 / =0 / -0) (287 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
11. stompix (Trust: neutral) (DT1! (7) 4847 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
12. Avirunes (Trust: +12 / =1 / -0) (466 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
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. DaveF (Trust: +31 / =2 / -0) (5181 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
17. examplens (Trust: +5 / =4 / -0) (DT1! (19) 1464 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
18. nutildah (Trust: +15 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (23) 5940 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
19. thandie (Trust: neutral) (360 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
20. yahoo62278 (Trust: +38 / =2 / -0) (DT1! (25) 3197 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
21. LFC_Bitcoin (Trust: +30 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (18) 7528 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
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. Slow death (Trust: +3 / =2 / -0) (583 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
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. Igebotz (Trust: +7 / =3 / -0) (DT1! (9) 1370 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
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. icopress (Trust: +34 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (21) 5577 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
36. invincible49 (Trust: +1 / =0 / -0) (255 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
37. logfiles (Trust: +5 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (12) 1454 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
38. tvplus006 (Trust: +14 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (14) 1613 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
39. witcher_sense (Trust: +15 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (16) 3967 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
40. darcon_pr (Trust: neutral) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
41. The Cryptovator (Trust: +22 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (23) 2100 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
42. lovesmayfamilis (Trust: +27 / =2 / -0) (3906 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
43. cryptobenn (Trust: +0 / =0 / -1) (1 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
44. TalkStar (Trust: +9 / =0 / -0) (734 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
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. FatFork (Trust: +7 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (9) 2175 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
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)