Now it's become quite complicated to judge connected accounts only based on transaction history. They probably sell each other or there is someone reselling. We assume they are connected but who knows the real story. It wouldn't be prohibited dealing with each other out of the forum even they use a forum account. But if there is some other link with each other like a social account or uses the same address then a red tag would be appropriate. I think coinlocket$'s neutral feedback is fine in that case.
Yes that's right sir. But in this case, the bm/dev (I dont remember who has control the distributions of reward) sent double reward for linkedin campaign to me so I sent back to dev address.
I checked his account and found no matches on social media. Moreover, I did not find any matches for wallets either. I may have been inconsiderate, but this happens very rarely.
Transaction coincidences have not been considered direct evidence of cheating for a long time. Therefore, I also suggest that @icopress make more weighty arguments against Iccang161096.
Moreover, @icopress became a member of the DT, and now his tags should be very fair. Otherwise, why was the system created?
All excuses, like, "I don't remember why I painted this and all other accounts," in my opinion, are not appropriate here.
You need to be responsible for all your actions to truly be a trusted person.
Simply putting a neutral tag is also not fair, without clear evidence.
Thank you for your opinion and done to check my account.. I really appreciate
Now just wait icopress make a argument. I think all my proof already clear here.
Thank you all for your feedback.