You are not, although you posted their trust list and gave them a neutral feedback for the same, without knowing any solid evidence other than Webtricks having same browser screen size as the other player ( that's a funny way to handle alts by blackjack.fun indeed )
My reliance on a gambling site
placing their reputation on the line when they (not I) made the assertion that two accounts were connected won't be repeated given blackjack.fun now appears to be back peddling from their follow-up assertion that they have secret proof of a connection between the two.
I don't even think the above red feedback is valid as giving a retaliatory DT distrust to someone after you are personally accused by him without any evidence is acceptable. Anyway, I think you both should sort this out like a man ! ( Side Note : webtricks is more friendly and open minded overall, FYI )
I've always clarified or corrected posts. Instead of sitting down to discus this "like a man" Webtricks first action
by their own admission was to DT distrust me - i.e. shoot first then ask questions later. Archive [
1a] [
1b]
This is their first post:
I know it isn't considered wise to leave retaliatory feedback but I think you ...
Nevermind, congratulations for becoming the first entry in my distrust list.
Clear case of (self admitted) retaliatory DT distrust by Webtricks against myself.
@LoyceV @suchmoon
I've always been able to have good conversations with you, so you tell me: Would it sit more comfortably with you if my trust feedback of Webtricks were NEUTRAL instead of negative in that
I would not trust this person to do a trade with?