In my opinion, Lauda was too trigger happy on the red paint, and JollyGood goes down the same path. I especially dislike that this scares off good users, while real scammers will just continue with a new account.
You remember that Lauda was accusing many scammers and cheaters for plagiarism and in the end someone discovered several plagiarism in his own account.
If you start mass producing negative feedbacks left and right, it's almost certain you will make mistakes and accuse innocent people in the process.
At least Lauda had the balls to quit and left the forum on his own terms, so people remember him for good things he did.
I doubt same thing will happen with with copycat.
Meanwhile, his own
Reference link shows he didn't ask for source codes, and I think it's unreasonable to expect free source codes after you pay someone for a freelance job.
This looks like borderline scammer or blackmailing behavior, provide source code or you will receive negative feedback.
How even a neutral feedback applies here? My trust page is not for him to write my pathological reports.
I would worry about this neutral feedback.
People can easily search other side of the story and make their own conclusion.
This no longer applies because his feedback on your account is neutral.
No longer applies until next opportunity and next victim he finds.
I think everyone should reconsider if they want to keep positive feedback on JollyBad profile, including you FatFork.
This kind of bully behavior witch hunting is not bad just for him but for whole bitcointalk forum.
I would also suggest ~ him because of his repeated behavior and ignoring suggestions from other members.