self-moderated to keep this thread clean from trolls, attention-seekers and signature spammers

I have no idea what BenCodie was thinking when he created this drama under the guise of a rational thread to invite discussion. Here we see another example of somebody who has received a neutral tag and has decided to try to have it removed. What does he do? He decided to create a thread and dress it up as an outlet for intellectual debate when the intention was simply to gauge whether or not he could get some momentum behind him which (he hoped) would pressure me to removing a neutral tag.

Can you imagine that? All that effort, skulduggery and scheming on part of BenCodie for nothing except a neutral tag. Rather than post in that thread, I have created one to express sentiments regarding his obsession with the fact he received a neutral tag. I usually try not to respond to unnecessary drama or make threads to stipulate my position when it comes to members complaining about tags but once in a while someone comes along who seems to be posting directly, indirectly or subliminally in multiple threads making comments that can continue to be ignored or some response can be made. I have decided to post a response just for those that might be curious.

If (as expected) you read posts from BenCodie regarding the neutral feedback I left for him, this thread can be used a reference for those interested.

Apart from the above mentioned thread, I see he has been busy in other places, some links below:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5095156.msg62782318#msg62782318
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5095156.msg62796140#msg62796140
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5095156.msg62800923#msg62800923
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5095156.msg62802613#msg62802613
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5095156.msg62803109#msg62803109
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5095156.msg62803861#msg62803861
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5095156.msg62806038#msg62806038

What is clear, after he realised the comments he made in the Whirlwind thread including those when he insulted at least two very knowledgable members (after he stated he was convinced Whirlwind was a scam but applied to join their signature campaign because he did not want to miss out on the opportunity to get the weekly payouts), he tried repair the damage by posting anywhere while trying to get to that 1000 merit mark. Basically, I have no interest on whether he manages to get their or not but it obviously means a lot to him therefore the campaign against me started just because I left him a neutral tag.

After posting those unacceptable comments in the Whirlwind thread and then going on the offensive against some forum members and attacking/insulting them rather than being humble and withdraw his comments entirely, he allowed time to pass then sent this PM on 27th August 2023. Still, full of pumping adrenalin and a larger-than-life-ego, he did not apologise but chose the I did not say that stance and has maintained it ever since.

For those that know me and have conversed with me via PM, you will attest to the fact I do reply. I think there have been just a handful of unsolicited PMs where I have not replied but the stance that he took in the PM was enough for me to not consider giving a reply, I thought it was highly condescending considering apart from the fact it the first he sent a PM but you can come to your own conclusions.

For those not aware, I had to ask BenCodie several times to explain fully what he was stating when he stated he was convinced Whirlwind was a scam yet did not raise it with anybody and instead applied to join their signature campaign and not only that, he stated he did not feel it important to tell anybody. Those of us that read the posts in that thread know what he stated but I still hoped he would withdraw the comment because I did not want a drama such as this being created. Even though I did not leave a negative tag, the drama has still unfolded.

He is heading towards Legendary rank therefore that milestone could have played a part in this sudden burst of activity regarding the neutral tag. Yes ladies and gentleman, all this drama over a neutral tag. There was a trend when alt-accounts operated by farmers were creating threads asking for negative tags to be removed but those days have long gone, it has been for far too about neutral tags.

In a nutshell, BenCodie received a neutral tag for stating he was happy to take money from a signature campaign of a what he was convinced was a scam because he should not say no to money coming his way and because he did not feel the need to raise his concerns with those of us who thought they were promoting a genuine business.

Here are some ironies:

The first here that in retaliation for a neutral tag he has responded with an unwarranted and undeserved negative tag. Adding on to that, there are some trolls who have a habit of following me around (somewhat obsessively) and at least one of them has added BenCodie to their trust simply because he gave me negative feedback.

Some of the trolls have made fleeting comments but one of the trolls has even resorted on some previous occasions to posting all the names of those who have added me to their trust list effectively asking them to remove me by using some subtle and not so subtle mannerisms. How ironic (if true) that same member deliberately adds to his trust a second member who has given me negative trust purely on that basis and for no other reason therefore the troll is effectively pointing a neon sign on to himself asking to be excluded from members trust for applying incorrect use of the trust system. The irony.

Another irony in this situation is that BenCodie had (I believe but someone please correct me if I am wrong) given negative tag later revised to neutral to just two members of a seventeen member strong team of the bc.game signature campaign participants, on the basis the company allegedly had excessive scam accusations against them. With which logic did him by being an upstanding member of the community select 2 members from 17 to leave neutral tags. For obvious reasons the campaign manager (icopress) was not tagged because one day he might apply to join a campaign but what is not so obvious is why did he think 15 other members doing the same thing did not warrant the same tag.

Another irony is that Shishir99 created a thread named Super High IQ BenCodie vs Low IQ forum posters about gambling. because the OP was condescending with his alleged higher IQ to those he concluded had lower IQ to him, therefore five days after the thread was created BenCodie left him a neutral tag for (effectively) daring to question him. How ironic he is upset that he has received a neutral tag from me.

Anyway, after several prompts from me, the OP decided to reply to my question about his disingenuous behaviour in the Whirlwind thread. After he semi-retracted with a "that is not what I said" comment rather than be humble and accept he made a mistake, I opted to leave a neutral tag **

I waited patiently for the OP to reply, if there was malice on my part I would have simply left a negative tag immediately. I gave multiple opportunities for him withdraw or retract his comment before placing the tag. From his side it seems it was a carefully thought out reason (related to signature campaigns, increasing to Legendary rank) which saw him semi-retract the comment but now he has tried to find ways of trying to have the neutral tag removed while citing even stronger than before that he never said this and never said that.

There is nothing wrong with my post but it did not warrant a reply from BenCodie:

Quote from: JollyGood on August 25, 2023, 06:30:43 PM

BenCodie, please review your last few posts (including the ones where you have insulted respected members of the forum) and ask yourself if you have achieved anything constructive by using profanities and insults. I doubt it will help you when you put forward any argument to debate any matter in any walk of life therefore it should not help you here.

Also, would you like to re-think your post about you saying in your opinion you knew Whirlwind was a scam but you did two very interesting things. First, you did not post warnings about it (because you said you were not obliged to) and second, even though in your opinion it was a scam from the very beginning you did not hesitate to apply to join their signature campaign and you would have no problem with participating if you were selected.

That sort of conduct is shocking to say the least if you are stating you believed it was a scam but had no problem wanting to be part of their signature campaign.

The final irony is advice for myself and a suggestion for others to consider without prejudice. If any member posts they are happy to promote what they believe is a scam because all they want are payments (and they go on to apply/join what they believe are signature campaigns promoting scams and even go as far as to state it is not their job to effectively protect forum members by raising alarms and could not care less if forum members get scammed by services they promote), just tag them with negative trust when you see their post.