But what I noticed is you cannot handle criticism. If someone criticizes you, you should reply with constructive answers and valid points. Instead, you start calling them out and using foul language (Which I do not like; you have nothing to do whether I like it or not because I am no one).
Criticism should be based on facts, and not on some subjective value judgments. If I say that you are a spammer and a cheater, will this be considered criticism or will it be considered empty talk without facts? If you think that when I was called a shitposter, writing for money and a plagiarist, criticism that I cannot stand, then you agree with the fact that I can freely call you a spammer and a cheater, hiding behind the word CRITICISM.
Wrong. I didn't distrust you because you left the feedback without reference. I distrust you because your feedback is incorrect, and I cannot trust someone with anger management issues. Who left feedback first based on their emotion and then changed it later. I cannot trust someone who tries to dig out others' mistake, whoever talk against them. I cannot trust someone who uses foul language to defend and divert the conversation to another path, just like you are trying to create a drama with me, so everyone focuses on this drama instead of the original thread.
I'm calling you two-faced because you listed a bunch of crap that you can't prove, but at the same time, you trust this review:
Do you think it was written in sanity or under the influence of anger? That is, you trust this review, which says that Merit is a plagiarist and a whore, but in this review there is no evidence that I wrote plagiarism and that I am merit whore. It's just someone's value judgments that you call criticism.
Learn Bitcoin, don’t try to sit on two chairs and pretend to be Mr. Objectivity, you’re bad at it. And don’t try to play psychologist, assessing the emotional state of people you don’t know via the Internet, via text messages.