Jonathan Kamm (kammagic) Exposed

[Richard]

Hey Jonathan,

Thank you for joining and for posting.

However, the post seems to be both valid and invalid to me so please allow me to analyze it using a comment Vincent (M4sterV) recentely sent to us with your reply to it. It has to do with the video which Vincent linked to in his post in this thread.

Also, I do not know if this was manipulated by Vincent in any way but I will trust him that it was not, and that it was copied and pasted directly from the YouTube PMs.

Jonathan:
"I disagree with your Handcuffs feedback. I missed the lift twice I hit it the third time. The blue deck was brand new the red deck was well used. The differences in the cards were a factor. Concentrating on proper technique is why I finally hit it the third time.

The tutorial is a steal at $12.50

Anything else I can help you with?

I don't allow exposure in my comments section so your comment was deleted. In the future feel free to private message me."

The main steps
1. Granted, because you sent him a PM and so you did not ignore him;

2. Although there is not much advice in the comment because he said it was something personal, the post seems to be good and valid to me. I would have approved this if it was posted to one of our videos;

3. By your reaction I guess that the comment was understood;

4. It is not clear where Vincent got the information from although that does not seem to matter in this case;

5. Talking to Vincent quite regularly, I am pretty sure that he does have good sources for everything he says so I guess this would not have been any problem;

6. He knows what he is talking about;

7. Other than "Anything else I can help you with?", no question was asked.


Other things you take into consideration
1. I do not see any intention to humiliate you in public;

2. The tone of voice seems to be fine;

3. There is no exposure and I do not know whether it was intentional or not, but Vincent's use of "lift" rather than fully naming the sleight seems to be a big part of that. I must point out that at the previous step you said that "Why would you use that DL?" would be approved. "DL" seems to be extremely close to exposure to me though. But I do not know if this point (3) would still have it removed or not;

4. No boasting. Instead, compliments were given.
I personally tend to approve the boasting kind of comments because in the end others will reply that do not care about it. In some cases it are actual laymen posting such comments which then turns it into something very valuable. Of course, this does not count for the "first post" kind of comments;

5. No anonymous posting.


The two situations in which you find criticism appropriate
1. Vincent asked for advice;

2. I doubt that he is an authority to you.


Conclusion
Although you said that you removed the comment due to magic exposure, I do not see that. This is a random message from the many messages we received, certainly not all of them coming from Vincent and not all of them being related to magic. In some cases it is rather obvious why you removed the comments, yet in other cases there is very valid feedback given which according to your post should actually have been approved.

I stand my conclusion, especially because you started marketing your release by saying that the tutorial is a steal at $12.50. Nothing wrong with that but flat out saying it does seem to be a little cheap to me, as well as that you apparently had to concentrate on the lift before it worked. Honestly, that does not sound like a good one to me.

Then in reply to the latest part of your post, I have to agree that you may look at things differently and that that is not up to us to judge. But it seems to upset quite a lot of people. If that many people do not get why their comments were not approved, I wonder if it is really their fault. In the most extreme example it would be the same as starting a war because you believe that that would make the world a better place and yourself a more respected person.