Quote from: whywefight on March 01, 2016, 11:40:31 AM

I have -ved op because he promoted a ponzi. In my eyes that makes him untrustworthy. I could imagine betcoin doesnt want to be connected with people promoting ponzis while wearing their sig.

I will contact the campain manager

If OP simply gave himself pos feedbacks from any random alt, he'd still qualify to be in the campaign*. Thats how stupid the campaign rules of that signature campaign are.

*Although of course, he'd get more negs for trust farming from alts

Quote from: Stroto on March 01, 2016, 11:39:39 AM

It teaches them to be critical thinkers instead of community sheep later in life and are prepared when the real scammers show up.

Although I hate arguments being compared to real life, I slightly agree with it. However, it doesn't explain why they shouldn't get a negative for promoting/supporting the ponzi, which will lead to more users being scammed

Quote from: Joel_Jantsen on March 01, 2016, 11:38:58 AM

3.I see people with highest quality of posts with negative feebacks for silly reasons.I think investing in a Ponzi is a subject limited to one's personal choices ,you can't force him to not to.

The decision of promoting/supporting the ponzi is the user's own, from what I know CD is not forcing anyone to decide what to do with their money, he is essentially saying don't encourage the others to invest only to be scammed later.

Quote from: Joel_Jantsen on March 01, 2016, 11:38:58 AM

That being said, if you don't comply with his intentions,you're free to leave him a feedback and this should be understood by the campaign managers that it necessarily doesn't portray one is a spammer and he deserves to be kicked out of campaign if he still has the highest quality of posts .

Trustworthiness and post quality are two different things, even theymos has clarified that in the thread announcing the trust system