Quote from: pawel7777 on April 15, 2016, 10:11:17 AM

FFS I didn't say FJ definitely didn't scam people, I said it's not quite the scam in a classic meaning. Which is not.

The main issue here is that contest had no clear terms and conditions and it didn't get as much interest as FJ expected, comparing this to signature campaign is bit missed.

But if you're desperate to do it, it would be more like sig campaign refusing payment due to low quality posts and participant felt scammed because there wasn't a clear definition of what 'constructive post' is. Guess what, this happens all the time.

To dumb it down, in terms of FJ's contest, it's a question whether (with lack of T&Cs) every entry should be classed as qualifying, or whether you accept FJ to reject entries due to low quality (based on their own judgement).

To put this to extreme, if I submitted video featuring my dick and me drunk-shouting "F**k FJ" should I feel entitled to being rewarded, just because there are less entries than paid places? Would you support my claim, or would you give FJ a right to reject my entry?

Point is, it's not always a black/white situation.

To summarise, in my opinion, lack of clear rules should be judged more (but not entirely) in favour of participants. FJ should apologise and look to settle the matter by paying out at least according to the table, so:

4-10: 3 btc total: ~0.43 each
11-30: 3 btc total: 0.15 each

But you should give FJ right to reject very low-quality vids (if there are such at all).

Hopefully that would settle it.

ps. All my knowledge of the matter comes from first post of this thread, which I assume is accurate. I haven't seen any of the vids, and I don't even visit FJ anymore as it's blocked in UK.

ps2. the second accusation didn't get any traction, so not commenting on it.

TL:DR

Anyway. TL:DR Means too long didn't read.
Also the profit he made or whatever word you used that means the same thing money earned is the tons of BTC he didn't pay out. He stole that from people who worked for it.