Do you have an army of alts on bitmixer or something? How is it not bitmixers fault? Of course it is. They are paying people to do this. So what do we do?
Let's not be hypocrites. At the end of the PrimeDice signature campaign we all had been posting crap and then posting about how many posts we made during the month. I made over 1,000 posts, you claimed making even more than that (which might well be the case). In fact, after the PrimeDice signature campaign had ended, I joined Bitmixer's one and was soon kicked out for alleged spamming, lol (to be honest, I left myself having been underpaid after they had retroactively changed the rules). So if this campaign gets banned after all, I will be quite happy personally...
But this is not the way to go
You can't just hope that people are going to change their behavior, that isn't how the world works.
Haven't seen your post before submitting mine, but as you can see, the road is open to everyone, and people do change the ways they behave (and some even become global moderators at that)
Tl;dr: OP started this thread to suggest fighting spam by punishing campaign managers. Now, they are defending the banning of users/services and disagree with any other methods.
What's the secret agenda here?
What's the secret agenda here?
I'm against banning services as being counterproductive and overall harmful, especially the ones that are said to contribute to Bitcoin in a meaningful way. I'm not so much against banning individual users as I don't see much sense in it. Just in case, you would have to ban half the forum should it get moderated for real. In this way, punishing lazy campaign managers seems to be the only viable alternative, at least currently. There is no hidden agenda really...
Are you pretty?
