This is incorrect..

You should never "force" anyone to escrow.. They rightfully can choose not to escrow..

If you look here in the Overview of Bitcointalk Signature-Ad Campaigns [Last update: 01-Dec-2019] thread you will find that roughly half of the current Bitcoin paying signature add campaigns are not escrowed..

You very well should recommend escrow or warn participants that their is no escrow, but you don't "force" escrow..

If they are a scam then escrow is the least of your worries because then you red tag every participant for advertising scams.. Which is done ALL THE TIME..
And, I'm not sure a reputable escrow would escrow a signature campaign for a scam..
Would you escrow a signature campaign for a ponzi?
 


That has come to my attention and I have been thinking about it so thank you for bringing that up for me..

My "legendary account" and greater identity are in no way "ruined" by Lauda's comment..
If it diminishes me in any way it would only be to those who are ignorant..

In fact, it does Lauda more harm than me.. Or will do..
If you are in the know around here, when you see it, you will immediately realize that it is abuse of default trust, and basically just nonsense..

This will make Lauda look very bad for doing it, to anyone who's opinion I care about..
If you think it is right, you may want to think about it again..

I may mount a full defense if I have to, but it is so blatant that I'm thinking, I might not even have to mount a full defense myself..

Go ahead and get some talk going on about it before Lauda has a chance to rethink their decision here to save face..


I think @Lauda the sooner you remove it, the better it will be for you, before I, or anyone else, takes a stand against it..