Please do not ONLY bring adhominem.
Calling your endless rants "endless rants" is not an
ad hominem. It is a statement of fact, and as it is not an attack on your character as a way to criticize your argument, it is not an
ad hominem. For someone who goes around calling people dirty turds and other pathetic insults, you should probably learn the meaning of the words you use. (That also was not an
ad hominem, simply an insult. The two are not synonymous.)
The other points you raise are already clearly answered previously and debunked by the answers I have already given.
I, like everyone else, will not be trawling through your back catalogue of almost 1000 pointless rants. If you wish to directly answer why you should be able to dictate rules to all bounty managers on the forum, please do so. If bounty managers agree that the merit system is flawed, then they are entirely allowed to ignore it and select participants on whatever criteria they like.
Stop ranting please.
This is also a bogus claim because you are not setting the full context as if to make it appear we randomly act in that way without first having exactly those sorts of behaviors inflicted upon us first. Calling people dirty scammer supporting turds is not adhominem either when we are discussing their scammer supporting ways and their undeniable observable instances of doing just that. THOSE are statements of fact too. Either way let's stay on topic.
Now as to the point that you feel you would need to sift back through 1000' of "rants" to get your answer, when it was in the last post I made to you clearly illustrates that you do NOT understand the issue with letting campaign managers operate without transparent and clear rules that ALL members are measured against equally.
Now can you present a list of pro's and cons to support your nonsense that we should leave it totally subjective or just confess you are only claiming this because you seek to not be in competition with other members fairly because you fear that your chipmixer sig will be vulnerable. I say it will clearly just be gone instantly because you do not have the capacity to demonstrate you are one of the top 57 best posters here and certainly not one of the most 57 top posters that are clearly not a scammer supporter.
But skipping the adhominem/not adhominem debate on that part list your pros and cons and clearly debunk my assertion that transparent and clear rules/thresholds should be introduced and that campaign mangers should stop hiding behind their DT pals manipulated metrics so that they can GIVE THOSE SAME DTS ALL THE BEST SIG SPOTS LOL.
Who would have guessed you would not like the idea of being measured against transparent rules/thresholds in fair competition with other honest members but prefer your campaign manager DT loving pals keep giving the chipmixer spots to you hahahaha
WHY WOULD ANYONE object to some transparent rules/thresholds being set that are not obviously gamed and abused to match applicants against??? you really have to consider that question first. YES the only reason is that they are likely already benefitting from this current subjective gamed abused mess. THAT IS EXACTLY what we see here oeeieie is a chipmixer spammer already hey??? that is not adhominem is it? that is a statement of fact that you are one already?? the motivated is questionable but what other motivation is there for NOT wanting transparent rules for all members to be measured against??? let him supply them.
Alts we agree on since you don't have any. Then again if you had some perhaps we would no longer be in agreement??? who can say.
Alts are certainly not a good idea in the same sigs especially on new tokens.