Quote from: suchmoon on January 28, 2020, 10:44:44 PM

Quote from: Lauda on January 28, 2020, 10:20:50 PM

what do you do?

Do: tilde the shit out of them and make a strong case for others to follow.
Don't: red-trust for disagreements.

Come on, it's not rocket surgery. There are 100 users in DT1 but in most cases you need only like 5 or 10 to make a difference. Yahoo is +14 so 8 flips would do it. I haven't heard anything to convince me to flip yet so don't count on me. From what I've seen he put a lot of effort to clean that campaign up, including removal of the X10 signature, so I still trust his judgement.

Nor would I red-trust anyone for carrying the Yobit signature. It's safe to assume that most campaign participants are just being unmitigated lemmings, like iluvbitcoins helpfully showed us.

So what can I draw out as a conclusion based off of this post:

Accepting a job to actively advance the efforts a known-scam is okay (one that to this day, continues to selectively scam its users)? Yes we failed to stop this much earlier, but the discussion is valid.
Keeping a ponzi scheme advertisement in your signature (knowingly or not) is not untrustworthy behavior nor worthy of a negative?
Defending the above (ponzi schemes, and in particular their advertising) is not compromised judgement/untrustworthy behavior?
Advertising a scam in your signature (or any other profile fields?) is not untrustworthy behavior nor worthy of a negative? I could just claim to be an "unmitigated lemming" and it would prevent me from having my reputation wrecked?

Please clarify as I personally can't see how I could answer any of those questions with a yes myself. However, I am trying to understand the implications and the precedence that this situation sets for the future.