The decision has likely been made to not allow the user to join signature campaigns.
I am not aware of anyone successfully participating in an avatar campaign that is banned from wearing a signature, so I don't think this is a pressing issue.
It makes sense now and it has totally enlightened my confusion regarding this.The banned was effective only for not wearing signature but they can still wear avatar on their profile.
This allows users to keep getting scammed and more victim if ignored. Negative tag and flag will not cause the user to remove the signature and avatar from the scam site. I firmly believe that account used in such campaign simply want to be paid without consideration to prevent scam on this forum. This means the account support scammer to get more victim.
I think red-tagged under profile name is enough for users to avoid not to get scam and all their particpants have negative tags as a warning to anyone that they are precaustious. I don't know how effective in advertising if a banned user wearing avatar since it isn't clickable for any link not unlike the signature code in our profile. So, let them be. And this is enough sign to avoid them.
