However, if over long periods of time, if a manager allows lots of shit posts, and doesn’t do anything about it, it will reflect negatively on the person who didn’t fire the campaign manager in favor of someone who would address the shit posts.
Campaign Managers don't have any kind of editorial control over a participants posts.
There is no requirement to continue to receive merits once in the campaign - far from it. If a participant can con or buy as little as five merits in
the last 120 days, then they are in. The
Campaign Manager for the
signature campaign I am in will, on occasion, make a comment on the
Google Spread Sheet for a user to "spread out" their posts. However, this is as close as a CM dares come to exert editorial control over a user's post's content.
I don't include the stipulation that for example five posts each week must be in (for example) the gambling/gaming sections. But, even then as I said at the start, there is no editorial control over the post's content.