You are right $100 per week is a significant amount of money in the third world but as with the previous 1xbit signature campaign it might be another case of a puppeteer controlling various accounts that are all trying to enrol therefore a certain amount of the campaign fees are going to one person.
If stake.com or any other casino/gaming website that have almost zero allegations against them decide to have almost no requirement to get paid - they should not be evaluated on the same merit as known scammers. If some campaign managers choose to hire members based on their rank/name/forum etiquettes or other criteria over their quality of posts then that is their prerogative. Apart from trying to get posts out there with the 1xbit banner I cannot see what criteria the 1xbit scammers would have in choosing participants when some are deep red with double figures in negative trust.
Such a sad state of affairs.... the lure of earning anything from $20 - $100 per week to promote the 1xbit scammers is enough for some to jump on the signature campaign bandwagon.
$100 per week is not bad at all. It is in line with the second best paying signature campaign, which would be the Best Change one. Now there are two more at those levels. This one pays that money for advertising a known scam site and then there is Stake.com, which with its posting requirements does not exactly encourage quality posts.
With $100 a week there are families in the third world who eat, and if you live in the first world and have a stable job, it is a good extra source of income. I guess that's why a lot of people end up advertising the site. If they paid a lot less, there would be a lot less people willing to destroy their reputation on the forum to advertise for them.