Quote from: mak013 on Today at 12:43:10 PM

Quote from: Betwrong on January 28, 2022, 09:59:34 AM

Well, look at us, bitcointalk members wearing signatures and/or avatars advertising this or that company. Of course we are paid for that, but do we write everything to advertise the sponsor? Far from that. Check it out yourself. Let me assure you that it's possible in some cases to be paid and stay not biased at the same time. If you mean most of the journalists are biased, then I agree. I just don't like generalizations. I mean, not all bitcointalkers, even those with no ad in their signature, are good, and not all journalists, even those sponsored by corporations, are bad, or, biased, if you want.

You mostly right, but there are some moments that can differ.
First of them is the reputation of the company. If the company is about scam - even the best of us can get negative trust and disapproval from other members. That`s why it is important(for me at least) to find a company with good repatation.

The point you are stating (while its true) is different from what Betwrong mentioned.
You are correct that we might get negative trust if we promote a campaign whose owners are fraud and it makes sense because it will encourage more scam and as a candidate we should be aware of what we are promoting.
But at the same time the signature campaigns never mention that we should only speak good about the products we are promoting.
This eliminates biased judgements which was the point at the first place.

Quote

Second - when i found out bitcointalk - i thought that "hero" or "legendary" members wearing signatures of the projects they believe. In this way we are responsible to newbies that believe in signatures.

That's an honest mistake Tongue

When I was a newbie I though it's just normal ads that get popped up on any website.
Little did I know they are signatures willingly worn by the users.