Quote from: igehhh on Today at 01:35:48 PM

Quote from: _BlackStar on Today at 04:10:26 AM

Quote from: The Pharmacist on Today at 04:00:42 AM

I hadn't noticed the user in question doing what he did because I think he posts mainly in the gambling section (correct me if I'm wrong; I'm too lazy to check), which I stay away from unless I'm doing post reviews for people.

I'm even pretty sure he's still at it on June 13 based on a post archive where he just cites a number of posts without adding anything and comes back to edit them after a few hours or maybe a different day. I think this kind of behavior is not tolerated as right behavior in the campaign, he wants payment but not doing things the right way.

The campaign manager is responsible for checking this kind of behavior, and I think he will do it more strictly now for all his participants.

Due to the high demand for posts from that board by most signature campaigns, there have been so many shitposters on the gambling board recently that I wish every thread OP made it self-moderated just like JollyGood did here⚽ English Premier League Season: 2021/2022 There is no room for 1xbit spammers, shitposters, or trolls; only quality discussion.

I've compiled a list of 20+ gambling board shitposters who add nothing to the discussion; I've reported the majority of these posts, but I don't think it's enough! Will a negative tag with a strong message suffice?

I would be ok with it , but I'm not sure you would be setting the right precedent by tagging the user in question. I think a logical solution might be to make a rule in campaigns(this would depend on if the manager wanted extra work) no edited posts are eligible for pay.

That rule IMO fixes the problem.