If we get into this debate of whether it is moral and right or not to join a signature campaign that does not support your principles, we get into a really long one. That is because I think all sides can have both good and bad points to score. Joining Wasabi's signature campaign is perfectly fine if you support them, since that would be the ideal case anyway, but it is also perfectly fine if you do not because after all your mindset might be 'why would I miss this opportunity?', and it is OK to think that way as well. To some here, it is probably extremely immoral to join a signature campaign that is against your principles, to others it may be perfectly fine. This is fine as well to me.
~snip~
I do think this is an interesting topic that deserves its own topic. My personal opinion is that for myself, I never wanted to promote something that is against my values; at the same time I don't condemn people promoting something they don't 100% believe in.
I am very confident someone would rather click the signature link under one of n0nce's posts over the signature link under one of a shit poster's reply.
I'm not sure that's necessarily the case. An opinion from a signature campaign manager (like icopress

) on this would be interesting; to me signature advertising seems to be a mix of getting as many of your company's banners on the forum in general and having users with a certain reputation promoting you. The former refers to the psychological
'Mere Exposure Effect' ('as seen on TV'...) ; the latter steers towards an
'argumentum ab auctoritate', wherein people assume a certain legitimacy of a business if esteemed community members advertise for it.
To put it more concrete terms: First, a user is 'bombarded' by ChipMixer banners, which sparks interest, then they see that high-ranked users wear that signature which gives it legitimacy and ultimately leads them to try it out.

This is my impression, but I'm glad about more insights (preferably in a new thread!

).