Regarding the two points you stated, if that is what any member thinks it is their opinion and there will always be a difference of opinion. If there are members who have the principle that Whirlwind was an obvious scam that is there opinion but in my opinion it does not have merit because it was not obvious to most of us.
Also, if there are any members alluding that those who participated in the signature campaign knowingly promoted a scam (for the sake of $125-$150 per week), that too is an opinion they are entitled to. I think that opinion will be shared by a tiny minority.
That's the tricky part: even though I agree, many people don't think that way. Just like they think Merit is an endorsement.
I understand that coming from someone who never advertised any service before, but as soon as you start advertising something it automatically puts you on the same boat as everyone else who promotes a service that isn't an obvious scam like Ponzi, so it makes no sense to say "I am better than you because I am advertising this service which I so happen not to guarantee".
I have nothing against n0nce, but the main takeaway of his post was
1- WW was as obvious a scam as Bitconnect.
2- Everyone who participated in WW did it for the $/post despite knowing it was a scam
I respect his decision for not feeling comfortable advertising WW or any other service he doesn't like, but those claims make it seem like every one of us was advertising an obvious scam just for money, maybe he didn't mean it that way, but his post implies exactly that.