Quote from: BenCodie on Today at 09:55:03 AM

The most important part of my response

Quote from: 1miau on Today at 01:11:33 AM

Quote from: BenCodie on October 24, 2023, 09:02:08 PM

I ask you again to reconsider your usage of my profile in the OP of your thread, as it is inaccurate (again, unless your agenda is to disqualify objective thinkers against gambling from signature campaigns by labeling them as hypocrites)

It's not inaccurate, it's a perfect example for the point "Join a campaign you agree with and not just for the payout."
Heck, it couldn't get more accurate. Cheesy

I don't disagree with coins.game, I don't agree with them either as they are a casino. I am neutral. IF coins.game started scamming users or doing wrong by them, then I would disagree with them and then, I would leave the campaign as I would not agree with them. Is that not acceptable? (You don't have to answer any of this reply but I want you to at least answer this question).

You are definitely NOT neutral, when writing such a statement:

View this as an example.

Quote from: 1miau on October 18, 2023, 01:08:44 AM

It could not get any clearer...

Quote from: BenCodie on Today at 09:55:03 AM

The majority of people join signature campaigns for the payout, otherwise, do you think forum signatures would look the same tomorrow if all payouts no longer paid any btc?

Shitposting for a few bucks is a different issue....

Quote from: BenCodie on Today at 09:55:03 AM

Otherwise, what you are saying is that in order to join a campaign, you must:
- Have no motivation about the BTC you are being rewarded

This is not what I or anyone else here said.
No need for that strawman...
We can wear a legitimate campaign and still be happy to get some sats. But we should not wear any shady signature just to earn a few bucks.

Quote from: BenCodie on Today at 09:55:03 AM

- Join because they like the project only

No need to like the project, but we should not oppose it fundamentally (like you did).

Quote from: BenCodie on Today at 09:55:03 AM

- Promote in the interests of the project EVEN if it is not in line with their opinions

That's coming close to what people have written here.

Quote from: BenCodie on Today at 09:55:03 AM

You are also saying that:
- People who aren't speaking in the interests of the campaign are hypocrites

Wrong, I've said that when wearing a signature campaign, we should not oppose it fundamentally.

Quote from: BenCodie on Today at 09:55:03 AM

- People who voice an opinion that against the interests of the campaign industry are hypocrites

Wrong again...
People wearing a signature campaign, should not oppose it fundamentally. Otherwise, they are hypocrites.

Quote from: BenCodie on Today at 09:55:03 AM

If there were actually official guidelines that enforced your ideology, then this would manipulate how people post, it would create influence over people via signature campaign, and it would destroy the forum.

Misguided clowns like you are destroying the forum whith your nonsense sigspam:

View this as an example.

Quote from: 1miau on October 18, 2023, 01:08:44 AM

Quote from: BenCodie on Today at 09:55:03 AM

The rest of my responses

Quote from: 1miau on Today at 01:11:33 AM

Quote from: BenCodie on October 24, 2023, 09:02:08 PM

I also already said to you multiple times in multiple ways about having an advertisement in my signature. Just because I don't like the gambling business, doesn't mean I won't take their money for having an advertisement in my signature. Doesn't mean I am a hypocrite either. Hypocrisy would be if I was in my position but then personally endorsed casinos with my words and my posts. That would be hypocrisy. However, signatures are not personal endorsements and never will be.

Wearing a paid signature is a personal endorsement, it's directly appearing next to your forum name.

I disagree with that completely. Please provide a reference where it states officially that a signature is a personal endorsement.

The brand name appears directly right to your forum name and your forum profile. Of course it's an endorsement and we should select the campaigns carefully.
High paying campaign are selecting the most reputable forum members for a reason.
What anyone else does, when coming over our signatures is not our issue.
But we, as a participant in that campaign, should always be able to get behind the advertised project. Otherwise, we should not support it.

Quote from: BenCodie on Today at 09:55:03 AM

Quote from: 1miau on Today at 01:11:33 AM

...And why should a gambling site even pay for your anti-gambling posts? You wouldn't pay for an ad on TV as well, where it says "our product is shit, please don't buy". Roll Eyes

Quote from: BenCodie on October 24, 2023, 09:02:08 PM

I do not spam in that board, I advocate against casinos and their usage because I am for the people, not for the casinos.

Everything is said about the issue.
You are wearing gambling signature and are getting paid for that, while you are actively advocating against gambling. So, why are you wearing that signature if you don't like gambling at all but you are still advertising for it in your signature? You are wearing the signature just to get some cheap sats for free!

If you actually bothered to look at my posts, I do not consistently post about "anti-gambling" in the gambling board/I do not go around screaming "gambling is bad, don't do it" to people, but I do not go around saying "gambling is good, go ahead and do it" either. I warn of the dangers, I make my position clear (more on the "don't gamble" side than "gamble" side) and I only criticize casinos if they have done something unethical toward players, which unfortunately, is a lot of the time.

Then, maybe a gambling signature is not suited for you...
Why advertising it then, if you think, it's harmful for other people?
Your advertisements are even leading to damage according to your previous statements.
You are just hypocritical, nothing else.
This is so nuts, if we think about your hate against gambling, while your are happily advertising it in your signature to gain a few bucks. Roll Eyes

If you don't like gambling and you are opposing it, fine. But then, don't wear a paid gambling signature... Roll Eyes

Quote from: BenCodie on Today at 09:55:03 AM

Also, are you saying that people are wearing signatures because they love and believe in the project they are promoting?

No one said that...
Wearing a signature just means that we can get behind that project and would use it.
No need to be in love with the project.
Your way of twisting words is so massively misleading. Roll Eyes

Quote from: BenCodie on Today at 09:55:03 AM

Quote from: 1miau on Today at 01:11:33 AM

Quote from: BenCodie on October 24, 2023, 09:02:08 PM

I ask you again to reconsider your usage of my profile in the OP of your thread, as it is inaccurate (again, unless your agenda is to disqualify objective thinkers against gambling from signature campaigns by labeling them as hypocrites)

And if you really want to keep looking butthurt like you are looking currently, please complain to me, as I'm the one who created the picture.
Your attacking of CryptopreneurBrainboss here just for doing his job is beyond hypocritical.

If you don't like the picture, you should have thought twice before typing such nonsese while wearing a gambling signature. Roll Eyes

I see it as that I'm defending my honor, I have a right to do that and I am sure others would do the same. Sure though, call me butthurt.

Also I'm not attacking brainboss either, I am responding to his decision and telling him my side of things since clearly, he is not aware of how I look at things. If he is ignorant to that purposefully then of course I'm going to ask him things like, "do you have an agenda?"...because why else would someone blatantly ignore good reasoning? I have a right to complain to him as you did not insert that image into the thread, he did.

They way you are twisting our words here, saying things, no one has ever said in the topic and other strange conclusions are just pointless.
Of course people will point out, that your comment about gambling while wearing a gambling signature, is not how this works.

If you don't like gambling, no need to join a paid signature campaign about gambling.
Easy as that...

Quote from: BenCodie on Today at 09:55:03 AM

Edit after initial reply

It seems that you both genuinely think that signatures are personal endorsements.

Wearing a signature IS a personal endorsement, as said before.

Quote from: BenCodie on Today at 09:55:03 AM

So I made this thread. If you choose to go there and share your opinion, please do not include the drama in this thread.

They way you are asking the question is already completely misleading because no one here ever said by wearing a signature "The wearer encourages you to use the advertised service".
Wearing a signature doesn't mean to "encourage anyone to use the advertised service".
Wearing a signature just means that a participant agrees, that the service is legitimate to use.
Wearing a signature just means that a participant could say: "Yes, I can get behing using that service". What any viewer of this possible signature does, is completely their choice.

Quote from: BenCodie on Today at 09:55:03 AM

I genuinely think that they are paid advertisements and should not be perceived as personal endorsements (as not ad should, imo). We will never settle this debate until we get more opinions.

And we won't settle this debate as well, when you are asking completely misleading questions. Roll Eyes

You are taking this purposefully out of context to get your preferred answer...