Quote from: BenCodie on Today at 08:39:32 AM

I participate in signature campaigns because it incentivizes me to be a part of the forum that I enjoy using.

LOL

That's some nice word twisting.
You are joining these gambling campaigns because you are able to get your hands on quite some additional sats, nothing else. Otherwise you would not add a signature of a service you deem to be from "one of the most unethical sections of the forum" and you think, that:

Quote from: BenCodie on Today at 08:39:32 AM

Gambling destroys lives.

You are such a funny clown. Cheesy

Quote from: BenCodie on Today at 08:39:32 AM

1moose you can make all the threads you want but I don't think anyone really cares. I have made a thread and tried to optimize the poll in a way that is fairest to both sides, while you retaliated with this poll which is so much more worthless than the poll that I created.

Oh dear, this is so funny.
Your poll got optimized. Cheesy

Well, considering how far from the initial discussion your poll in your topic is, there's really a lot of space for improvement... Cheesy

And even funnier: your accusation that I would have "retaliated with this poll".
LOL, this is comedy gold. Cheesy

Maybe I've "retaliated" as well by linking the initial discussion from Beginners and help to give all readers the full picture?

Quote from: BenCodie on Today at 08:39:32 AM

Quote

Our opinion of the service does not matter, we can advertise everything even if we fundamentally oppose it because wearing a signature doesn't mean to endorse it

What a terrible way to put it. You make out as if my opinion is that it doesn't matter if it's legitimate or not, that anything goes, and that one who shares the opinion of the poll does not care at all about the detriment that the service could entail to a user who uses it.

It's a very accurate way to put it because it's exactly describing your anti-gambling comment while wearing the sig and getting paid handsomely for that...

Quote from: BenCodie on Today at 08:39:32 AM

Thank you for devaluing your opinion so much in this whole process though. It has helped me realize the true value of your opinion, which is much lower than I originally valued it, and low enough for me to not care about in the slightest. I'm sure this thread will serve no other purpose than to attack me and my viewpoint and I look forward to reading more responses.

Well, we just need to quote some of your posts and it's pure comedy already.
But that's not our fault, so please don't blame us... Cheesy

Quote from: BenCodie on Today at 08:39:32 AM

To all those who voted the first option, be careful what you wish for. If we are personally endorsing something, we are adding liability to all outcomes. Members are better off advertising services while they are legitimate, and endorsing them publicly via posts, not the signature. If this is not the case, you could be blamed and held liable for someone who got scammed because they found about a service from your signature, IF we classify signatures as personal endorsements.

Your interpretations are very strange and they don't make any sense at all. There is a clear community consensus about the issue when it comes to joining a (scam) signature campaign:
If there's undeniable proof, that a service is a scam, only then your concern applies.
Everyone who still joins a campaign at that point or continues to promote it, despite the community has shown undeniable proof about the service being a scam and this consensus is accepted by DT, only then we are liable for knowingly advertising a proven scam.
But we can't know if any service turns out to be a scam in the future, so everything what happened before the service goes scamming, is not our responsibility.

So, yes: we are liable if we are knowingly promoting a proven scam service and the result will be a negative trust from DT....

Quote from: BenCodie on Today at 08:39:32 AM

Tell me if I'm wrong.

Yes

Quote from: BenCodie on Today at 08:39:32 AM

Gambling destroys lives.

Okay, let's assume that's a reasonable argument and of course, it's completely okay, that you really hate gambling, that's your opinion and you are allowed to have it.
But then, why THE F*UCK are you advertising a gambling site in your signature / profile picture? So, you are complicit in "destroying lives" according to your viewpoint. Huh

Your gibberish doesn't make any sense!
Of course, people will call you out for that. Roll Eyes

In which world are you living in?

Quote from: JollyGood on Today at 12:55:58 AM

He is a multi-level hypocrite because he says one thing about joining signature campaigns and another thing about ethics and another thing about censorship yet ends up doing the very things he claims (he and) others should not. Giving him any attention is a complete waste of time and energy therefore he is remaining on my ignore list.

I don't even know what he's trying to achieve.
Right now, his clownery is a good example of Streisand Effect, where very soon, the whole forum will know about his "gambling incident", every campaign manager will be aware of it and the following picture might become a meme: Cheesy