The essence of this conversation comes down to the fact that you need to respect the advertising opportunities that are available to you. And also the fact that in my eyes it looked like Wasabi was paying for Sparrow advertising. There's nothing wrong with saying "I use" (any brand you like), but when you say "I recommend" and list several similar wallets, then I believe that mentioning a project that spends resources on the campaign is an issue of ethics.
This is absurd. You should respect the very people who put you in business. The advertisers should respect the content creators. Without posters on this forum, there is no business for you and nor is there any growth opportunity for advertisers as a result of advertising here.
You are obviously an advertising
amateur as well! If I recommend Sparrow wallet while I have Wasabi in my signature, then one could draw that Wasabi is as good as Sparrow if it is in my signature as well. There is nothing in a recommendation of Sparrow that leaves any possible interpretation that says
not to use Wasabi!
The only time that I would throw you a bone and reason with you is if a poster directly slandered/unreasonably criticized Wasabi while they wore the Wasabi signature. At this point, sure, kick them out of the campaign if you want as it harms you and the advertiser. Otherwise, there is no reason to unfairly treat posters.
As a campaign manager, maybe you need some reminders?
- You can not force people to recommend advertised products
- You can not censor legitimate discussion about other products.
- You certainly not attempt to control what people say on the forum if it is not harming the advertiser nor the forum!
But if you recommend open source wallets without mentioning the one whose advertisement you are wearing, then you have no place on my team, since I see this as a disparaging attitude towards my work and the advertised project.[/b]
I don't agree with icopress's above statement at all. It might be bad etiquette to bad mouth whatever you're advertising in your signature space (and it would certainly cause a bit of confusion/head-scratching to anyone who might not know much about sig campaigns), but requiring members to mention the product/service in their sig space if they're engaged in a discussion about a set of products/services in which it belongs is just not good--
unless that sort of posting is explicitly prohibited in the campaign's rules, and even then I think it's crossing a line.
I strongly agree with this.