Quote from: icopress on Today at 01:05:15 PM

Quote from: BitcoinGirl.Club on Today at 12:42:28 PM

I hope you are right but when one of the four quotes is about the negative vote for merit source and it was quoted before other three then it creates a doubt.

This quote was added for reference because after his applications to participate were rejected several times, he apparently took it as a personal insult. And he began to attack, creating FUD within a short period of time. The user then added to this the spread of slander (which was the main reason for the tag).

It is this position that is reflected in the tag, since there is a significant difference between when someone expresses their critical position (for example what pawel7777 touched on in this thread... or m2017's objections in the application thread) and when the user has malicious goals.

I can already say that he will soon come to this thread with a statement that he does not need this 1000 dollars. But everything is much simpler... lies cannot be supported by facts.

Excuse me, can you please quote the last time that I applied for a campaign of yours? Can you please also provide proof that I apparently started attacking you "a short period of time" after not being accepted into one of your campaigns?

I am going to address this very clearly.

You need to provide proof. This is definitely a false accusation. I can't even remember the last time I applied to one of your campaigns and if I did, I certainly would not be upset to not get accepted. This is not at all a part of my nature and it never has been for the entire time I've existed on this forum. It's a baseless accusation that can not be proven whatsoever.

What I am saying has absolutely nothing to do with being in your campaigns. I was last a member of mixtum campaign, and I think after that I maybe applied to one or two of your campaigns. To say that my opinions are based off of not being accepted into your campaigns is an outright lie. I have never complained about not being accepted into a signature campaign and I have never been ungrateful about signature campaigns. I appreciate when I am accepted and understand there are more qualified members when I am not accepted.

The truth about the basis of my comments against you is that you have behaved inappropriately and displayed that you care more about your advertising/business interests than the community.
1. You continued to promote the BC.Game campaign even while there were many open accusations. You only stopped that campaign once they stopped filling your wallet. Unlike Royse777, who will pause a campaign until any open dispute is resolved, and who is therefore acting in the interests of not just the advertiser but also in the interests of the community.
2. Leo said a lot of valid facts about Wasabi that have proven they are potentially risky to deal with, and yet you have completely ignored this and you still work with them, proving that you care less about Leo's findings and more about the money that wasabi give you.
3. After the thread by pawel7777, you have shown that you care more about the desires of Wasabi and its campaign than the freedom of opinion that users should have whether they have a signature or not.

Let's not mention Betnomi and your involvement with acting in their interests all the way until it was plain as day obvious that they scammed their players en mass as well?

The above are 3-4 reasons for my opinions about you which have been compiling over time. I have never spoken badly about a campaign manager for not accepting me into a campaign. This is downright absurd and anyone who has been reviewing my posts and existence here would surely know that this is an outright false accusation. Using this as an excuse for your actions which lead to my comments is a cheap way out, and I hope you get called out for it by another member as well.