This is a theory I never thought of before but it fits in with the bigger picture that they have many super spammers and low quality posters on their signature campaign and not only that, they have many members that have received multiple neutral and negative tags.
Having said that, I would be more inclined to think that in this sort of scenario the campaign manager is the one that would be controlling the selection process therefore the company might be completely innocent and the whole problem was created as a smokescreen by the campaign manager as he runs the multiple accounts and takes the money for himself.
Is that more probable in this case considering Stake is a massive enterprise and are not exactly short on cash for running campaigns?
~snip~
Another explanation may be that multiple people use the same account, or multiple accounts, which is why you can notice differences in his posts, in terms of writing style, grammar and AI usage. It's extremely evident in posts that he's expressing his opinion and in others that actually require some knowledge to answer, in terms of definitions, technical specifications etc.
I would be inclined to exactly that theory, considering that the manager wholeheartedly defends exactly such shitposters who could actually be part of the alt network that the company bought to promote itself on the forum. I wouldn't be surprised if they then hired one or more people to manage that network, and of course they use AI and paraphrasing to do their job.
It is obvious that such a way of promoting pays off, because the investment in buying alt accounts is returned in the way that they do not actually pay unique members to advertise them. Unfortunately, apart from the persistent report such post and the hope that some of the global mods will react with a ban, red tags or flags are quite ineffective for such things.