Quote from: LoyceV on Today at 07:49:06 AM

Quote from: mindrust on June 06, 2024, 06:56:08 PM

What if we tag stake.com, their manager and the participants for spamming?

That would be considered Trust abuse.

+1

Quote from: Lucius on Today at 09:56:44 AM

I'm sure that nobody reads those posts, and even if they do, they can't have an IQ higher than 50. It is clear to all of us that this campaign currently holds the leading position in generating spam on this forum (together with a couple of super low pay rates campaigns), so suggestions that someone should spend several hours every day cleaning up after them do not make much sense.

However, managers (if they really exist there) marked this user as writing quality posts. As far as I understand, they have standards for how the post should look, but the content itself is completely irrelevant.
Quotes as a sign of discussing a certain topic with someone, two or three paragraphs, a picture (preferably from the Stake site). For those who are short-sighted, this picture looks pretty good.

Quote

The only thing that would give results is a temporary ban on that campaign, and mandatory running of the campaign (if it were to be started again) by a respectable manager - this has already happened in the past when such positions were taken by @Lauda and @hilariousandco.

We can't ban a campaign because we don't like the quality they bring. How will we even determine which manager is up to the task? I believe that every manager has those who think that he is not doing his job well, and that would be an endless discussion.

The Stake campaign is currently the most talked about, so it can be concluded that it is also a form of success. They definitely attracted attention.