Quote from: LoyceV on Today at 02:00:57 PM

Quote from: suchmoon on Today at 12:54:43 PM

If you don't trust someone's judgement, why would you apply to join a campaign managed by that someone?

As long as you trust the campaign manager, I don't really see a reason not to join. Unless you're expecting a tag because of the campaign manager's bad judgement on others.

My understanding of "judgement" is a bit wider. Managers can have a lot of discretion in how they run campaigns, so if I don't trust someone's judgement to the point of "~" then I probably don't trust their ability to properly manage a signature campaign, even if I don't believe they would outright scam/steal/etc.

Quote from: LoyceV on Today at 02:00:57 PM

Quote

I'd say anyone who thinks that way ("will this affect my signature earnings if I make this exclusion") shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the trust system

If someone excludes a campaign manager from his Trust lists and applies for a campaign, it shows he doesn't care about potential financial consequences. Even better if the campaign manager still accepts him (assuming he qualifies), to show his skin is thick enough to separate the exclusion from business.

Not sure if you're agreeing with me here or disagreeing LOL, but my point was that trust lists should not be affected by signature campaigns in any way, shape, or form. Whether users are self-censoring their trust lists to avoid pissing off campaign managers, or managers are thin skinned, or managers perhaps farming trust - all of that is terrible, but almost certainly happening to some extent.