Quote from: dkbit98 on Today at 08:16:20 PM

Quote from: Awaklara on Today at 06:12:52 PM

If you care about your campaign, maybe you should limit the criteria of Newbie accounts that apply. Even newly created accounts you accept, it's like you intentionally attract cheaters to participate in making your campaign successful.

This would not stop cheaters doing the same cheating like usual, they only need to upgrade to jr.member rank or get those accounts in some other way.
If they are willing to do this kind of cheating for extra $5 than they can do much worse Tongue

I would not accept any inactive members, and I would take a look at forum history of all participants.

This is true but I think base on the campaign, I think the dev team might not care much about these alts and that is why they have been no much innovation on dealing with it. Since they may be likely be concerned with mainly the number of emails that give the review on playstore.

Also I don't disregard the fact that the pay is also an influence on this.

Quote from: Ojima-ojo on Today at 10:05:06 PM

This is the lowest Chester's can go in my opinion because $5 is a kind of too low to get the attention pf any reputable forum members and only newbies and Jr. Members will take such offers seriously amd if you notice a trend in the suspected accounts you will see that their are alts and most are low ranks.

The fact is in this review reputable members here won't really matter simply because the review ought to be posted on playstore and so viewers might not even be aware or recognize those who are really reputable at Bitcointalk there, this makes them focusing on rep members not their top priority rather the more, the merrier.