I understand this part, I left negative feedback on the OP account because I don't think it's fair what his site does to people, they are stealing and cheating people. but I didn't leave negative feedback on the signature campaign participants' account because honestly they already entered the campaign with negative feedback and then it's up to them to analyze if they think it's fair and correct to be promoting a scam site, I prefer to let it be themselves to put their hands on their conscience and analyze whether it is fair and correct to promote a scam site.
I can understand what you are trying to convey, but not red tagging participants and letting them escape doesn't make any sense. They are adults and they should be responsible for their own decisions at the end of the day.Scam sites like 1xbit won't get banned from this forum due to the freedom of opinion clause which is why red tagging participants is the next best alternative in my opinion.
I think the same. Tagging is a method to combat scams and frauds on the forum. The members who are negatively tagged are deliberately promoting a scam casino. It is an active aid to fraud, something that is actually punishable by law in the real world.
any effect on them even if you do pile them up with lots of negative feedback into their profile.They had got been used to these things so it would be really that useless because they do aim for the money.
Doesnt matter if this one is ethical or not as long they could make money or been paid then that what matter most.
Yes, but sooner or later this ridiculous charade will stop, but the negative tag on their accounts will remain. No legitimate business or respectable bounty manager will ever want to work with them. Only scams like 1xbit are okay with associating their brand with other scammers.
