Topic: [CFNP] BestChange Signature Campaign | Sr Member+ - page 41. (Read 133465 times)

The payment for the week 131 has been sent: https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/49f0026f809b90a95d9b9a7c736ea5dfb1ec74662a283a6b51f28cf0b1fc49ae

The bonus went to:

• Upgrade00
• zasad@
• Charles-Tim
• _BlackStar

Thank you, everyone, for your great work!

The payment is visible in the wallet since 9 hours ago, but it is still unconfirmed as of now. I think the low transaction fees are the reason why it wasn't confirmed, so a bit more patient to wait for this one. But thanks for the smooth payout this week.

We have sent the payment for the week 130: https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/791a8a50ed6e1de140451aab37d761821283d04f68a4fee39db3036eb17039c2

The bonus went to:

• examplens
• tvplus006
• crwth
• adaseb
• Nrcewker

Thank you, everyone, for your great work. Let's rock further!

I believe we should refrain from speculation and guesswork. what someone will probably do, let's leave it for the moment when it finally happens.
by guessing in such sensitive matters, we make it difficult to see the situation realistically, especially when they are this biased and stubborn.

Also, this is the signature campaign thread I would say that it is not necessary to have another place to discuss the same thing. for example, I gave you my answer in the scam accusations thread, I believe you may not have seen it. but that's not a surprise when the discussion about this case is conducted in 4 different threads.

If it is not a case for immediate alarm from most signature campaign participants then which are the minority that it is a case for immediate alarm?

That is your opinion and I welcome it, however I disagree. That is the beauty of an open forum we can all express our views 

I would say that at the very least, signature campaign participants should study the complaints against those that are paying them even if they do not make public statements to support either side to start with. After a scam or misconduct allegation is closed, signature campaign participants should leave the campaign if a scam has taken place or stay if no scam has taken place and/or a resolution has been found... or leave if they are not satisfied with the outcome.

In my opinion allegations against websites/organisations cannot be overlooked or dismissed by those promoting them simply on the basis that they pay weekly signature campaign fees on time, even with added bonuses such as in the format in which Best Change operate.

Yes that is true, hence my posting about the issue in this thread where all Best Change participants would be perusing in order to check there were updates as well as if they were in line for receiving the weekly bonus.

That is why I suggest Best Change signature campaign read what is actually being discussed about their service:

Openchange (Openchange.cash) (PARTIALLY SOLVED)
SCAM EXCHANGE MONITOR: BestChange

Well let us for argument sake say that happened in an amicable manner, that was the past. The latest allegation against Open Change via Best Change affiliate links was mentioned. The previous alleged good conduct of Best Change (in resolving scam allegations and other issues associated to them) was not raised here.

As for the thread you linked above, the very same thread has this post (#3) which also should not be dismissed: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.53602682

And my reply to it (#63) making my feelings known: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.53617135

In the same thread (post #61) the member states that the OP (that you linked above) demonstrated Best Change can add scam exchanges without proper checks: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.53616819

I think the onus is on forum members who agree to promote a business, project or service to apply due-diligence before deciding to receive remuneration in lieu of promotion. When applying due-diligence, prospective signature campaign participants can come to their own conclusions about whether they are promoting as scam or not and whether they feel they are happy to promote the website paying them.

As for me stating whether Best Change are scammers, I not am going to say they are a scam but some of their practices are borderline. For example, they promoted a scam exchange (Open Change) and the incident was mentioned by the victim. He visited bestchange.com and found Open Exchange via an affiliate link on thier website. The user sent approximately $5000 worth of crypto which they withheld, only to release 90% but kept 10% for themselves under the guise of their highly dubious Terms and Conditions. They effectively are saying their ToS allow them to confiscate 10% of funds if they they deem the transaction to be suspicious.

And they did it here:

Openchange (Openchange.cash) (PARTIALLY SOLVED)
SCAM EXCHANGE MONITOR: BestChange

Best Change have not yet answered a simple question: Are they going to receive an affiliate payment from Open Change for 10% that they stole from the victim? https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.60513258

Keeping this in perspective and looking at the current situation, I would not be promoting Best Change and would disassociate myself from them if I were on their payroll and that is only because my threshold is very short therefore for me it does not need to be an out-and-out scam for me distance myself from promoting it. Having said that, other members have their own threshold and their own criteria for carrying out their own due-diligence and come to their own conclusion.

You believe absolutely correct, it is a personal choice.

From what I can see, for now at least it is only Best Change that can force those participating it their signature campaign to make a public statement about how it conducts business on the bestchange.com website and they will probably refrain from doing so as it could backfire spectacularly on them.

For obvious reasons, signature campaign participants questioning Best Change publicly about the way it conducts business will probably be removed whereas those that do not have any issue with Best Change business practices (or those that do not publicly question it) will be allowed to continue promoting it for their weekly remuneration.

I will be waiting to read their next post in the threads I linked, especially looking for the answer to the question about whether they will receive an affiliate payment from Open Change as a result from the 10% they stole from the victim.

The payment has been sent: https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/ec3ed57211aa93742f6295ce7a4dbdc27ccfeee3daa3a08b7275e02063b2c6fb

The bonus went to:

• Darker45
• cryptoaddictchie
• hugeblack
• Charles-Tim
• Mpamaegbu

Thank you for your great work!

I personally saw it and posted what I thought in one of the threads, but this should not be a case for immediate alarm for most sig campaign participants. It's not a must that participants should have an opinion on any complaint that comes up. I believe some members don't even check on scam accusations board.

Most of the negative press was initially based on "Guilty until proven innocent" If you were active when this happened. Most members who rushed to send them negative feedback had to remove or change it to neutral.  A couple of scam accusations have come by, but even just as an exchanger monitor, they did try to resolve them amicably.

Are BestChange.com scammers? If they are, please let me know.

I believe this is a choice, not a must.

Thank you for the feedback but I disagree with the manner in which the original post was interpreted and misconstrued.

I think I expressed myself in a clear and concise manner and the expression is part of my style, my character and the way I post. I think I expressed myself appropriately but can consider using alternative words and expressions to make myself more clearer if future in need be. Having said that there really is not much to change in the original post or the subsequent follow-up because the points raised are valid even if some members might find the text somewhat harsh.

You misconstrued my post and by the looks of it even the follow-up too. What you attributed to me is factually incorrect.

Yes I can understand the time aspect. Time is always of the essence and making time for the forum is not always possible.

I certainly do not feel there is an immediate need for any signature campaign participant to post in any discussion related to Best Change as a sense of urgency but since those displaying Best Change signatures are receiving payment of at least $100 per week for doing so, they have a moral responsibility to make a decision about their future affiliation with Best Change after investigating the facts and after reading what Best Change have to say on the matter.

If after going through the claims against Best Change and the counter-claims their signature campaign participants conclude there is no reason for them to stop promoting Best Change then that is a decision for them just as it is for those that conclude they will not promote Best Change any longer and just as it is for those that will not promote Best Change until or unless they change certain business practices. Each to their own.

you say exactly what Poker Player wrote, I absolutely agree with him.
now if the two of us already understood your words like that, maybe you should think about whether you expressed yourself well.
I also came to the conclusion that leaving the campaign is a "must" because there are criticisms of the owner. whether the participants of the signature campaign are the most important part of the whole business?

I haven't had enough time for the forum in the last 2-3 days, although I followed a famous case. due to the lack of time, and there are already certain positions that I agree with. I did not consider my participation (as the bearer of the Best Change signature) in the discussion to be urgent, just didn't want to repeat things over and over again.
now I will do it anyway, to make an official note.

You misconstrued what I wrote, there is no bias attached and I am not acting as judge, jury, executioner or anything else. Your presumption to that effect is ill-concluded since there was a counter-balance written yet you picked and chose what you wanted to take the meaning out of context.

In effect, Best Change is employing people to promote it and in light of the latest allegation where their brand name and business ethics was called in to question here SCAM EXCHANGE MONITOR: BestChange

I asked for signature participants for their views because either they will support the way Best Change is conducting business therefore should be happy to defend it and therefore to promote it... or they are not happy with the way Best Change conducts business therefore should not be happy to promote it and therefore should not promote it.

If signature campaign participants are unhappy with the manner in which Best Change conducts itself and are unwilling to defend it but at the same time are happy to promote it, then that in itself raises a different question about their own moral behaviour. $400 a month plus bonuses for several members is a lot of money in many parts of the world and that can cloud judgements of even the most capable and rational people.

I am waiting for the Best Change forum representative to give their own views on the allegation in question and their signature campaign participants could or should do the the same before concluding what they feel is the best course of action for them.

Can you ask the questions in a less biased way? With this rhetorical question you are trying to force the participants in the campaign to do what you want them to do.

You are acting as judge and jury, condemning Best Change, without the trial having taken place.

I was hoping those participating in the Best Change signature campaign would take a look at this thread and then give some feedback on the subject matter: SCAM EXCHANGE MONITOR: BestChange

This is not the first time Best Change has received negative press but what do Best Change signature campaign participants think about the manner in which the business they promote is conducting itself?

Will any signature campaign participants conclude the best course of action is for them to leave and find a different signature campaign?

Will any signature campaign participants post views defending the manner in which Best Change is operating?

Send me this image, or post somewhere what you want to have in the background of the BestChange logo, I'll do it for you. I am not a design master, but I know that much 

Thanks for the answer, but unfortunately I don't understand how to use an image editor and I just resized the image for the avatar I posted. LOL
But that's okay, I also still like some of the avatars in the OP.

Please don't shrink the logo horizontally, and also please kindly enlarge it.

I have been in this campaign since the 3rd week (2 and half years), and as far as I remember there was no payment delay even once. indeed maximally responsible.

About your avatar, I would enlarge the BestChange logo a bit, just to be clearer. however, it is best to wait for approval from the campaign manager.

Glad to know that payment was made on time and smoothly. This is my second payment from the campaign, thanks Best_Change.

So here goes, I'm interested in using this avatar but I need to know if I have permission to use it?

The payment for the week 128 has been sent: https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/7153ef1d1a4146ece1534488bcc821e3a7a3fe6596f78ae16fe7c4aa8133cc54

The bonus went to:

• sheenshane
• hatshepsut93
• amishmanish
• KingsDen
• Xal0lex

Thank you, everyone, for your great work!

My first payment for this campaign received, thanks Best_Change. Let's do better.  

The payment for the week 127 has been sent: https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/821d2d4f964770142e8b0137c83e95082ebc503afebc5faf52232bfd2875b0f8

The bonus went to:

• The Cryptovator
• hugeblack
• Upgrade00
• adaseb
• Mpamaegbu

Thank you, everyone, for your excellent work!