Topic: FastBluff.com is piloting a Signature Campaign! [Highest Paying Campaign] - page 3. (Read 7899 times)

I'm sorry but you are accusing me of wanting to "scam" you?  That's a little crazy dude.

I am accusing you of not paying for advertizments made in good faith.  I have left feedback to this effect.  If you want to resolve it, we can talk about that further in PM.  In the meantime, your threatening tone really just makes you look worse.

Good luck with your endeavours.

We will not be changing the limits anytime soon. We have proved payouts, don't let one person who is obviously just wants to scam us, make this perfect campaign into something it isn't.


Payout: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7897240

We have left you negative feedback, as we set up a policy you didn't follow it. You are now not eligible to be in any of contest or signature campaign. Please stop spamming this thread as we will report it to a mod, if you want you can pm us to continue, but we have made our case very clear.

Talk to this topic and get on their list https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/overview-of-bitcointalk-signature-ad-campaigns-last-update-01-jan-23-615953
Increase your limit by a bit. If you get to 125 posts a week you will be the actual highest paying campaign. You have the same rates as primedice but you pay weekly. After the primedice campaign I would probably switch to you if you increased the limit to 100 at least, and you prove payouts.

I'd be happy to continue the conversation in PM if you have anything more to say.  For the moment, I see that you refuse to pay for posts made in good faith bearing your advertizment.  Your reasoning for this is vague.  You just say "it's not fair to us and our clients".  But you haven't addressed the obvious fact that your "system" is just a way to get free posts each week by refusing to pay for posts between the time you paid for last week and whenever you decide to "reconfirm" someone the following week.  No other ad campaigns work this way, and you know it.  There's no reason to refuse to pay for advertizing done between the time you pay and the time that you "reconfirm" and you know that too.  If you can offer something more than a trite "that's the rules, I'm sorry",  I'd be happy to hear it.

In the meantime I've left negative feedback describing the situation (I know it doesn't mean much since I'm not in the default trust ring but it's really all I can do).  I would say that you owe me for the posts I've already made this week but since your refusal to pay me for this posts is the crux of our disagreement, I've just left that as the amount risked (a paltry 0.006BTC).  I'm actually quite surprised that you would take such a strong stand to risk your good reputation and leave a contractor dissatisfied over 0.006BTC.  I would have thought that you would have taken the rational approach of viewing the facts of the argument (sed advertized for me, I should probably simply resolve the error in my system so that people who advertize for me are getting paid for it).  However, it appears that it's more valuable to you to "stick to your guns" over this system than to make things right.

If you want me to remove the negative feedback, simply pay me for the advertizing I've done for you and I'll remove it.  Good luck in the future.

I am sorry but I will not be continuing this in the thread. You can pm us if you are unhappy, but everyone else was able to follow it. We have been extremely easy on the rules we set, and we even overpaid for our first signature campaign week. So for you to be dissatisfied, is really unfair to us. We are willing to work with you, but we can't bend rules that majority of people were able to follow. It just isn't fair to us and our clients.

What?!

I'm sorry but if I'm wearing your advertizement in my signature space, how is that not a confirmation that I'm staying with the program?

Do you really, honestly, think that someone would wear your advertizement in their signature space and not expect to be paid for it?  I was away over the weekend and therefore I did not reply to your pm immediately.  Still, your advertizement was up on my posts over this time period, why do you think you should get that for free?

This morning I added nearly 10 more posts in good faith advertizing for you.  Now you reply to me in the evening and say, "ok, i just caught up with you and i'm putting you back in at your current post count"??

If this is really the way your program works then consider this:

1. You pay for a given week.
2. You are now getting free advertizing because you won't pay for any posts until you "reconfirm" people
3. People say, ok, please let me reconfirm.
4. You eventually reconfirm them and you don't have to to pay for posts between steps 2--4!?

Obviously, under your system, I would immediately remove your ad upon payment and wait for you to "reconfirm" me before I put your ad back.

Finally, can you please explain how this is "unfair to everyone else" if you simply pay people for the posts that they made in good faith with your signature?  How many free advertizments (unpaid posts) did you get from everyone else?  Why wouldn't you simply pay them for the advertizing you got?

I think the obvious fair thing is to pay everyone for the advertizing that you got from them.  If you are not willing to reconsider, I'll be resigning from the program as soon as possible.

Your post count is starting at 202, because in our pm to you about the first report, we asked you to confirm if you were continuing with us, you have just responded to that pm now. I am sorry but we have to take our post count from when you confirmed you were staying in the campaign. We can't bend this rule, as other people followed this and it would be unfair to them.

Yes, of course the same address.  But why on earth should my post count start at 202?  It should certainly start at whatever it was at when you paid me last week.  I haven't taken down your signature in the mean time?  Why would you refuse to pay for posts made with your signature?

I'll have to check to see exactly where I was at when you paid me last, but I believe it was in the low 190s.  That should be my starting post count.

To emphasize: I have worn your advertizement all week.  I have posted with your signature nearly 10 posts already this week.  I can't understand why you would refuse to pay for posts made with your signature in place?  If this is truly the case, I would consider it to be a deal breaker.  Please clarify as soon as possible.

EDIT: I checked the dates on my posts, as far as I can tell you last paid me at post 195.  So this should be my starting post count this week.  If that's not the way things work, then I'm pretty dissatisfied and I'll be resigning immediately.  Just waiting to (hopefully) hear that there's some simple misunderstanding here.

Ok so your post count is going to start at 202. And you want us to use the same address?

Yes this is fine.

Great, so I'm continuing with this campagin on the premise that it's still weekly.

Thanks fastbluff and I hope that you can work out the issues with twitter/macaffee soon.

Ok..  can you tell me how to update my sig to the other bright colored one? never mind that, can I use this one?

⚀ Fastbluff ⚁⚃ || 1% House Edge Dice Game || Instant Payouts || Thread

I have updated my sig with this one, if it is not accepted, pls tell me and I will change it to default one. Thanks

Thank you for the reply

I also said unless we promised you a spot. We reach ~15 people including the people that we promised a spot, so while no new people can join, the people that have post that I said they can join, will be able.

Im sorta confused, you guys say you are closed, but when more people apply they still get in??

Correct me if im wrong pls.

Confirmed.


We don't update that information in the middle of a round, that will change with the new round.

Hi, I became a full member today, So kindly update my pay per post from 22nd July posts. Thanks

Signing Up...

Posts:   2284
Activity:   252
Position:   Sr. Member
Address:    17tdm21TXzThSaeXkGsLzQXRR7JjUJ9q8E

Please Confirm...