Topic: [Guide] Factors to consider before joining paid signature campaigns. (Read 2846 times)

I totally agree with you, this factor is a very important one to consider before joining a campaign. I know somehow who engaged in a campaign and the campaign requires him to make at least 5 post from the gambling section, and he is not much of a sport person but he engaged in the post because of the money to be paid out in the campaign. He ends up making a very low quality post in the gambling section just to meet up with the post count, if the campaign had require him to post maybe 2times from the gambling section he would have at least been able to come up with a better quality post than that of 5.

One fact I like is that every member here uses a psuedonym as names they go by and even if they join any signature campaigns, the comments from previous posts shouldn't be much of a worry to the individual when joining a new campaign, unless they joined campaigns or participated in boards discussion that has little to boost their reputation.

Morals get to be tested from what I have read too and if someone is against gambling and does campaign for a gambling site, that makes them accomplice to gambling too.
Still, shouldn't joining signature campaigns here, be more of a job description rather than many members referring to it in a mocking way, as though those of whom it benefits aren't doing it more for the pay than for the love ?

It is important that you know this, joining any campaign is at your own risk for them to pay you or not, and you will receive a tag because you're contributing to the promotion of a fictious site, though the forum doesn't moderate scam, but the tag members will leave on you will help any future dealings you may engage into with other members have a clue about your past deals and promotions.


Its very important to read the rules and regulation under the campaign OP thread on the first page, many will first jump into applying before taking time to read what is in their campaign rules which is wrong.

Thank you for completing the translation dear DS. As I told you and Gazeta, I was busy with my business. I had to take a short break from the forum and online platforms to pay full attention to my business. As I posted in our local thread, this is an important thread that should be available on various local boards so it reaches to maximum number of users.

Even though there are some high-ranked members and they have spent a lot of time on this forum, still they get confused when it comes to ethics and following some basic things. I just noticed a thread in the Meta board where this thread was mentioned. This could be another example why people should read this thread.

All what you have listed is actually true. Especially knowing the reputation of the campaign you are advertising here because it could lead to receiving red trust. Because you are speaking good of a campaign that is not as good as you call it .

Another point I also love is to check the the maximum post per week before joining the campaign otherwise you might end up joining a campaign that will make you post out of point do to completing of post count. And also lastly to making sure we know what we are about to promote. Because according to the image of the user above, shows that the owner of that account is not promoting gambling rather talking out of point because he doesn't like gambling but was just fortunate to work with a gambling campaign.

Hey dear CryptopreneurBrainboss!

Hope you are doing well

I am the member of ABOT ( The Alliance of Bitcointalk Translators)

I have completed translation of your very useful topic in Arabic language. Can you Please update Translation in OP?

Translation Link: [الدليل] العوامل التي يجب مراعاتها قبل الانضمام إلى حملات التوقيع المدفوعة.

Have a good day 

Nalain420 ~

Hey Brain Boss.

Here is the translation of this topic in "Bangla" language. Can you please update OP.

Post link: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.63633807

Learn Bitcoin was originally supposed to do this translation but he is kind of busy and later asked me to do it. It's been reviewed by Gazeta. I am also a backup translator for Bangla language at AOBT. Just letting you know.

Cheers,
DS

Usually, I take a little longer than average time to complete the translations because I don't want to feel pressured. Moreover, I am too busy with my new start-up and I am doing the translations only when I have some free time.

Let's get back to your post. I understand your whole point. I also agree that writing 10 posts a day isn't spamming. But, when you see a particular campaign participants doing it for ages and you do not see those participants out of some specific boards, you might have a negative thought about them and I don't think everyone will disagree with me about it.

Yeah, I have noticed that you have removed some participants for spamming. One of my local was removed from one of your campaign due to a neutral feedback and that is something I should appreciate. If campaign managers act accordingly like this one, the forum would have less spammy threads and posts.

Let me start from here because I'll be looking forward to your translation, hoping to see it soon.


I believe writing 10 posts per day shouldn't be considered spamming provided what you're writing is adding value to the thread you're discussing on and the the forum in general. I write 10 post part day very often and I won't consider them spamming irrespective or them being on the gambling board (which I used to do before but can't remember when last I wrote there). There are users writing quality post on the gambling board and not all members there are spamming so we shouldn't be generalising although there are high chances of seeing spammers on the board because it's very easy to communicate over there.


I was surprised nobody has questions this part but I'm glad you did. As I said earlier 10 post per day on the forum isn't spam and many members are doing that frequently including myself. 10*6 that's 60 and that's the maximum required for my campaigns. Is that high yes but you're not mandated to write up to that amount. Many campaigns has paid upto 50 posts including the great chipmixer campaign and we didn't discredit the campaign because they didn't mandate the participants to write 50 posts and I'm also not mandating my participatants to write that. A look at the both spreadsheet and you'll see that many participants aren't writing the maximum. Everybody is doing the best they can and as for spamming the forum, alot of users has been removed from the campaign and posts also getting denied, this isn't a complete solution but whoever is spamming and get reported gets an automatic removal. Getting a neutral  (not even a red) also gets you removed for spamming.

PS: If participating in my campaigns is going to turn you into a spammer avoid them and apply for other campaigns with less weekly quota.

I have read this thread before, But I don't remember If I have ever commented on this topic. I agree with everything you have shared but look at this point. I always considered stake participants as spammers because they could write more than ten posts a day without adding any value to this forum and all they write on gambling boards. There was a time when I also wrote ten posts a day but not on the gambling boards. I used to write in the several boards of the forum.

Now the reason I have quoted this part, I believe two of your campaigns contradict this point. I don't want to mention the campaign name but those campaigns allow users to write up to 60 posts and they are going to get paid for all those posts. More importantly, Tier E encourages spam in the forum. You may have a different point of view. But, I believe this is also a fact.

Anyway, I have started working on translating this thread for my locals. I hope I will finish the translation soon.

Hey CryptopreneurBrainboss, here is the Portuguese Version https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/guia-fatores-a-serem-considerados-antes-de-participar-em-campanhas-de-assinatu-5483476
Thank you so much for allowing me to translate it 

Sorry for the delay translating the topic (you have to prioritize day-to-day obligations, although it is no excuse).

I have posted it in the "Beginngers & Help" section of the Spanish board: lately we have seen a rise of Spanish speaker newbies there who are interested in joining signature campaigns, and I'm sure that these guidelines will be very beneficial for them (those who read them, at least).

Please, consider notifying us (AoBT) every time major changes are done in the OP, so we can update our respective translations. Keep up!

You are definitely NOT neutral, when writing such a statement:

View this as an example.

It could not get any clearer...


Shitposting for a few bucks is a different issue....


This is not what I or anyone else here said.
No need for that strawman...
We can wear a legitimate campaign and still be happy to get some sats. But we should not wear any shady signature just to earn a few bucks.

No need to like the project, but we should not oppose it fundamentally (like you did).

That's coming close to what people have written here.

Wrong, I've said that when wearing a signature campaign, we should not oppose it fundamentally.

Wrong again...
People wearing a signature campaign, should not oppose it fundamentally. Otherwise, they are hypocrites.

Misguided clowns like you are destroying the forum whith your nonsense sigspam:

View this as an example.

---

The brand name appears directly right to your forum name and your forum profile. Of course it's an endorsement and we should select the campaigns carefully.
High paying campaign are selecting the most reputable forum members for a reason.
What anyone else does, when coming over our signatures is not our issue.
But we, as a participant in that campaign, should always be able to get behind the advertised project. Otherwise, we should not support it.


Then, maybe a gambling signature is not suited for you...
Why advertising it then, if you think, it's harmful for other people?
Your advertisements are even leading to damage according to your previous statements.
You are just hypocritical, nothing else.
This is so nuts, if we think about your hate against gambling, while your are happily advertising it in your signature to gain a few bucks. 

If you don't like gambling and you are opposing it, fine. But then, don't wear a paid gambling signature... 


No one said that...
Wearing a signature just means that we can get behind that project and would use it.
No need to be in love with the project.
Your way of twisting words is so massively misleading. 


They way you are twisting our words here, saying things, no one has ever said in the topic and other strange conclusions are just pointless.
Of course people will point out, that your comment about gambling while wearing a gambling signature, is not how this works.

If you don't like gambling, no need to join a paid signature campaign about gambling.
Easy as that...

---

Wearing a signature IS a personal endorsement, as said before.

---

They way you are asking the question is already completely misleading because no one here ever said by wearing a signature "The wearer encourages you to use the advertised service".
Wearing a signature doesn't mean to "encourage anyone to use the advertised service".
Wearing a signature just means that a participant agrees, that the service is legitimate to use.
Wearing a signature just means that a participant could say: "Yes, I can get behing using that service". What any viewer of this possible signature does, is completely their choice.

---

And we won't settle this debate as well, when you are asking completely misleading questions. 
You are taking this purposefully out of context to get your preferred answer...

Edit after initial reply

It seems that you both genuinely think that signatures are personal endorsements. I genuinely think that they are paid advertisements and should not be perceived as personal endorsements (as not ad should, imo). We will never settle this debate until we get more opinions.

So I made this thread. If you choose to go there and share your opinion, please do not include the drama in this thread.

If I am wrong, and the community agrees that signatures are to be taken as personal endorsements by readers, and not paid advertisement, with good reasoning and resounding consensus, I will apologize for my posts, remove my signature and join a non-gambling campaign that I am comfortable with personally endorsing.

---

The most important part of my response


I don't disagree with coins.game, I don't agree with them either as they are a casino. I am neutral. IF coins.game started scamming users or doing wrong by them, then I would disagree with them and then, I would leave the campaign as I would not agree with them. Is that not acceptable? (You don't have to answer any of this reply but I want you to at least answer this question).

The majority of people join signature campaigns for the payout, otherwise, do you think forum signatures would look the same tomorrow if all payouts no longer paid any btc? No, they would promote things that either deliver their personal message, or would personally benefit them...not provide free advertising to some profit machine like a casino or mixer.

Otherwise, what you are saying is that in order to join a campaign, you must:
- Have no motivation about the BTC you are being rewarded
- Join because they like the project only
- Promote in the interests of the project EVEN if it is not in line with their opinions

You are also saying that:
- People who aren't speaking in the interests of the campaign are hypocrites
- People who voice an opinion that against the interests of the campaign industry are hypocrites

If there were actually official guidelines that enforced your ideology, then this would manipulate how people post, it would create influence over people via signature campaign, and it would destroy the forum.

---

The rest of my responses


I disagree with that completely. Please provide a reference where it states officially that a signature is a personal endorsement.


If you actually bothered to look at my posts, I do not consistently post about "anti-gambling" in the gambling board/I do not go around screaming "gambling is bad, don't do it" to people, but I do not go around saying "gambling is good, go ahead and do it" either. I warn of the dangers, I make my position clear (more on the "don't gamble" side than "gamble" side) and I only criticize casinos if they have done something unethical toward players, which unfortunately, is a lot of the time. If my post doesn't fit into the latter descriptions, then I am just participating in conversation like normal. I don't have to be a gambler to participate in conversation, just like I don't have to be a developer to post in the technical discussions board. If campaign sponsors had a problem with my posts, I'd have been kicked out of campaigns long ago.

A campaign manager is paying me because my posts are naturally of good quality and I probably generate traffic for whatever is in my signature. That's why I get paid. It's a fair deal. I go about my activity here as normal, and get paid because my activity has value. That's the same for everyone.

Also, are you saying that people are wearing signatures because they love and believe in the project they are promoting? If you took the money away from the signature campaign today, I'd bet that at least 90% of people will leave their campaigns or change it to an affiliate ad of some sort. Your rationale here is totally invalid, to put it most politely.


I see it as that I'm defending my honor, I have a right to do that and I am sure others would do the same. Sure though, call me butthurt.

Also I'm not attacking brainboss either, I am responding to his decision and telling him my side of things since clearly, he is not aware of how I look at things. If he is ignorant to that purposefully then of course I'm going to ask him things like, "do you have an agenda?"...because why else would someone blatantly ignore good reasoning? I have a right to complain to him as you did not insert that image into the thread, he did.


Hey, thank you for the honesty in your post. You are partially right, I like to think of it as continuing the conversation by expanding on my viewpoint. I can breakdown and articulate my rationale/viewpoint on a nano level, so I always have something to reply, whether it be explaining where I am coming from or disagreeing. I won't say that I always do that though, I do see the other side if it makes sense on a logical and rational level.

I agree with you there that you are not a spammer nor a shit poster. You engage in conversation with genuine interest which is why you are able to write in detail. Your posts are constructive. They hired you because of their professionalism. I can guarantee you that even if their known enemies apply in their signature campaign but that user writes good posts, those campaign managers probably accept them because of their professionalism. The problem is in your mind. You are promoting gambling through your signature space while you believe it's unethical. Another point is you cannot take criticism. You jump towards others who write against your point of view.

Everything is said about the issue.
You are wearing gambling signature and are getting paid for that, while you are actively advocating against gambling. So, why are you wearing that signature if you don't like gambling at all but you are still advertising for it in your signature? You are wearing the signature just to get some cheap sats for free!


Wearing a paid signature is a personal endorsement, it's directly appearing next to your forum name.
And why should a gambling site even pay for your anti-gambling posts? You wouldn't pay for an ad on TV as well, where it says "our product is shit, please don't buy".  


It's not inaccurate, it's a perfect example for the point "Join a campaign you agree with and not just for the payout."
Heck, it couldn't get more accurate.  

And if you really want to keep looking butthurt like you are looking currently, please complain to me, as I'm the one who created the picture.
Your attacking of CryptopreneurBrainboss here just for doing his job is beyond hypocritical.

If you don't like the picture, you should have thought twice before typing such nonsese while wearing a gambling signature.  

Saying that I spam on the board is very far from the truth. I do not spam in that board, I advocate against casinos and their usage because I am for the people, not for the casinos. Does that mean my posts are spam? Absolutely not. Does that mean all of my posts are advocating against gambling/casinos? Absolutely not. I post in topics that interest me there, period.

Also, whether a merit source is there or not will make no difference to whether I post there or not. If I was a spammer, Little Mouse and Royse777 wouldn't allow me into their campaigns. The truth is, my posts are if anything of higher quality than majority of the other posts in that board.

I opposed to the merit source idea because I believe that it will increase spam there. The incentives provided by casinos already causes inflation of posting in that board, and the addition of merit sources would only increase the incentive to post there....thus, more spam. Casinos and people like you may like the idea, but neither think of the negatives, corruption and poor quality that already exists, and how that might get worse. Who is really blinded by the dollars?

I also already said to you multiple times in multiple ways about having an advertisement in my signature. Just because I don't like the gambling business, doesn't mean I won't take their money for having an advertisement in my signature. Doesn't mean I am a hypocrite either. Hypocrisy would be if I was in my position but then personally endorsed casinos with my words and my posts. That would be hypocrisy. However, signatures are not personal endorsements and never will be. M

My only prerequisite before advertising is that they are not a scam, which I rely on my own due diligence and the campaign managers to ensure. I trust Little Mouse and Royse777 when it comes to this and they are generally the campaign managers that I prefer to work with. They also understand where I stand and why they allow me to join their campaigns, even if they're gambling related. Why? Because overall, I am a high quality poster. I am genuinely interested in being on this forum, I like to converse, and ultimately, I add value to threads. If that was not the case, I would struggle to be accepted into a campaign. That's not a brag, that's reality.

You might think I am not adding value to this thread, I think you are wrong...By you mentioning me, I have looked at you under a microscope...the only reason I am here is because you are creating rules when you have no authority to do so, and mislabeling people with rules and guidelines like the one involving me, which is inaccurate...and of course, now that I've pointed out some things like thinking you have the authority to create global signature campaign guidelines (that are more than just assistance for beginners), and potentially having an agenda, you have decided to not only reply to a lot of my previous post, but claim it adds no value.

I ask you again to reconsider your usage of my profile in the OP of your thread, as it is inaccurate (again, unless your agenda is to disqualify objective thinkers against gambling from signature campaigns by labeling them as hypocrites)

You're promoting a gambling site through your signature which means you have to be writing on the gambling board, there's a request for a merit source for the board that'll obviously increase the post quality of the board as member try to write better to increase their chances of been merited but no, you opposed because you enjoy the spam going on on the board as it helps you complete your post count and gets you paid with the excuse that you want to take the money the casinos for yourself (that it's better with you than with them). This just goes to show your true nature, you say the casino are scamming the gamblers then why don't you fight against that by not having anything to do with the gambling sites but guess you can't do without the signature payouts which just makes you a hypocrite and a perfect example to the second point of this thread.

This might be the last respond you get from me because I can see you aren't adding any valuable discussion to this thread and I won't do you the honors of giving you more reason to fish for your weekly post on this thread. People found this thread useful that's why they resurrected it, I don't know who did that but thank you for that. Again I said you mightn't find the thread valuable to you but your stupidity can't be forced on others. We have those that'll find the thread useful and those are the targeted audience not a hypocrite just chasing after money without any moral values.

I think that your guideline is ultimately pointless and a lot of what I had said has been completely ignored.

I'll use the Marmite example again.

Let's say that I don't like marmite, how it is made or it's ingredients, and yet, I can still talk about Marmite constructively (and objectively if I I wanted to) and was offered to be paid by Marmite to advertise Marmite in my signature.

Does taking this advertising opportunity really mean that I am compromising myself just to take an opportunity to lease digital space in my forum signature?

Of course, gambling has higher ethical and moral problems than Marmite. However, if I am able to go to that board and post constructively and objectively, and have a different opinion than just "yay I love gambling and I gamble my signature earnings to Stake.com every week" (as is how a lot of the gambling board members are there) then is that not a good thing?

The consequence of your guideline and using me as an example of this false label of hypocrisy is that you have no one who is incentivized to think objectively and against the unhealthy gambling nature in that board. Your guideline is trying to make all campaign participants to be proponents with no subjective/objective thinking toward Gambling, and exclude those who think differently.

Is that the agenda you want to push?

Evaluating the maximum post required every week is very important because sometimes due to the pressure of trying to meet up to the maximum post per week in order to receive higher pay might make one to make shitpost, low quality posts, or even go off topics. So it is advisable to join campaign that give you time to calculate and make informative and quality posts rather than make shitpost just because you want to meet up the target.