Wrong. Being non transparent opens you up to corruption and backhanders. Projects are not wanting to be associated with corrupt and devious campaign managers.
Not being transparent makes you seem like you have something to hide? do you have something to hide?
I would say campaign managers are expendable especially if they taint the projects they are hired to help promote.
I have told campaign managers before they are in a very sensitive and fragile position. Do you not understand this hhampuz?
Why not say QS did X which broke the rules so I removed him?
Feel free to message any of my employers and see how they feel about it. Someone did that a while ago and my employer told me straight up that they just laughed at someone trying to smear my rep.
I am nothing but professional when it comes to my campaigns and all of it is in the public here at the forum. Guess that's the reason why I keep getting hired but hey, don't just take my word for it, message them!
Messaging your employers would only be the first step. Multiple scam threads and reputation threads regarding them and their deliberate selection of a campaign manager who refuses to give transparent and fair opportunities to each member is enough to brand the project a scam. There is no reason NOT to give a transparent explanation of your actions or it leaves both you and your project open to corruption and scam accusations and rightfully so.
Once you have a google page full of scam accusations which could be bumped and filled regularly with posters who are disgruntled at unfair treatment is a negative the project does not need to have. The campaign manager is far more expendable.
If you are fair then you have no reason not to be transparent about your actions. The only reason to hide the reasons behind your actions would be if you had something to hide? Too many of these unexplained actions is totally grounds for a corruption and scam thread on both you and also the project if they do not capitulate and hire a transparent campaign manager that hires and fires all persons equally on the same grounds or they ARE CORRUPT and scammers.
This I do what the fuck I want with no explanation needed is certainly one that looks very shady to me. What project was this relating to?
I ask you again. What was the reason you dropped QS? did he do something during his time that broke the rules that would have got anyone else dropped too?
Back handers and also even worse colluding parties receiving the tokens from an initial distribution of a project is even more worrying. I don't think you understand the gravity of what it is you are doing or what it is you are saying.
Is it asking too much to ask for fair transparent rules that are applied equally to all members? do you get back handers for choosing certain members? do you get a larger share of the profits if a colluding bunch manipulate the markets for new tokens before dumping? how can you prove you do not? this is why you need to be transparent and open about things.