Topic: ★ LuckyBit Bitcoin Talk Affiliate Program ★ [CLOSED] - page 65. (Read 221315 times)

stingle my bro it is writing there!!!
you are confused again!!!
i can't cut his hands!!
 


MAAAAAAAAAAAARRY CHRISTMAAASSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!
but...
you are firing users from this campaign...
and i think 12H off line it is a little bit too much!!!



I am truly peaceful!!!
at Christmas we are all better!!!

 

ah.. my brother it is better too!!!

and you???

I sincerely hope you have a happy Christmas evening ...

I absolutely respect stingleword's diligence in monitoring his advertisers. I think its a good thing that someone is hands on with their business and has a clear direction of how they want their company to be seen and how their company operates.

It is sadly where stingleword states that he wishes other advertisers were as diligent as he was, where I have a problem. Many other campaign owners don't care about the issue of multi-accounts since their company is still receiving exposure and a lot of people, myself included, write professionally and in a manner that promotes their company in a positive way. There is nothing in my personal opinion or own ethical stance that suggests multi-accounts are wrong in any way or negative for the community. There is equally nothing that seems to commercially support what appears to be a personal vendetta. What is the benefit of ''denouncing in public'' multi-account users when it is not ethically disagreeable nor against the rules of this forum, as has been well established.

Registered!

I would agree with you if other signature campaigns were half as vigilant about undesired behavior as I have been.

If other campaign managers want to get on the train, I'll share with them. I don't see a need to air dirty laundry. They aren't violating the forum rules, and I'm not interested in interfering with the thriving account marketplace by publicly airing linked accounts.


You weren't aware because nobody was, apparently. What I thought would be common sense ("Don't cheat the signature campaigns by dual enrollments") has to now be explicitly and strictly enforced. I'm not writing you off as a scammer, I'm temporarily barring you and any other participants that have abused the signature campaign system.


1) I already did, and with some more details, per your request.
2) If you're sharing your wallet, you are being rightly disqualified. Shared wallets are the core of this problem.
3) Because I only just discovered the infraction recently.

I appreciate your attitude about this. If you wish to re-apply in the future, I may reconsider your participation; please wait at least 30 days to do this. I assert that the "we" at the beginning of your post really should have been an "I", based on this reply:


Are you aware that it's Christmastime?

I'm a busy man. I have a life. Human arms, legs, and a stomach that requires food in it to keep the hands that type these words functional. I cannot answer every question every day in an incredibly timely manner. I've been offline for about 12 hours, what is the urgency that requires this post? None. The OP is already updated to state you will be disqualified for using a spend-linked wallet, so this post is causing trouble for no reason at all.


I won't dignify this comment with a response. Attitude is everything when I make considerations for this campaign, as I mentioned previously.

To close this subject once and for all: It never should have come to this. It is simple, common sense that signature campaign abuse is going to risk getting you kicked out of them, and if you are asking for "explicit" defined rules concerning this simple common sense foundation, then you are clearly looking for a way to cheat. If you are an honest advertiser that isn't trying to game the system, then you won't feel threatened by this change and don't have anything to worry about.

Because on that time, Luckybit sig campaign become the only one campaign left.
Also luckyb.it provide first in basis and "got kick or re-enroll" basis 

^ they lowered the member payment so no members join this campaign now. And lately some better paying campaigns appeared so others don't join as much either.

Ah, but still, slots on this campaign were usually always snapped up as soon as they became available.

@hilariousandco stingleword is removing everyone with more than one account from the campaign, I think. People are being kicked out faster than entering. xD

stingle,
why you are not answering?

i can not read mods in OP page under "You will be disqualified and barred from the campaign if:"
i think if you clarify you can help other users to understand better signature campaign rules.
if you do not want to answer, at least, update the OP page under "You will be disqualified and barred from the campaign if:"...

i remember you,
you had many weeks of campaign signature for free, from many users!!!

I haven't checked this thread in a while, but damn, 12 free slots! What's going on? I wonder if people are not just joining this because of the bet requirement. What is the minimum you have to bet to become ellegible?

I'd like to enroll:
Post count: 986
BTC address: 16zob7e2DZycSBjMKHoipsqdu3KiDmd8uS
Last bet: http://luckyb.it/check?txin=d0d79e0ac0c284c0c46f5c57543c547ce93f58dc9dd0aa4d7cce4446a2519a45:0

Daanie, there has been some misunderstanding.
My post was in no way directed at you. It was a generic statement because Stingle comes across many alts.

Botany, how does that make me a scammer? First of all I didn't enroll this campaign twice. Second of all, I only have one alt. Third of all I wasn't aware of that unwritten rule (it's not written in your rules section). I got an alt account because I recovered the password of this account a few months back while I created this account in march. I didn't intentionally create this account to do dual account signature "abuse".

Last but not least; I've made over 80 posts, 30 more than I should. I write my posts like I usually would so OP there shouldn't be much to whine about and write me off as a scammer. Anyways good luck with your campaign.

Hi Stingle,

If your background check reveals alt accounts of known scammers, it would be better for the Bitcoin community if you publicly name them. Makes the forum a safer place. 

Your background check revealed links to alt accounts that are enrolled in other signature campaigns. Dual account signature abuse is a growing and chronic problem that I am actively combating. Sorry you've been swept in the net, but this is long overdue.

Sorry I'm Dutch but what rule did I exactly abuse?

ahahaaha

this question makes me realize enough of you

 

Requesting Enrollment.

Posts: 272
BTC Address: 13iQreg2V1iCkWWDA5g1AG3Y8Z6bC5wKJD
Recent Bet: http://luckyb.it/check?txin=e7c4656eecc59ea006daa5d7e5838bbf030c83cf7a0145ce13df6b0416589371:0

stingle...
we understand your point of view..
but we do not consider to have cheated.
for us it is ok... i and my bro have no problem to skip this lap...
we like bitcoin and we hope it will rise and become really a standard around the world.
so we continue to write and learn and it is not a problem for us to be disqualified, but i repeat, we do not consider to have cheated.

but we ask you two things.

1) specify in the op page under "You will be disqualified and barred from the campaign if" to not use the same wallet for different account.
2) we do not know if in the futures we will ask to enroll again... but if we will want? How to not be disqualified again? just use 2 different wallet?
3) why do you wait 3 weeks to disqualify us? you get 3 weeks of signature from 2 users for free... A better approach could be pay this month and never, i say never, accept enrollemnt from the users who you think have cheated!

no hard feelings... and marry christmas  

Today's qualified payments have been background checked and paid.

EternalWingsOfGod - 0.1BTC - f9d7dd34343583d7005811e14f1147db2e8983a080273a75c0e8e0c821dd6403

This user is being paid for a complete enrollment but disqualified for abuse:

Daanie - 0.05BTC - 78f54c66210ce9a14d519f17ae5a6b20f9d0944006579a5273239723f62a2076

This particular instance sees only a few days' overlap so I didn't feel the user should go unpaid; however, a crackdown is a crackdown so I won't allow you to re-enroll anytime soon. Same goes for your discovered alt(s).