Both of you summarized the problem of Stake campaign. I gave the manager a suggestion the last time on the former thread, but it seems they implemented what they think is the best.
The rating system is deceitful. If there's a way the participants will complain they may. I have looked at the posts of the users with good ratings, the only criterion for rating is "the length of post". These guys paste wall of texts making it impossible for anyone to read and engage in healthy conversation. There are some good posters in that campaign, but the rules is gradually turning them all to spammers.
- Remove the bonus system
- Cap the campaign at $100
- Remove the post raters, I don't think they are need
- With your weekly budget, your avatar and signature will still dominate the gambling board
I don't think we should expect much when the maximum quota is at 60 posts, and you're receiving a 20% bonus on each post made on the gambling board. The gambling board is flooded with nonsense. It's extremely common to see replies that have nothing to do with the subject of the topic!
I don't doubt that there are participants who create decent posts, but there's a large number of them who're after the maximum they can receive. I'm not going to jump into assumptions to judge their financial situation, and I'm referring to users from third-world countries, but I'm going to remain to the statement that you cannot write constructive and contributing posts when you're after such a quota. I personally couldn't imagine myself writing so many posts and remain on-point; I'd have to spend all day on the forum and still, I would either run out of subjects or a large number of my posts would be of substandard quality.
Sometimes it makes more sense to include more details in conversation rather than simply one or two liner responses. Most people are more interested in the details and how you came to such a conclusion than the answers themselves.
Stake signature is no different from other campaigns; they are only receiving negative energy because the manager does not belong to any club or pays more attention to forum politics, the DT, or the Merit system.
Four experienced individuals grade stake participants, and users with negative evaluations are dropped. My postings are misinterpreted for AI-generated content since they are perhaps too brilliant to be written by humans. I guess.
I think it would be better to own up your mistake and move on, and perhaps, you'd be forgiven by your campaign manager, community or whoever else. The deleted posts were 100% written by an AI software, I can distinguish if it's written by AI without even checking it with any kind of scanner. Most of the times I'm on point, I've reported a handful of users in the past and can now recognize them with decent accuracy. You've been caught, and this isn't the first time either. You don't seem to be learning from your mistakes.