Nice gesture from your side, but i would advise of adding the rule that "Participants may not advertise similar or competing gambling related sites while enrolled in this campaign"
Reason is that it would be both counter productive and contradictory if someone would advertise two gambling related sites, but it's your call..
I think that would be a strict call! Since they haven't any avatar ready as of now, every campaign members cannot just waste that space for nothing!
Them having no avatar currently has nothing to do with the logic by which i wrote my response. In regards to "wasting space" - Campaign needs to protect their interests,
and since they have honesty good rates compared to other campaigns, i don't see why anyone would have the greed to advertise two
competing businesses.
Another thing (in regards to gambing section posts); "At least 30% of the posts should be made on the Gambling section. "
Imagine scenario:
person A posts 100 posts , where 30 of them are in gambling section (30%) - everything good , person A is eligible for payout.
person B posts 300 posts, where 60 of them are in gambling section (20%) - person B isn't eligible for payout due to not following the rule.. ?
No your interpretation is quite wrong. Both will get paid according to 100 posts (maximum post count) whether one post 1000 post at a time, his 100 posts will be considered for payment.
My interpretation is spot on if you are reading rules in a legal way. I'm not saying they would indeed do that, but it would still be better if they added a line like:
"At least 30% of the posts should be made on the Gambling section. After 100th post in total, requirements for posts in gamblind is changed to 30 posts, not 30% of the posts "
