The AdkinsBET Army of Alts

[LoyceV]

gadado and M16 have been active more recently, and both are now sporting a spiffy new web cam/sex site ad in their signature (jangacams).

Isn't that against the rules?

10. No embedded NSFW images anywhere. NSFW content must be marked accordingly.

[TwitchySeal]

They are awake and promoting 1xbit now

So maybe they're just sig sluts and not related directly to adkinsbet?

[Adzivu]

Some of those users didn't have adkinsbet avatar/sig, but where defending the site fiercely.

All of them where offline for a while and now are back.
All posting subsequently.
If I were stupid I'd say it's coincidence.

[TwitchySeal]

Some of those users didn't have adkinsbet avatar/sig, but where defending the site fiercely.

All of them where offline for a while and now are back.
All posting subsequently.
If I were stupid I'd say it's coincidence.

They were true shills.  Many of them were wearing sigs for other casinos while not even being members of any campaign simply to appear as if they were not being paid to promote adkins bet.

[examplens]

gadado and M16 have been active more recently, and both are now sporting a spiffy new web cam/sex site ad in their signature (jangacams).

Isn't that against the rules?

10. No embedded NSFW images anywhere. NSFW content must be marked accordingly.

If we talking only about signature space, I guess the rule is not violated here. they only have links to adult websites and have not posted NSFW images here ^{I haven't checked their post history}. Two different things.
As I remember, this is not the first time that someone advertises NSFW websites here and as far as I know, it was not considered a violation of the rules nor were there any sanctions for it.
But maybe I am wrong.

[actmyname]

gadado and M16 have been active more recently, and both are now sporting a spiffy new web cam/sex site ad in their signature (jangacams).

Isn't that against the rules?

10. No embedded NSFW images anywhere. NSFW content must be marked accordingly.

If we talking only about signature space, I guess the rule is not violated here. they only have links to adult websites and have not posted NSFW images here ^{I haven't checked their post history}. Two different things.
As I remember, this is not the first time that someone advertises NSFW websites here and as far as I know, it was not considered a violation of the rules nor were there any sanctions for it.
But maybe I am wrong.

Putting the cart before the horse there. A signature, which effectively turns all your posts (past, present, and future) into advertisements is somehow more acceptable than a singular post with the same content.

Hmm....

[Timelord2067]

Putting the cart before the horse there. A signature, which effectively turns all your posts (past, present, and future) into advertisements is somehow more acceptable than a singular post with the same content.

Hmm....

Not only that but if you are able to post in a thread on the very first page and the thread then goes on to become quite popular, your signature (regardless of past, present or future signature) will be on display as I have a feeling readers will scroll down the first page then jump to the last page before posting, so the first page is prime advertising space, hence the "Army" swarms to get their incessant posts in as quickly as possible on ANY thread in anticipation it might become a long term thread.

[Botnake]

I'm wondering how long the 1xbet signature campaign will last when all of their participants have a negative rating. This is an experience for them I believe, and if it will be successful, then other gambling sites with bad reputations might follow the system of 1xbit.

They are now live in their first week, some campaigns have a trial for at least 1 month.

[actmyname]

I'm wondering how long the 1xbet signature campaign will last when all of their participants have a negative rating. This is an experience for them I believe, and if it will be successful, then other gambling sites with bad reputations might follow the system of 1xbit.

They are now live in their first week, some campaigns have a trial for at least 1 month.

One wonders why it wouldn't be conducive in this free-for-all environment to simply start up a new gambling site every week (or even day) to post a thread on the forum, put out some signature campaign^*, and continually exit scam gamblers^{^} on account of the lack of prerequisites to freely advertise on this site. Alongside how alt accounts of rulebreakers are effectively unpunished until found by forum members (if even that, given time delays and manual checks) and how long members persist and have presence despite negative feedback/reputation... we're living in a time of blissful ignorance.

Plus, no one who comes upon a new thread in the gambling section (guest or not) will receive any warning about established/unestablished sites. Best you have is viewing the yellow flag as a guest (i.e. 1xbit) though I would expect it to be displayed in a more pronounced manner. If you expect guests to have no idea about the forum dynamics, what's to say they haven't simply skimmed past the yellow flag as a rare occurrence?

As it currently stands, the post-hoc deterrence of flags seems like a roundabout prevention mechanism especially without any limit to account, thread, post, or scam creation. Oh well: we can keep tagging people who scam for a few hundred bucks.

_* optional exit scam for greater profit efficiency
_^ also collect free KYC to scam even more