Obviously he would say yes to that since it would cost less.
Obviously, you didn't read what I was saying.
The question was whether or not to pay those users that didn't post 2 or 3 times in the official thread.
Not paying them would have been a cheaper solution for notaek, but as far as I know, he will opt for paying them anyway.
He has no obligation to do so.
The campaign manager did set out rules for us
The campaign manager seems to be gone.
He abandoned this campaign at the moment the runners called the quit, not caring for you guys left behind.
He could have helped us over here, but he chose not to.
BTW. What's seems odd is that you would not count post made on 20/5? Wasn't the campaign last to this Sunday?
I stopped counting all posts after the following posts by the campaign manager (who was still acting as one during that time):
I'm sorry, you are right. I only found out now that there is a problem.
I'm afraid this means this campaign is also halted until I found out what happened and what the Escrow will do in response. As stated in OP I do not control the funds and I'm just hired to run this campaign. Sorry guys.
It's clear he stopped/paused the campaign at this point (in consent with the advertisers), which is why I don't think there should be an obligation for notaek to pay posts after this (out of his own pocket).
So what is fair in this regard? Opinions are good and should be considered but at the end of a project it's not the opinion of third party's that count, but the rules that were set out.
I'm not forcing my opinion on anyone. I'm suggesting how to proceed based on my view from the outside.
I don't have a say in this, it's fully up to notaek.
2 Or make a balance today of the post and have a discussion about which rules to follow and which rules not.
I don't think a discussion between participants "which rule to follow" is going to bring us anywhere.